Planet X / Sumerians / fantastic gallery of artifacts, page 3

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times

reply posted on 23-12-2003 @ 01:57 PM by Byrd

No, Badastronomy points out that there isn't enough mass for a planet to have been there and that the orbital corrections and better measurement of data show that the asteroid rubble is just solar system rubble. And that the asteroid rubble composition is the wrong kind for an exploded planet.

...and a few other things wrong with that theory.

reply posted on 23-12-2003 @ 11:19 PM by lostinspace

An unknown force disrupted the core of the ancient lost world to the point that it was cracked and fissured by volcanic activity. Then an immense star called "Gu-ardor" wheeled into alignment with our solar system which produced a state of resonance throughout all the planets and Sol. The planet that experienced the disrupted core could not endure the oscillation, so it eventually burst into many fragments.

reply posted on 24-12-2003 @ 11:16 AM by RANT

Originally posted by Byrd
No, Badastronomy points out that there isn't enough mass for a planet to have been there and that the orbital corrections and better measurement of data show that the asteroid rubble is just solar system rubble. And that the asteroid rubble composition is the wrong kind for an exploded planet.

...and a few other things wrong with that theory.

Just for fun, take a look at www.metaresearch.org...

Meta Research (which are scientists willing discuss possibilites that don't fit the current textbooks) point out if there were any more mass in the asteroid belt, it would be too much for a planet.... the fussion required to 'explode' a planet would render all but the most hard crust layer into vapor, and the remaining mass (asteroid like material) only a fraction of a percent.

I'm not saying they're definitely right, but why should one say badastronomy is definitely right? Meta is AWESOME at pointing out things status quo research won't touch... like that fact modern man couldn't rebuild the Pyramids.

reply posted on 24-12-2003 @ 07:41 PM by lostinspace

Sitchen's theories came around 1976, I think, and his theories are way out there-Nephilim come from outerspace? I do not believe the Sumerian account really refers to the creation of the physical universe and the earth.

I did, however, appreciate the direct connection to Tiamat being the destroyed planet and the helper gods refering to orbiting moons leaving its side. (I couldn't find this particular text when searching through Babylonish works.)

What is important is to collect the many works of ancient cultures and look for a common theme. Some truth has got to come of it. It will become embellish after time. That's normal because we've all played the game where the first person tells a story and the next person is to repeat it and so on utill the tenth person tells it back to the first and the story is distorted through error.

Anyway, the work of imagination I'm referencing to comes from an interpretation around the late 1800's. This person compiled many ancient religious texts and framed a story around the period leading up to the flood. Need to have a frame of reference just to see how to organize the picture to the puzzle. Will we ever know if anything really happened when we look at the legends of myth?

Its the search for truth.

reply posted on 26-12-2003 @ 07:03 PM by Byrd

Originally posted by RANTJust for fun, take a look at www.metaresearch.org...

(peering at site..)

I dunno. I see some obvious mistakes... such as "
Comets are so strikingly similar to asteroids that no defining characteristic to distinguish one from the other has yet been devised." There's quite a bit of difference -- comets, if you remember, are balls of ice. Asteroids aren't.

And then there's this one: "But it should be noted that galactic tidal forces would eliminate comets from any bodies that exploded prior to 10 Mya, so only very recent explosions can produce comets that would remain visible today" I'm afraid that "galactic tidal forcess" are almost negligable; unmeasurable. A "tidal force" indicates something is orbiting around something else and its gravity is influencing the first object. We are smack in the middle of a galaxy; no other galaxies affect our solar system. The pull of Jupiter on your body is less than the gravitational pull of the cup of coffee next to you. Galaxies are billions of times farther from you (and the oort cloud) than Jupiter is.)

There are not galactic tidal forces.

...and so on and so forth.

I'm ppuzzled by this site, though, and wondered if it was a hoax. I did a credentials search for Von Flandern and found he's authored astornomy papers and is a PhD. But he also says rather unsupported things such as Mars was once an amusement park for a galactic race; something that's very unsupported.

So I'm less inclined to believe him, and wonder just what his credentials really were at NASA.

reply posted on 27-12-2003 @ 08:17 PM by lostinspace

Is it at all possible that the end date of the Mayan Calander, December 23, 2012 coincide with a cyclic event that occured with the Summerian legend of Marduk and Tiamat?

As I mentioned earlier about a work of fiction that indicated an alignment with a great immense star with that of the worlds of our system and influenced the destruction of Tiamat (the lost planet-now the asteroid belt) could be in fact the giant center of the Milky Way Galaxy. Marduk might represent the center of the Milky Way Galaxy.

reply posted on 28-12-2003 @ 05:41 PM by VeeTwin