Re: Planet X: Alternative Explanation 2

Greg Neill wrote:
> 
> "Nancy Lieder" <zetatalk@zetatalk.com> wrote in message
> news:3B8E74C4.D6FC8533@zetatalk.com...
>>
>> There have been no verified NON sightings either.
> 
> Oh, that's rich.  Ha!  Thanks for the laugh.

Point me to a decent quality posted picture of the coordinates Nancy
supplied at the time she claims the coordinates are relevant.  THAT
would be a verified NON sighting.

If somebody says they saw Elvis at the local diner eating lunch but the
security tape does not show an Elvis or Elvis impersonator, THAT would
be a verified NON sighting.

It is possible to verify non events, and it is reasonable to issue this
challenge.

> 
> "In other news, no penguins were killed in a twenty three car
> pileup on Interstate 87..."

Interesting, but how would you know it is true?  You would know because
they show extensive video tape of the entire scene and there are no
penguin carcases.

Suppose they offered a choice of two news stories:

1) "In other news, no penguins were killed in a twenty three car pileup
on Interstate 87..."

2) "In other news, 478,986 penguins were killed in a twenty three car
pileup on Interstate 87..."

And that is all the information you had, what would you conclude?  Which
story is correct and why did you pick that one?  Did you just
ARBITRARILY decide that the second story was improbable without any data
just because you didn't like the conclusion?  Or you thought that it is
stupid for someone to be transporting a half million penguins on I87?


With appologies to Cuba Gooding: "show me the picture".

The Small Kahuna