Re: Planet X: EARTHQUAKE Increase

Michael Davis wrote:
> 
> john Latala wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, 10 Jun 2001, Michael Davis wrote:
> >
> > > She is the leader of a doomsday cult called zetatalk, sort of a poor
> > > man's Heaven's Gate.
> >
> > Hmmm ... if planet-X doesn't show up will she be committing suicide like
> > the Heaven's Gate crowd did?
> 
> Who can say? I'm not really terribly concerned about what that whack job
> Nancy does to herself anyway. If she offs herself, it's just good riddens to
> one more nut as far as I am concerned. What worries me is how many of her
> "flock" might decide to go with her, or worse yet, take along innocent
> bystanders for the ride like that screwy Japanese doomsday cult did. At this
> point, Nutty Nancy doesn't seem (to an outsider like me) to have the same
> hold on her poor brainwashed cult members that Jim Jones, David Koresh and
> Marshall Applewhite did, but she still has two years to work on them, and
> Koolaid is cheap.

Two points:

1) almost *all* cult leaders are men.  This is not an accident because
being a cult leader is not about religious beliefs but about exerting
power and control over another human, and in particular, exerting power
over vulnerable females.  In other words, the leaders are in it to get
laid (Marshall Applewhite the glaring exception, although a lack of
testicles does not mean a lack of sex).  For a man to be promiscuous, he
still has the problem of attracting willing females.  For a woman to be
promiscuous, all she has to do is say "yes" to the inevitable hoard of
males that will be attracted as a moth to a flame.  (Even David Koresh
had considerable difficulty keeping his 'member' in his pants, despite
his moralizing and the 7th and 10th commandments).

2) Unlike many of the detractors, I have actually read the web site.  If
this is a "cult" it is a truly unique one.  There are no solicitations
for money of the kind you find associated with cults: "sell all you have
and give it to us".  There are no promises of special treatment like:
"join us and you will not go to hell" or "join us and you will be
protected from XXX and a space ship will pick you up".  There are no
plans or any encouragement of any kind of mass suicide or any other mass
coordinated action.  In fact, to the contrary, there is only the
suggestion for *individual* and actions for small scattered groups all
focused on *survival* not avoidance.  Almost all of the dogma provided
by cults is aimed at exerting control "trust us, we know better" and
aims to subjugate the members to a non-thinking role.  Nancy, on the
contrary, constantly challenges readers to think for themselves and
debate the issues based on analysis of data.  She is telling people to
go look for Planet X themselves, not posting pictures and saying "trust
me, I have a better telescope".  She is telling people to look at the
Navy data and Earthquake data and explain it themselves.

Surely the basic message is stark: "the world as we understand it will
radically change" but the real problem here is not just the message.  If
you look back into history such a thing is clearly not without
precedent.  Civilizations have repeatedly arisen and collapsed for over
10,000 years of recorded history, sometimes for well understood reasons,
sometimes not. Sometimes there was a slow decay, sometimes it seemed as
if the people all just up and wandered off.  This is not ZetaTalk, it is
history.  The MTBF for civilization is something around 500-800 years,
so by that measure we are due.  Whether it is the pole shift or we
simply blow ourselves to smithereens in a nuclear fireball, we are still
due.

The bottom line is that these kinds of responses are based not on an
intellectual superiority (because if that were the case, a clear
coherent argument would be presented) but instead based on fear.

I mean, what if she is right?  The whole idea is so terrifying that most
people cannot even rationally consider it for even an instant.  Instead
we see simple dismissal: "she is a kook/troll/paranoid/cultress/XXXX". 
We are left with slander and meanness.  But this is no substitute for a
rational dialog, regardless of what you think of the other person.  I
mean is your idea of a dialog with a schizophrenic to beat them with a
stick because they won't listen to reason anyway? I mean, they are not
even human so why treat them with kindness and respect?

I challenge any of the detractors to come up with concrete examples of a
consistent behavior or group of text references that support the "cult"
status of ZetaTalk.  To do this, provide references (there are plenty)
and show how this fits the psychological profile of a cult using any
published research on cults of any kind.  (But it is OK, I know you
won't, your fear will prevent you from doing the necessary research).

> 
> --
> The Evil Michael Davis?
> http://mdavis19.tripod.com
> http://www.mdpub.com/ufo/skeptic.html
> http://skepticult.org Member #264-70198-536
> Flaggy random killfile member #33 1/3
> 
> "Goddammit! The world is just filling up with more and more idiots! And the
> computer is giving them access to the world! They're Spreading their
> stupidity! At least they were contained before - now they're on the loose
> everywhere!" - Harlan Ellison

One might hope for the repeal of the first amendment...  Life would be
so much simpler if we all just adopted YOUR point of view, now wouldn't
it?

The Small Kahuna