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.

 

Was the Planet Venus a Comet??

page: 2
6
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 03:19 AM
link   
Thats a good theory Venus vs. Comet. It would explain alot of tales about the interaction; except: "Venus was visible in full daylight and, while moving across the sky, rivaled the sun in brightness."




posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 04:02 AM
link   
There are hydrocarbons in Venus' atmosphere...H2SO4 and CO2 ... not in the forms we need them for "life" but ... the materials are there



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 10:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by ViolatoR
"Venus was visible in full daylight and, while moving across the sky, rivaled the sun in brightness."

There are also ancient texts that say the Earth was covered with water for 40 days and 40 nights....
We can speculate.
Since Venus is visible during sun-set or dawn we can assume another cosmic phenomenon. There is a point in Venus orbit where, seen from Earth, Venus will have its minimum apparent magnitude (maximum brightness). Lets say that due to its orbit eccentricity, this point coincides with the shortest sun-venus distance and also, due to earth's orbit eccentricity, this also coincides with shortest distance between earth and venus (that is the shortest distance between the planets when venus is at its brightest point, not the shortest distance between the planets when venus is not visible/bright). In this case you would see a brighter than usual venus and you would compare it with the sun brightness during a sunset or dawn.
Another possible explanation would be a super nova misidentified as venus (since venus is not visible during the day) or, why not, an occulation of a super nova by venus....



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 02:04 PM
link   


"Venus was visible in full daylight and, while moving across the sky, rivaled the sun in brightness."


A statement like that cannot seriously be taken at face value.



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 02:44 AM
link   
According to ancient Hellenes, Venus (Aphrodite) erupted out of Jupiter's (Zeus') head. The ancient Sumerians say this was caused by the twelth planet, Nibiru (Babylonian Marduk and Egyptian Ra/Re/Whatever), as it passed by Jupiter. Perhaps it should be noted that the Sumerians located Pluto and identifed Uranus and Neptune as the same size and colour.



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 02:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sargon
According to ancient Hellenes, Venus (Aphrodite) erupted out of Jupiter's (Zeus') head. The ancient Sumerians say this was caused by the twelth planet, Nibiru (Babylonian Marduk and Egyptian Ra/Re/Whatever), as it passed by Jupiter. Perhaps it should be noted that the Sumerians located Pluto and identifed Uranus and Neptune as the same size and colour.


According to Greek myth, it was Athena who emerged from Zeus's head; the Sumerians made no mention of Marduk (he was a later, Babylonian, god) and the Sumerians had no knowledge of any planet beyond Saturn.



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 05:28 AM
link   

Perhaps it should be noted that the Sumerians located Pluto and identifed Uranus and Neptune as the same size and colour.


The Sumerians had no idea of the existence of Uranus, Neptune, or Pluto.

As for Venus "erupting" out of Jupiter, I suspect that a statement of that nature probably refers to an occultation of Jupiter by Venus. It certainly makes a lot more sense.



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by mikesingh
 

I believe that Velikovsky was right, when I first obtained a copy of his 'Worlds in Collision', I went straight home and began reading, I read all night and finally fell asleep at around seven the following morning, I just could not put it down.
I found all his work amazing, and have looked at things differently ever since. Good luck with this post Mike, I will follow it with interest.
Regards,
Horsegiver.



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 09:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kano
Uranus also has a retrograde rotation. (Although its almost rotating on its side with respect to its orbit).

Don't forget Pluto, but I guess it could be argued that it is no longer considered a planet by some but more like a comet...Hmmm, no tail? That's interesting.
The north pole of any planet/star is defined as the axis point that has a CCW rotation (prograde). Since there is geological evidence that the Earth's magnetic poles (N/S) have switch several times in Earths history I think it's possible that other planets and stars do this as well. So Venus is actually in prograde rotation as viewed from above it's north pole, same with Uranus and Pluto, but because of it's axial tilt (about 178 deg) it appears retrograde with respect to the other planets and our Sun. Uranus is around 97deg. so it looks like it's rolling along on it's orbit around the Sun. I don't know if Uranus's north pole faces the sun throughout it's year or if it is fixed.


Venus itself takes longer to rotate around its own axis than it does to orbit around the sun,
Makes for a rather long solar day, if you could see through the clouds that is.


Originally posted by Essan

Originally posted by ViolatoR
I dont see how anyone can just say "no" to this question.
Amyone with the slighest knowldege of geo or astro physics. Or even who has read a book about our solar system, can say "no" with absolute confidence.

I do posses at least a slight knowledge of geology, physics and astronomy and, with all due respect, I can say with absolute confidence that this answer and your comment are futile. They contribute nothing to the discussion here.
I think it would be a safe bet that Venus is not "a giant marshmallow" nor do I believe it was a comet at anytime but to assume that we know with absoluteness our solar system and it's origin is to close our minds to understanding and any new discoveries. What a shame that can be.


Originally posted by Essan
it still remains impossible for an object orbiting it...[stellar binary counterpart]... to be dragged into the inner Solar System and then become fixed into a circular orbit. What's more likely? That Venus is the planet that has always orbited the sun in its current position? Or ... that happened to get dragged into the solar system, destroyed the planet that previously orbited the sun between Mercury and Earth (so completely that all traces have disappeared)

I agree with you that it is more likely that Venus has always been there but not that it is, or ever was, impossible for objects to get captured gravitationally into our solar system. Even though the outer gas giants are small compared to our Sun it's their location than can make it possible for them to attract objects (inverse square law).
There are no traces of a destroyed planet where Venus is now but this doesn't help the the argument against the OP, maybe there never was anything there before.
Oh, BTW there are traces of a destroyed planet between Mars and Jupiter which also follows Bodes law.

Originally posted by Essan
Venus Express is currently in orbit and sending back data


sci.esa.int...

Thanks for the link, I like to keep up on info from all the spacecraft we have floating around out there but with so many it becomes difficult.

To assume that we know just about all there is to know and to make absolute statements against any new ideas or thoughts is to close the door to understanding and thus remain forever in ignorance.



posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 01:38 AM
link   
Most of the peculiarities about various planets etc in the solar systems can be explained as a consequence of planetary migration during the early formations of the system.

www.abovetopsecret.com...'

Note: this all happened long before there was life on earth.



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 04:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Essan
 


Well of course Marduk was Babylonian. He'd hardly be called to completely different names by the same people. As for Uranus and Neptune and Pluto? Note that the sumerians always depicted the solar system with 12 planets. The below quote is also interesting;

english.pravda.ru...

"The researchers were astounded when they saw the image of Uranus transmitted by Voyager Two in the January of 1986. The Sumerian description of the planet - mash.sig - meaning "bright greenish"- almost matched the greenish blue picture of Uranus on his TV screen. Sitchin's translation of the Sumerian expression "hum.ba" read: "marsh plants." He believes it indicates the presence of hot semi-liquid material that was discovered on Neptune three years later. The Sumerian regarded Uranus as Neptune's twin brother. Data gathered by the probe seemed to confirm the point. Not unlike Uranus, Neptune's color is bright blue, the planet has a strong magnetic field, a hot semi-liquid core and plenty of water."


Also;


www.ufodigest.com...
The Dogon tribe of West Africa believes that the starting point of creation is a star that revolves around Sirius and is known as the 'Digitaria star'. Their understanding is that this star is small, but heavy, and contains the building elements of creation."


Two French anthropologists Marcel Griaule and Germaine Dieterlen studied the Dogon tribe that live in an isolated mountainous region of Bandiagara, south of the Sahara Desert in Mali, West Africa. Mr. Griaule wrote about their discoveries of the Dogon tribe in his book, "Conversations with Ogotemmeli", published in 1947.

Ogotemmeli was the tribe's oral historian as was his father before him. He states that we were created by beings that genetically engineered our DNA. In fact, he said that our DNA was manipulated three times and that three different versions of humans were designed. This was due to failed experiments by out creators. Amphibious aliens from the Sirian star system, that landed on earth with "great noise and wind" on a 3-legged spacecraft. These aliens combined their DNA with the DNA of single sexed animals - us.

The Nummo came from the Sirius star system and resembled serpents, lizards, chameleons and fish!

That's right this isolated African tribe have an oral history that claims Mankind was genetically seeded by a race of aliens called the Nummos and that this race of space-aliens came from a star system that only now, with advances in science and orbiting telescopes, can finally confirm the beliefs of a African tribe that originally migrated from Egypt

So the big question is or should be,

"How can an isolated tribe, a people with no written history, have scientific information concerning stars light years away that astronomers are just confirming today?"


Although, their places of origin seem to defer, there are amazing similarities between the Nummo and the Annunaki who came to earth and settled Sumer. Ironically, both species of aliens are reported to have been in Egypt approximately 4-5000 years ago. Both races appear in ancient mythology as being dressed as fish or amphibians! Zecharia Sitchin has amassed a life time of information about the Sumerians and the 12th planet.


[NOTE: THAT LAST BIT ABOUT ALIENS DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH OUR TOPIC. THE IMPORTANT INFORMATION IS THAT REGARDING THE SIRIUS STARS]

 
Please 'tag' and 'source' your quotes.

Mod Note: External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.
Mod Note: No Quote/Plagiarism – Please Review This Link.




[edit on 17-4-2008 by Jbird]



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 11:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Sargon
 


I believe Griaule was debunked,

www.ufoevidence.org...

but let's not get to far off Topic...


Was the Planet Venus a Comet??



posted on Oct, 28 2008 @ 10:29 AM
link   
I would not like to say if any of Velikovsky's theories are right, but I do find the orthodox theories very lame ! Clearly the cosmos is unstable and there is a lot we don't undersatand yet modern scientists present rather weak theories as facts. Coal we are told derives from swamps and forests which 'over time ' built up into layers of coal. Wat is never expalined however is how this material ended up thousands of meters underground. There are sea shells on the tops of mountains again not expalined ! The written histories of mankind are seen as odd because they talk of things we don't like to consider possible. Layers of rocks are faulted and overlaid in odd ways . The poles are known to have reversed in the past . The year changed in length . The traditional theories are very poor in explaining most of these things but discussion of alternative ideas are put down out of hand . Just because some ideas may appear far fetched doesn't mean they should be ignored without reasonable consideration.



posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
I would not like to say if any of Velikovsky's theories are right, but I do find the orthodox theories very lame ! Clearly the cosmos is unstable and there is a lot we don't undersatand yet modern scientists present rather weak theories as facts. Coal we are told derives from swamps and forests which 'over time ' built up into layers of coal. Wat is never expalined however is how this material ended up thousands of meters underground. There are sea shells on the tops of mountains again not expalined ! The written histories of mankind are seen as odd because they talk of things we don't like to consider possible. Layers of rocks are faulted and overlaid in odd ways . The poles are known to have reversed in the past . The year changed in length . The traditional theories are very poor in explaining most of these things but discussion of alternative ideas are put down out of hand . Just because some ideas may appear far fetched doesn't mean they should be ignored without reasonable consideration.


Artifacts being found in unlikely areas has all been explained since the discovery of plate tectonics, erosion, etc.

For your two examples: Plants and forests found underground at high pressure forming coal can be easily explained as eons of sediment carried by either rain water, oceans, lakes, rivers, etc. building up over vast amount of time, compressing oranic layers.

Seashells on mountain tops can also be explained through the understanding of plate tectonics. ie: two tectonic plates converge, one goes under the other, causing the second plate to rise, thus giving birth to a mountain range. If this collision was between an oceanic plate and a continental plate, or two oceanic plates, you now have seashells on mountain tops.

These aren't theories, they have been proven through extensive research. Not to say that any theories that deviate from the norm are unacceptable, but there has to be more concrete proof given than the mythos of ancient civilizations.



posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 12:51 PM
link   
Venus could be the other planet that colided with earth to make the moon. Just a thought



posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 07:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xeven
Venus could be the other planet that colided with earth to make the moon. Just a thought




If two planets were to actually collide at the speeds in which they orbit/would orbit around a star, they would be shattered,
Not just one 'small' chunk coming out of one of the planets,

Venus was never a comet, never has been and never will be


your solar system is perfectly spaced & laid out for harmony,
It works in the same way as all the cogs work inside a fine watch,
Perfect balance and perfect harmony,

If a incredibly massive comet were to enter this perfectly balanced solar system,
It would cause utter chaos on a solar level,
Things would not just 'level out' and go back to normal



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 01:04 AM
link   
Venus was shot out of Jupiter according the eye witness
reports reported by Immanuel Velokovski.

How would one think otherwise.

Its not like UFO witnesses that can be pressures out of
their observations back in the 1950s.

The reports are in, unless someone is changing IVs source
material.
Or ridiculing his theories that might as well be stone cold laws.




[edit on 11/1/2008 by TeslaandLyne]



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 01:38 AM
link   
According to ancient texts,


The Vedas said that the star Venus looks like fire with smoke. The star had a tail, dark in the daytime and luminous at night.

This luminous tail, which Venus had in earlier centuries, is mentioned in the Talmud `Fire as hanging down from the planet Venus. Described by the Chaldeans the planet Venus `was said to have a beard. "Beard" is used in modern astronomy in the description of comets.

The Mexicans called a comet `a star that smoked. What was the illusion of the ancient Toltecs and Mayas? What was the phenomenon and what was its cause? A train, large enough to be visible from the earth and giving the impression of smoke and fire, hung from the planet Venus. Venus, with its glowing train, was a very brilliant body; therefore not strange that the Chaldeans described it as a `bright torch of heaven. Illuminates like the sun,' and compared with the light of the rising sun.


Was seeing the 'tail' of Venus just hallucination of the ancient races? Were they so stupid? Or did their imagination run riot?

Cheers!





www.crystallotus.com...



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 02:00 AM
link   
reply to post by mikesingh
 


No one person knows what those people actually saw,
Maybe they actually did see a comet, that happened to be where Venus normally would be?
Who knows
could well have been some form of atmospheric anomaly at the time as well,



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 02:28 AM
link   
Venus might have carried a lot of frozen Jupiter gases along
with it. And so sort of a comet for an extended period of time.
And noted by the ancients until the excitement and they
grew old and the tail disappeared.

There were many close calls for the earth and some pole
reversals, orbit changes and rotation changes.

I don't recall all of the interpretations of IV.

The Flood was a cosmic rain storm.. I mean you got to
work with it to figure how it might happen.. just because
there are difficulties should not mean rejection.

ED: There was also some lighting bolts associated with Jupiter,
most likely associated with accelerated gases.



[edit on 11/1/2008 by TeslaandLyne]



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join