Study links periodic mass extinctions to "Planet X"

originally posted by: yorkshirelad

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.

Well let's say it is Nibiru (just for laughs) and the article is correct. The next mass extinction event would be 16 million years away.

Better start prepping now!!!

in re; extinction events not being at 27 million year intervals;

could there be delayed reactions in which planet -X- interferes with a comet/asteroid gravity that sends it into a death spiral into Terra years later?

I find it odd that Whitmire seems to be back to his Nemesis hypothesis. He first proposed it about 30 years ago. Since that time he abandoned it because the paper he used to support a periodicity in mass extinctions was shown to be wrong. In fact just a few years ago he was pushing his Tyche hypothesis. Which is similar to Nemesis just without the mass extinctions. As far as I know nothing new had been found to support a periodicity of mass extinctions. So I wonder why he has abandoned his Tyche hypothesis and seemingly gone back to Nemesis.

a reply to: Sargeras

I understand they use doppler to discover planets on distant stars, but we also use planetary radar systems.

Some we use to find d asteroids or penetrating deep layer clouds on titan, I'm not sure if there's a minimum distance for finding objects in space with radar, but if you consider that they can find asteroids the size of a soccer ball at eleven million miles , how stupid does it sound to find wandering planets the size of our own Earth or bigger beyond pluto?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: canDarian

This is an interesting idea and I want to hear more about it.

if there was any proof besides grainy youtube videos youd think we would hear more about it.
i mean its a new planet, should be pretty big news, if it was real.

I remember watching Marvin the Martian on Looney Tunes and his spaceship going by "planet x" . Woder what the artist was getting at way back then..

originally posted by: mothersuperior
I remember watching Marvin the Martian on Looney Tunes and his spaceship going by "planet x" . I Wonder what the artist was getting at way back then...

a reply to: JourneymanWelder

It's pretty much accepted that an unknown celestial body is having a measurable effect on the known planets, moons and objects in our solar system, including objects in the Kuiper belt. Whether or not it's a planet is what's up for debate.

a reply to: 0bserver1

It's easy to find other stars as they are independent light sources and it's easy to notice the wobbles in their light from objects passing in front of them. It's much harder to see something out in space that isn't backlit like this giant possible planet would be.

And I suggest they name is Nibiru when they find it ... just 'cause.

originally posted by: HawkeyeNation [snip] I've come to the mathematical conclusion that you are either a troll or ignorant. I've gathered enough from your 8 posts on this thread to make that statement.

And for that HawkeyeNation, you should get a Nobel Prize!

(Computer, end sarcasm mode)

Nobel's last will specified that his fortune be used to create a series of prizes for those who confer the "greatest benefit on mankind" in physics, chemistry, physiology or medicine, literature, and peace

Source: wikipedia
There are no Nobels for mathematicians but if there were... I would nominate Hawkeye!

a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

There's not a Nobel but Mathematicians do have the a Fields Medal which is only given every 4 years and is considered by many to be the 'Nobel of Mathematics'. It's the most prestigious award a Mathematician can receive. It's moot however you look at it as it has no bearing on a single nonsensical point made by Sosruko.

a reply to: peter vlar

Sorry, but what points did he make?

All I saw was "if we can't see it, it doesn't exist". Hardly what I would call a point lol.

a reply to: TerryDon79

I guess I was being overly kind by saying they made "nonsensical points" because we both know there wasn't a single point made.

a reply to: peter vlar

I just found it funny that he thought it was magic and then didn't want to "debate" anymore as I was giving him a headache lol.

I always thought the idea of a discussion board was to, well, discuss things. Silly me lol.

Interesting scientific analysis...

a reply to: TerryDon79

Or at the very least discuss what's wrong with the science instead of harping on how they couldn't see it so it wasn't science.

originally posted by: peter vlar
a reply to: TerryDon79

Or at the very least discuss what's wrong with the science instead of harping on how they couldn't see it so it wasn't science.

The reason he disagreed with it (as far as I can tell) was magic.

I disagree with the hypothesis because of, well, maths and logic. It just doesn't add up and makes no sense. The article looks very much like a Nibiru orientated piece with some actual facts thrown in there for good measure.

So if we instead say planet X, rather than Nibiru, it's no longer hilarious and worthy of mockery?

I mean, I'm thinking a mysterious extra planet is a mysterious extra planet. That's cool no matter how people look at it.

a reply to: GoShredAK

Planet X is an official designation for a yet to be discovered planet (Pluto was called Planet X in the early 20th century before it was found and named).

Nibiru is just a myth made up by a guy called Sitchin who "translated" some Sumerian texts and got it fabulously wrong. He was only educated in economics btw (which is not even close to archeology, ancient languages or anything needed to even understand who the Sumerians were).

a reply to: TerryDon79

Ok I see.

I guess I am just saying it seems like this Sitchin was entirely wrong about everything aside from the actual existence of the planet. Sounds like at least that bit may have some truth to it.