It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Planet X myth debunked

page: 1
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 06:51 AM
link   

It was an elusive planet that for 200 years appeared to explain Uranus's wobbly orbit. And there was the sister sun theorized to be near our solar system that caused asteroids to swerve toward Earth.

There is just one problem: neither "Planet X" nor "Nemesis" ever existed, researchers now say.....

"The outer solar system probably does not contain a large gas giant planet ("Planet X"), or a small, companion star ("Nemesis")," concluded University of Pennsylvania astronomer Kevin Luhman, who directed the study using NASA's Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE) telescope.

The results were published in the most recent edition of The Astrophysical Journal.


www.spacedaily.com...

I hope this finally puts the Nibiru/Nemesis/Planet X "controversy" to rest. Scientists went through the data from WISE actually looking for evidence of the hypothetical planet found nothing. No red dwarf. No brown dwarf. No ice giant. If there is a large planet out there, it is extremely cold and way on the far side of the Kuyper Belt.




posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 06:58 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


Just because people say something does not exist don't mean that it's true.
Some things just can not be proven by these man made researches. Scientists think they know it all but they don't know $&#*



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 07:15 AM
link   

Annunak1
reply to post by DJW001
 
Scientists think they know it all but they don't know $&#*


They know the math for the gravity which an additional planet would impart on it's neighbours.
You don't. Therefor you get to be told. Just the same as every other piece of information from every other field of science, which you don't have a prejudice towards.



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 07:19 AM
link   

Annunak1
reply to post by DJW001
 


Just because people say something does not exist don't mean that it's true.
Some things just can not be proven by these man made researches. Scientists think they know it all but they don't know $&#*


I should have known actual facts would not settle anything.



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 07:21 AM
link   

hexillion

Annunak1
reply to post by DJW001
 
Scientists think they know it all but they don't know $&#*


They know the math for the gravity which an additional planet would impart on it's neighbours.
You don't. Therefor you get to be told. Just the same as every other piece of information from every other field of science, which you don't have a prejudice towards.

Actually we do know the math. And yes, you can do your own integrations of the solar system using both the old masses of the outer planets, and the current masses that were revised using the telemetry from Voyager and see for yourself that the latter gets rid of the "perturbations." That's what programs like this are for:
orsa.sourceforge.net...
It's amazing to me how much ignorance and pure denial exist on this website on this subject.



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 07:23 AM
link   

DJW001

Annunak1
reply to post by DJW001
 


Just because people say something does not exist don't mean that it's true.
Some things just can not be proven by these man made researches. Scientists think they know it all but they don't know $&#*


I should have known actual facts would not settle anything.


What fact, he says this:




"The outer solar system probably does not contain a large gas giant planet ("Planet X"), or a small, companion star ("Nemesis")," concluded University of Pennsylvania astronomer Kevin Luhman, who directed the study using NASA's Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE) telescope.


Probably...how is that fact?



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 07:25 AM
link   

Catacomb

DJW001

Annunak1
reply to post by DJW001
 


Just because people say something does not exist don't mean that it's true.
Some things just can not be proven by these man made researches. Scientists think they know it all but they don't know $&#*


I should have known actual facts would not settle anything.


What fact, he says this:




"The outer solar system probably does not contain a large gas giant planet ("Planet X"), or a small, companion star ("Nemesis")," concluded University of Pennsylvania astronomer Kevin Luhman, who directed the study using NASA's Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE) telescope.


Probably...how is that fact?


Because unlike mystics, scientists avoid making absolute statements.



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 07:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Annunak1
 


They do know what they're talking about though.

If it were lies, we couldn't have sent the multiple spacecraft to all the planets.

You should check out the Cassini probe and how it used gravity assist to slingshot around Venus twice, then earth and then Jupiter on its way to Saturn.

How do you think this was accomplished if planetary gravity wasn't well and truly established?



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 07:30 AM
link   
Like i said. Some things just can't be proven with man made researches and technology. Science say this is fact right now. in a few years new facts arise and they change their whole stance on the subject. Therefore science is never factual because there are always new facts that are not discovered yet.

The OP is just copying some ish some other guy found out. Just because they did the math don't mean it's correct.
edit on 16-3-2014 by Annunak1 because: (no reason given)


Oh and spaceships have cloaking devices so that's why we can't see them
edit on 16-3-2014 by Annunak1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 07:36 AM
link   

Annunak1
Like i said. Some things just can't be proven with man made laws. Science say this is fact right now. in a few years new facts arise and they change their whole stance on the subject. Therefore science is never factual because there are always new facts that are not discovered yet.


But scientific laws are not man made. They are generalizations drawn from observation. These generalizations result in models that explain natural phenomena. These models are, for all practical purposes, facts. As observations require better models, the models are changed. Nevertheless, the observations underlying the models remain unchanged. In this sense, science deals with facts. These underlying facts do not change.



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 07:38 AM
link   

Annunak1Therefore science is never factual because there are always new facts that are not discovered yet.

That's really silly. Think, then type.



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 07:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Annunak1
 


So spacecraft like Cassini just got where they wanted by blind luck and magic?




edit on 16-3-2014 by AlphaHawk because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 07:39 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


The fact only that they used a device created by NASA smells like BS. NASA is and always will be a big fat liar when it comes to space studies. They didn't prove crap. They just made a statement based on their biased research. You can say all you want but i am not buying a thing that is linked with NASA



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 07:40 AM
link   
reply to post by hexillion
 


It's only silly if you can't understand that



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 07:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Annunak1
 



The OP is just copying some ish some other guy found out. Just because they did the math don't mean it's correct.
edit on 16-3-2014 by Annunak1 because: (no reason given)


I am not "just copying some guy." I am citing research that has appeared in a peer reviewed journal. The peer review process means that other researchers have checked his math. This greatly increases the odds that it is correct, and his conclusions valid. Admittedly, absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absence, but there are what are technically known as "constraints." If there are other bodies out there, they must have a certain maximum mass and/or minimum distance.



Oh and spaceships have cloaking devices so that's why we can't see them
edit on 16-3-2014 by Annunak1 because: (no reason given)


How did you determine this "fact?"



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 07:49 AM
link   

Annunak1
reply to post by DJW001
 


The fact only that they used a device created by NASA smells like BS. NASA is and always will be a big fat liar when it comes to space studies. They didn't prove crap. They just made a statement based on their biased research. You can say all you want but i am not buying a thing that is linked with NASA


So when NASA claims that there are at least 6,000 known exoplanets, that's just a big fat lie. There are, in fact, no exoplanets at all. And the Earth is flat.



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 07:49 AM
link   

DJW001
reply to post by Annunak1
 



The OP is just copying some ish some other guy found out. Just because they did the math don't mean it's correct.
edit on 16-3-2014 by Annunak1 because: (no reason given)


I am not "just copying some guy." I am citing research that has appeared in a peer reviewed journal. The peer review process means that other researchers have checked his math. This greatly increases the odds that it is correct, and his conclusions valid. Admittedly, absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absence, but there are what are technically known as "constraints." If there are other bodies out there, they must have a certain maximum mass and/or minimum distance.



Oh and spaceships have cloaking devices so that's why we can't see them
edit on 16-3-2014 by Annunak1 because: (no reason given)


How did you determine this "fact?"


"This greatly increases the odds that it is correct, and his conclusions valid."

Odds. So there must be odds that it also can be incorrect? And planet X/Niburu is not a planet. It's a spaceship. Check ur "facts"
This whole study is bs because they are saying that it's a planet when all the research into the subject clearly suggests it was a spaceship.

And i did not say it's a fact that spaceships have cloaking devices. It's something i know. And some things people know can not be backed up with so called evidence. Look we are obviously not on the same page on this subject so we might as well end it here. I believe this and you believe that and i respect your believes.



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 08:09 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


Many years ago, during a gathering with what you would call "mystic people" in Peru, I heard an interesting theory.

They told me that planet is in a parallel dimension, that would make it impossible to spot by scientists. It eventually would pass close to Earth, to retrieve all the people that couldn't reach a higher state of conscience. That world will be another opportunity to progress for them. After that "clean up", Earth will got to a higher dimension.

No due date was given.



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 08:15 AM
link   

Trueman
reply to post by DJW001
 


Many years ago, during a gathering with what you would call "mystic people" in Peru, I heard an interesting theory.

They told me that planet is in a parallel dimension, that would make it impossible to spot by scientists. It eventually would pass close to Earth, to retrieve all the people that couldn't reach a higher state of conscience. That world will be another opportunity to progress for them. After that "clean up", Earth will got to a higher dimension.

No due date was given.


And parallel dimensions are yet to be proven by "scientists". These are the things i mean. We do not have all the answers.
You can't disprove what cannot be proved. Truth will come for those who are ready to accept it



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 08:21 AM
link   
I think certain posters would do well to view and learn from this video:



new topics

top topics



 
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join