posted on Jan, 18 2005 @ 10:40 AM
Pluto was not discovered by us untill 1930 publicly. …. the reason he was looking for it [Ninth Planet] was becasue there was an unknown
gravitational force effecting the orbit of uranus and neptune. in 1930 when pluto was discovered it was accepted that this was the case. this WAS
NOT the case. in 1960 (or close to not 100%) a moon of pluto was discoverd and plutos mass was calculated. pluto is not what was casuing orbital
Not true. Pluto’s moon Charon was discovered in 1978. The reason that it was determined that Pluto was not causing orbital deviations was
that the original calculations and orbital analyses of Neptune and Uranus were simply incorrect.
The supposed perturbations in Neptune's orbit were attributed to the gravitational tug of an unknown planet beyond Neptune, dubbed `Planet X'.
Lowell predicted the position of Planet X based on these erroneous perturbations to Neptune's orbit, and the portion of the sky covered by the
telescopic survey was influenced by these calculations.
However, At the time of Tombaugh's discovery of Pluto, astronomers had every reason to believe that Pluto was indeed the reason for the
perturbations. It wasn't known until much later that the perturbations in Neptune's orbit did not exist; and even if the perturbations were
correct, Pluto would’ve bee way too small to have caused the perturbations. However, Pluto was discovered relatively near the predicted position;
and the size of Pluto, calculated based on its observed brightness and a reasonable assumption for the reflectivity of it's surface, was quite large.
Of course, Pluto wasn’t as large as its observed brightness led the discoverers to believe.
Modern observations of Uranus and Neptune show no evidence for orbital perturbations that cannot be explained by the other planets. Also, the
Pioneer and Voyager spacecraft have shown no inexplicable deviations that a tenth planet could explain.
…the recent earth related events are related to the relative closeness of this 10th planet.
If it’s “relatively close” how come no one has seen it?
”… the fluxuations are not casued by gravity, but rather magnetic feilds from this planet.”
Would you care to share with us your reason for believing that a magnetic field can cause a fluctuation in an orbital body? I am not aware of a
single scientist in the world who believes that there is any basis, experimental or otherwise, for a magnetic field causing a planet to shift in its
orbit or to physically move a portion of a planet, e.g., a portion of a tectonic plate.
Furthermore, if there were such a planet and if it were somehow giving off some kind of magic magnetic field, why hasn’t that magnetic field been
discovered and recorded by scientists? Given the importance of our own magnetic field, we now have satellites that do nothing but measure the EM
field of the Earth in real time, as well as observing and things like sunspots, which can change that field. If your assertion is true, why haven’t
we seen such a change in the readings?
And finally, even if there were an invisible planet which was emitting these unheard-of magnetic emanations, wouldn’t it also be displaying a
gravitational attraction as well?
“…in 1983 encyclopedia britanica stated that pioneer would travel another 40 years out to search for our solar systems second sun, a sun that
never made it. it is alleged to be a brown dwarf.”
Maybe in 1983 they believed that there might be a brown dwarf out in the Oort Cloud, but it never found one. Besides, although you might not be able
to see a brown dwarf at that distance, its IR signature would be incredibly bright, especially when recorded by today’s CCDs.
i have a bunch of additional evidence….1 the cycle of the sun is 1336040 days
What cycle of the sun? Certainly not the time it takes the sun to make a rotation around the Milky Way galaxy! That’s something on the order of 30
million years, not 3657 years, 10 months, and two weeks! Where did you get that information?
the myan calandar is 1336560 days long and ends in 2012… thats just over 3600 years, 3741 to be exact. thats within 4%, an acceptable tolerance
Acceptable tolerance for what? If there is a 3657-year sun cycle, and if it somehow ties into a Mayan calendar of 3741, then what you’re
saying – correct me if I’m wrong here – is that the so-called “end cycle” could come any time between 1929 and 2095. do you call
that “acceptable tolerance”? I certainly don’t!
…there have been mass exctinctions on earth at times coresponding to when this planet would be around, including the last ice age.
Not true. if you look at mass extinctions, including the Post Archaeozoic Die-Off which came about as a result of the atmosphere transitioning
from reducing to oxidizing, Permian/Triassic Die-off, and the Cretaceous/Tertiary Die-Off which almost everyone believes is a result of the Chicxulub
Strike in what is not Yucatan, you will not find a common time-period between them
For years, some scientists have attempted to show that these die-offs are cyclical and corresponded roughly to the rotation time of the Sun around the
Galaxy, but the numbers don’t work.
And, by the way, the last ice age was not a die-off; indeed, there was a greater biological diversity in the Pleistocene than other, warmer times.
…”there was more solar activity last year (magnetism plays a huge part) than in the last 8000 years or so.”
You have no way of knowing that – nor do I -- since we’ve only been taking measurements over the past 50 or so years, and there’s no way we can
correlate solar activity to any records in the earth, including dendrochronology, dipole changes on Atlantic basalts, or fossil studies.
”the earths magnetic feild is moving south at a rate of 60km per second…
Rubbish. While the Earth’s magnetic pole moves around, the field does not. And the pole isn’t moving south at 60 km/sec; if it were it
would have shifted every five minutes and 33 seconds. Do the math.
”…and the earths magnetic feild has been known to completely reverse.”
True, it does; on the average of about 70,000 years -- and we are statistically overdue for another. But there is no correlation between any of the
magnetic pole shifts (which we have calculated quite accurately) and any die-offs, so it’s not likely that, even if there were a magnetic pole shift
next Wednesday, anything bad would happen except maybe for the migrating habits of some birds and insects that use the earth’s magnetic field to
help them navigate.
“if you placed a telescope on antartica, you would be able to see into a 'blind spot' in space that we cannot currently see.”
Well, duh! If you live north of 30 deg N lat, then the sky above Antarctica is hidden from you because of the Earth’s curvature. A telescope in
Minnesota or Alberta can see a “blind spot” that someone living in Dunedin, New Zealand or Hobart, Tasmania or or Puerto Williams, Chile can’t
see, either – and for the same reason.
What is your point here?
I’m sorry, Jprophet; I don’t mean to shoot you down personally, but your assertions seem to be built on evidence that is either non-existent or
simply wrong. I can’t buy any of it.
[edit on 18-1-2005 by Off_The_Street]