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.

 

"Earth is actually 2 planets" Scientists conclude

page: 2
54
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 09:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Snarl




I've never been a big fan of the 4.5B year old theory.

It's close enough for me.




posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 11:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Where does the gravity come from to form a planet or moon in the first place?



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 11:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Bone75
God.
Of course.



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 11:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Atsbhct
Why did they feel the name to posthumously name the baby planet?


Theia was the mother of Selena the moon goddess. So the planet that created the moon shares her name.



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 11:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Bone75
God.
Of course.


Is that your standard answer or do you have one reserved for the genuinely curious as well?



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 11:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Bone75

Sometimes I say "I don't know" when I don't know.
The two are equivalent.

Gravity is a property of matter. Beyond that...
God or "I don't know." Your preference.

edit on 1/29/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 11:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
I found Immanuel Velikovsky a very interesting chap with a take on it that is fascinating


I find it a little difficult to offer up much belief in a YouTube video that begins with apocryphal and outright fabricated facts less than 20 seconds into the presentation. I just don't understand why people put so much faith in YouTube videos as a source of evidence when the video offers no supporting citations to substantiate their often fraudulent claims. Einstein did not die with "Worlds in Collision" open upon his desk.

Velikovsky had one aim, a singular end goal. To reconcile the fact that archaeology did not support a literal interpretation of Hebrew scripture. So he spent decades pursuing this goal by creating a revised chronology for ancient Egypt, Greece, Israel and other cultures of the ancient Near East. To do this he needed to completely ignore the laws of Physics and orbital mechanics. He was a psychiatrist, not a physicist. Sure, he had a friendship with Einstein but that doesn't make him an expert in physics, physics which was in complete defiance to everything Einstein had been working on for over a half century and has since been proven. And that's not to say that as his friend, Einstein did not read "Worlds in Collision" which Einstein is known to have done. If that type of association makes one an expert in a field they are not trained in then I am a world class Economist based on who my Father in-law is as well as a Physicist based on who his brother is. The notion is as ridiculous as Velikovsky's assertions.

The Earth was never a satellite of Saturn as Velikovsky insisted. Similar mythos in different cultures at different periods in history does not equate as proof positive of "collective or cultural amnesia" as he also claimed. some other claims concocted by Velikovsky over a period of several decades include:

A tentative suggestion that Earth had once been a satellite of a "proto-Saturn" body, before its current solar orbit.
That the Deluge (Noah's Flood) had been caused by proto-Saturn's entering a nova state, and ejecting much of its mass into space.
A suggestion that the planet Mercury was involved in the Tower of Babel catastrophe.
Jupiter had been the culprit for the catastrophe that saw the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah.
Periodic close contacts with a "cometary Venus" (which had been ejected from Jupiter) had caused the Exodus events (c. 1500 BCE) and Joshua's subsequent "sun standing still" (Joshua 10:12 and 13) incident.
Periodic close contacts with Mars had caused havoc in the 8th and 7th centuries BCE.


I think it says a lot that he never attempted to submit anything for peer review and instead published in the same way Sitchin, Hancock and Childress did, in novelization under the guise of fact based research aimed specifically at lay people who would eat it up. He literally laid the groundwork for the other above mentioned authors and set up the road map they would follow.



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 11:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

I've always been intrigued and puzzled by planet formation. I sure wish you guys would figure out this whole gravity thing.




posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 11:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Bone75

Things are attracted to things. The more things get together the stronger it attracts things.

How's that? I mean, you can go into a lot more depth if you really have to. But unless you're an astrophysicist, do you really have to?



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 04:07 AM
link   
a reply to: peter vlar
Newton wrote more about alchemy than he did physics.



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 04:43 AM
link   
I think this is all what makes this planet unique, all other life size planets don,t have all the goodies we do, therefore no advanced civilisations, looks like there needs to be a lot of planet bashing to get the mixture right, are we not damn lucky?



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 05:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bone75
a reply to: Phage

Where does the gravity come from to form a planet or moon in the first place?


Dark matter. All 5 DM partcles, totally resistant to photons / light, (resists the photons that bind electrons to a nucleus) and create the effect we call gravity.

Or aliens did it.

Or God, if you like that better.



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 11:36 AM
link   
Speculations and assumptions...

The only thing I think of when one states two planetary bodies smashing into each other (especially "violently"), is an asteroid belt.

Remnants of a destroyed celestial body.
Like the Mars scars, the prehistoric planet that was destroyed flying debris all over the place, one smashing into Mars surface and whiping out its atmosphere and landscapes. (Personal theory).

Too much destruction, and these scientists assume a violet collision was absorbed rather completely decimated?

Need some serious backing up before rock collisions absorb to compound planets.
Also the friction of gravity would of torn the surfaces apart before the bodies meshed, making them clash inside out.

Or please correct me if my perception of what is being conveyed is muddled...



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 11:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: Elementalist
Speculations and assumptions...

The only thing I think of when one states two planetary bodies smashing into each other (especially "violently"), is an asteroid belt.

Remnants of a destroyed celestial body.
Like the Mars scars, the prehistoric planet that was destroyed flying debris all over the place, one smashing into Mars surface and whiping out its atmosphere and landscapes. (Personal theory).

Too much destruction, and these scientists assume a violet collision was absorbed rather completely decimated?

Need some serious backing up before rock collisions absorb to compound planets.
Also the friction of gravity would of torn the surfaces apart before the bodies meshed, making them clash inside out.

Or please correct me if my perception of what is being conveyed is muddled...


That would have been quite a sight seeing two planets head towards each other. Can you imagine looking up at the sky each night and seeing this other planet getting larger and larger over the months. Each day they get closer by 1 million miles. In the last week the visual size would increase exponentially until the gravitational forces started causing earthquakes, distorting tides, plasma discharges between the two objects providing brilliant auroras and then the force of gravity in the space between the two bodies becomes completely warped before they merge in a mega-explosion, completely scrambling the magnetic fields.



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 12:29 PM
link   
a reply to: stormcell
Plasma discharges between them?
Why?

edit on 1/30/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 12:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Elementalist

Too much destruction, and these scientists assume a violet collision was absorbed rather completely decimated?
No. They don't assume it. They have used physics models to demonstrate it.



Also the friction of gravity would of torn the surfaces apart before the bodies meshed, making them clash inside out.
You mean the Roche limit? Yes that would be a factor. However the larger the impactor, the more resistant it would be to breaking up due to tidal forces (which is what I think you mean by "friction of gravity"). In any case, in terms of Earth the Roche limit would be at a distance of about 12,000 miles. Even if the impactor did start to break up at that distance, it would still be very massive.


edit on 1/30/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 01:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage

I also remember Zecharia Sitchin interpreting Sumarian texts about the Anunnaki whereby the ancient civilization annotated a very similar testimony about the Earth and moon creation that involved a cosmic impact of sorts.
You remember wrong. First, he did not derive his story from Sumerian texts. He reached that conclusion based on his misinterpreation of symbolism. There is nothing resembling his claim in Sumerian texts. Second, his story has nothing to do with the formation of the Moon being involved with a collision between the Earth and another planet.

Sitchin states that when struck by one of planet Nibiru's moons, Tiamat split in two, and then on a second pass Nibiru itself struck the broken fragments and one half of Tiamat became the asteroid belt. The second half, struck again by one of Nibiru's moons, was pushed into a new orbit and became today's planet Earth.

en.wikipedia.org...

Third, he claimed that Nibiru comes back into the inner Solar System every 3,600 years.


The "giant impact" theory has been around for quite a while and does not add any credence to Sitchin's made up planet, Nibiru.


That's simply false info you've shared there Phage! Planet X is absolutely real and will be reaching peri helion and passing Earth soon. You must have missed my thread containing photo documentation since April 2015, people should prepare for this event and I do not mean this lightly!

Here's the thread, this is conclusive proof of Planet X/Nibiru:

www.abovetopsecret.com...


Btw the OP article does sound like the Maldek/Tiamat scenario, Bodes math law also supports this, as does the volcanic evidence on asteroids, which can only form on a planet, and add to this the Sumerien accounts and we get a picture forming.




posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 01:30 PM
link   
a reply to: EndOfDays77




You must have missed my thread containing photo documentation since April 2015, people should prepare for this event and I do not mean this lightly!

No. I didn't miss it. I saw your pictures of clouds.



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 03:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Thanks you phage



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 03:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: EndOfDays77

originally posted by: Phage

I also remember Zecharia Sitchin interpreting Sumarian texts about the Anunnaki whereby the ancient civilization annotated a very similar testimony about the Earth and moon creation that involved a cosmic impact of sorts.
You remember wrong. First, he did not derive his story from Sumerian texts. He reached that conclusion based on his misinterpreation of symbolism. There is nothing resembling his claim in Sumerian texts. Second, his story has nothing to do with the formation of the Moon being involved with a collision between the Earth and another planet.

Sitchin states that when struck by one of planet Nibiru's moons, Tiamat split in two, and then on a second pass Nibiru itself struck the broken fragments and one half of Tiamat became the asteroid belt. The second half, struck again by one of Nibiru's moons, was pushed into a new orbit and became today's planet Earth.

en.wikipedia.org...

Third, he claimed that Nibiru comes back into the inner Solar System every 3,600 years.


The "giant impact" theory has been around for quite a while and does not add any credence to Sitchin's made up planet, Nibiru.


That's simply false info you've shared there Phage! Planet X is absolutely real and will be reaching peri helion and passing Earth soon. You must have missed my thread containing photo documentation since April 2015, people should prepare for this event and I do not mean this lightly!

Here's the thread, this is conclusive proof of Planet X/Nibiru:

www.abovetopsecret.com...


Btw the OP article does sound like the Maldek/Tiamat scenario, Bodes math law also supports this, as does the volcanic evidence on asteroids, which can only form on a planet, and add to this the Sumerien accounts and we get a picture forming.



Your playing a dangerous game spreading your version of end days... pun intended.

I've been through your threads, it's curious for sure what you captured, but by no means shows proof of a large planet impending doom.

Your posts can cause fear and confusion to real people. At the end of the day, you haven't proved anything.

Be careful about misleading perception and lives. If there were a body incoming, it's force would be noticed as well as its body.

The universe is subtle...




top topics



 
54
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join