Study links periodic mass extinctions to "Planet X"

originally posted by: sosruko
a reply to: TerryDon79

No object is visible..

Neither was Neptune or Pluto when they were hypothesised.

So apart from the "we can't see it yet" argument, is there anything else?

originally posted by: sosruko
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Ask a mathematician how does gravity work?
Ask a physicist how does gravity work?

One of them, will call it something of divine work.. The other, well, he will spit out how things does actually work..

Actually, if either one calls it something of divine work, I would doubt their credentials. You must have had some encounters with some rather unintelligent mathemeticians, who, by the way, would be more likely to provide the calculations of the effects of gravity, but wouldn't necessarily have knowledge of the how or why it does what it does.

What would be the point of asking a mathemetician how gravity works anyhow? Simply to see if you get the same look you get when you ask a seamstress how an internal combustion engine works?

a reply to: TerryDon79

No thats the only thing, Uranus does not have a Mag 5.8 and Neptune does not have a mag. 7.8 and they were never considered wandering stars with 88 fixed constellations over 2000 years ago for a farmers almanac.. Yes, you are right... I hope you accept my sincere apology..

Nibiru, duh.

originally posted by: sosruko
a reply to: TerryDon79

No thats the only thing, Uranus does not have a Mag 5.8 and Neptune does not have a mag. 7.8 and they were never considered wandering stars with 88 fixed constellations over 2000 years ago for a farmers almanac.. Yes, you are right... I hope you accept my sincere apology..

Ok, forget Neptune and Pluto.

What about quasars and black holes? They weren't found before the idea of them existing. The idea, then the hypothesis was formed based on interactions. Same as Planet X/9.

a reply to: dogstar23

by the way, would be more likely to provide the calculations of the effects of gravity, but wouldn't necessarily have knowledge of the how or why it does what it does.

There we have it, wasnt that hard.. I can provide philosophical mathematics for anything i can achieve in my mind.. Doesnt mean it exist in the real world..

a reply to: TerryDon79

no, please.. stop.. please.. We agree on disagree ..

a reply to: sosruko

Ever seen a physicist get a Nobel prize,

I have seen an undeserving president get one.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

The Peace prize is Norwegian, i as a swede do not acknowledge it..

originally posted by: sosruko
a reply to: TerryDon79

no, please.. stop.. please.. We agree on disagree ..

We don't disagree or agree (it's not that personal). I agree science and you're disagreeing with science.

(Although I don't agree blindly as proved by my comments about the article in this thread)

a reply to: TerryDon79

I dont disagree with Science, i disagree with the way its going.. The end doesnt justify the means.. You cant have a field of magic and call it science.. It leans to much towards the spiritual aspect of religion and to little on the factual side of science.. Just because you can explain your fantasy does not make it duable..

originally posted by: sosruko
a reply to: TerryDon79

I dont disagree with Science, i disagree with the way its going.. The end doesnt justify the means.. You cant have a field of magic and call it science.. It leans to much towards the spiritual aspect of religion and to little on the factual side of science.. Just because you can explain your fantasy does not make it duable..

You lost me. What "magic" are you on about?

a reply to: TerryDon79

Terry my man, i think its better to let go off the topic, we can agree on disagreeing, its not that hard.. I wont come to your side, you wont come to mine.. I even used Ptolemys Almagest so you could understand that most things we actually know maybe is the same thing discovered a very long time ago.. It just wasnt Aliens and magic that made a comfortable life for something which is nothing more than a primate.. thats me =)

a reply to: sosruko

Hang on.

You think that I think that Planet X in science is the same doom porn Planet X that's going to destroy the world?

If that's the case, you couldn't be further from the truth. I in no way imply, acknowledged or believe in Nibiru in any shape or form.

a reply to: TerryDon79

i have no idea, where your idea came from.. please terry, just leave it as it is.. You are actually giving me a headache..

I dislike the name "planet x" because it's become synonymous with doomsayers, I do understand the designation. Predicting the path, mass or even existence of unseen celestial bodies is hardly magic. There is more to Science then just Empirical data, this is more Data analytics.

The orbit of Sedna is interesting I doubt many would have believed it existed in such an orbit.

originally posted by: DutchMasterChief

“Planet X” triggers comet showers linked to mass extinctions on Earth at intervals of approximately 27 million years.

So when is it supposed to come around again? They left out the most important piece of info.

Not covered, but, the last mass extinction was estimated around 11 million years ago. So if the periodicity is actually ~27 million years, then we've got 16 million years to go - should be ample time to figure out interstellar travel.

a reply to: dogstar23

That's not going to sit well with Nibiru preppers

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: sosruko
a reply to: Zaphod58

Im saying use common sense... Ever seen a physicist get a Nobel prize, ive seen loads of mathematicians get Nobel Prizes..

Scientist claims there's even more evidence of Planet Nine's existence

Don't confuse Astonomy's Planet X with the Niburu crowd.

Awww pleease let us dad please we haven't had a Nibiru end of the world thread for a while and I could do with a laugh.