To John Lear and Sleeper: Planet Neptune - A Waterworld?

page: 1
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 10:27 PM
link   
I had an interesting thought lately. We all know Earth is known as "the blue planet." Reason being is that nearly three quarters of our surface is covered in water. Well, we all also know that planet Earth isn't the only blue planet in our solar system - Neptune is even bluer. So I had the thought: what if planet Neptune is a waterworld?

I base this speculation on a few things. In order to speculate, we need to recall some of John Lear's past statements:

1.) John Lear has stated that he believes there are no such things as "gas giants," or more formally, "the only gas giant in our solar system is NASA." This would mean that all planets have some type of solid surface.

2.) John Lear has stated that the sun is not a giant thermonuclear ball of fire, and that is actually an electromagnetic sphere. The sun's electromagnetism interacts with the atmospheres/electromagnetic properties of planets. This interaction then generates the planet's temperature. This would imply that a planet's distance from the sun does not dictate its temperature, and as long as the planet is within reach of the sun's energy (within the heliopause), the planet could be sufficiently warmed.

If these two things are in fact true, that would mean that Neptune could have a temperature similar to Earth's, along with a solid surface to walk on.

Here is the assumed "accepted" composition of Neptune:




To John Lear, Sleeper or anyone else that knows more than the average Joe: do you believe the above diagram is accurate? Basically, what are your views on Neptune? Do you believe that it possesses a solid surface and a surface composed nearly entirely of water?



Bright blue, white wispy clouds...it sure looks beautiful. Does anyone possess the belief that Neptune is not a gas giant/ice giant and is in fact a giant planet covered in a vast, blue ocean?

I just thought it was an interesting possibility...




posted on Jul, 2 2007 @ 05:29 AM
link   
I'd love to believe it was. Those pics do lend credence to the possibility. However, the source of these pics is probably "less than credible" if we are to believe John's theories.



posted on Jul, 2 2007 @ 08:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by thebox
I'd love to believe it was. Those pics do lend credence to the possibility. However, the source of these pics is probably "less than credible" if we are to believe John's theories.

Well, as for the origin of those pictures, they just came from a simple Google image search. I pulled them right off the first page:

images.google.com...



It really is a stunningly beautiful planet. I wonder what exists on its surface?

I'd really like to hear John Lear and Sleeper's input on planet Neptune. Surely they have some information about it that most are unaware of?



posted on Jul, 3 2007 @ 03:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by ChocoTaco369
Well, as for the origin of those pictures, they just came from a simple Google image search. I pulled them right off the first page:


I was referring to those who "produced" the images, i.e. NASA.


Originally posted by ChocoTaco369
It really is a stunningly beautiful planet. I wonder what exists on its surface?


And yes it is quite a looker... If I were a planet...



posted on Jul, 12 2007 @ 03:16 AM
link   
I'm surprised we haven't heard from anyone on this yet... I'd like to hear more on this interesting topic. John? Sleeper?



posted on Jul, 12 2007 @ 06:34 AM
link   
Hello,
that would be interesting to hear about, indeed. Such a beautiful planet, brings the idea of water. The very idea is just great, even if having in mind sci-fi story about the planet one complete ocean (and civilisation underwater) - just excellent (was it ever written? I would thing about it seriously

Also I only remember George Adamsky pointing out that all planets in our solar system are inhabited. I don't wanna put any mistake, but if memory serves me well once in an interview John Lear cited this exact saying of Adamsky's. So he found it credible.
Excuse me if it's not remembered correctly.

As for me, it seems very believable about life on planets as Mars, Venus (not physical) bases on Moon (practicaly no doubt). So who knows, maybe it's also Neptune...



posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 12:31 AM
link   
Hmm.....intriguing theory!! I wouldnt really be surprised much if it were true too. I mean, NASA does know the truth, but dont want to tell.

I concur, Neptune is a beautiful looking planet if i do say so myself!

My interest has piqued in realtion to the Electromagnetic fields in relation to the sun. Interesting!

What say you, Mr.John Lear about Neptune?



posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 02:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by ChocoTaco369
So I had the thought: what if planet Neptune is a waterworld?

It could also explain the legend of King Neptune as an aquatic God. I think you may be right on this.



posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 03:20 AM
link   
whoa man. I never even thought about that, but whoa. that's a crazy theory... but I'm sure the skeptics will crush it soon enough with their big heavy textbooks. After all, thoughts are becoming a crime these days.



posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 04:30 AM
link   
Choca
Thanks for posting that pic, using it as a wallpaper on my desktop.


Pity that we carn't see it's ring system on that pic.

It is a Gas Planet... there is no way that NASA could hide anything " secret" about it.
Nowadays there are too many "honest" scientist with good Telescopes who say it's a Gas Planet.
Tho the ides that it might be something else is very tempting.




posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 09:14 PM
link   
There are no "water planets" in our solar system. Just like there are no ‘gas giants’ in our solar system. That is a myth propagated by NASA to promote the belief that 'we', the 'human' race' are the only living beings in out solar system.

The major reason that NASA promotes that belief is to make us feel like we are 'alone' and dependant on earth invented technology. They don't want us thinking that there are 'better' or different places.

NASA is controlled by 'forces' that we know nothing about. Mike Griffin is a figurehead; he knows very little about what is really going on. You would really be surprised at all of the 'projects', 'planes', 'vehicles' 'satellites' 'space stations' and who all knows what NASA has out there.

There are secrets, within secrets, within secrets of which 'we', you and I know very little. About all we know is that a space shuttle goes up to a space station every few months and drops off parts that usually don't work.

The truth is mind boggling. There is so much stuff going on 'out there' not only in orbit around the earth but on the moon, on Mars and on many of the other planets it would make your head spin if you knew ten percent of it.

No. Neptune is not a 'water planet'. People live there like they do on earth. We have an amazing solar system but you are not allowed to know anything about it. Why? Because those in charge here on earth don't think its any of your business. Thats why.

Oh, one more thing. The only 'gas giant' in our solar system is NASA.



posted on Oct, 28 2007 @ 09:53 PM
link   
ChocoTaco369 that is a beautiful picture of Neptune that you have found, and your diagrams and theories are very interesting.

You have interested me, and my curiousity is up wondering about Neptune. When I get back to my laboratory tomorrow or the next day I'll run some tests hopefully, and see how right you are. Thanks for putting such an interesting theory out there to test.

Our Sun is very interesting also. As a kid growing up I was under the assumption that the Sun was molten magma; but that was then, and now I understand the Sun in a different way.



posted on Oct, 29 2007 @ 05:40 AM
link   
Hi John

So, you are saying all Scientist/Astronomers are lying as well?

Can you prove anything or give me a hint as to where I can find something feasible in your statements?



posted on Oct, 29 2007 @ 08:56 AM
link   
Just a quick note to say that not all astronomers work for NASA, or other American institutions.

Most of the major astronomical discoveries were made before NASA even existed and Neptune itself was discovered in 1846.
Spectroscopy (first used in 1859) can be used to to ascertain the chemical elements that make up planets, stars, galaxies etc. This has told us, as shown in the diagram in the opening post, that Neptune is mainly Hydrogen, Helium, Methane, Water, etc. By comparing its size vs its gravitational pull on its moons, you can work out the average density of a planet, which for Neptune works out at slightly denser than water.

If someone were to prove that Neptune indeed had a nice rocky surface, was habitable or maybe was inhabited, they would surely get a Nobel prize for their fantastic work, which would be worth a cool £760,000, or $1,565,156.47
Someone would have done it long ago.



posted on Oct, 29 2007 @ 11:44 AM
link   
Originally posted by Lyrian




Hi John

So, you are saying all Scientist/Astronomers are lying as well?


Thanks for the post Lyrian.

If a Scientist/Astronomer wants to belong to the club, hold on to tenure, keep a chair, feed himself and his family he needs to toe the party line. And the party line is: whatever the National Science Foundation says it is. Period. Some haven't and they have paid with their reputations and careers. And, no, if you are interested you will have to do your own research but you can start with Hansen, Lowell, Pickering and Firsoff.


Can you prove anything or give me a hint as to where I can find something feasible in your statements?


Heres a hint. The following are scientists/astronomers who believed that it was possible that not only did the moon have a breathable atmosphere but was populated as well:

(In no particular order)
William Herschel
Mestrius Plutarchus
Nicolaus Copernicus
Aristarchus of Samos
John Wilkens
Hans Kepler
Peter Andreas Hansen
William Leitch
John Herschel
William Whewell
Asaph Hall
Mikhail Vasin
Alexander Shcherbakov

Thanks for your post and input.



posted on Oct, 29 2007 @ 11:58 AM
link   
Thank YOU John for your posts first and foremost.... I am in the camp that will believe you over the corruption of these agencies, let alone chance that there's brainwashing drugs involved in all these agencies and from reading some witness accounts -- NASA and the CIA/NSA seem to share more then beds when it comes to drugging people/their own members.

Anyway, onto the Neptune/overall point and question -- don't the people of these other worlds know that the people of Earth are in a dictatorial position and have been for years? Do they think they could have technology to cure illness and help the people of Earth get less violent, quickly? Why can't they plan a mass landing to 'free' us from puppet govenments and the UN?

Lastly, is there any sort of Galactic Federation or Foundation out there where all these people meet/make decisions?

Like I prefaced my post John, I trust your word over the agencies anyday -- your background, family history and expertise are always in total respect in my eyes.



posted on Oct, 29 2007 @ 09:26 PM
link   
ChocoTaco369 I think your speculation of the planet Neptune if fairly accurate. Neptunes surface looks like it's made up of mostly water and ice.

Supposedly the winds there are very strong, upto around 1000 mph in speed. If the winds are that fast, then the winds there could easily raise ice particles high into the atmosphere and cover the planet like we see it in the photo.

I'm very sure you are right ChocoTaco369 that Neptune is a water/ice covered planet. There is also the high percentage that there might even be land sticking out of that mass of water/ice, since there seems to be indications of "near surface" magma activity.

Neptune is not a gaseous planet, because there are no real gaseous planets or stars. I know that people are going to say there are gaseous planets but they are not thinking right. Here is why.



Lets compare a cloud in the sky circling the Earth to what a gaseous planet would be like while circling the Sun.

We all see gaseous clouds in the sky circling the Earth, at least for a short period of time. The clouds usually change their shape quite often, and they always form, change their shape and then disappear. They are never able to keep their shape or to stay permanently.

Now.... you and I know by simple logic, that when you see a planet circling the Sun that they don't fade in or out, or disappear. Somewhere inside of the gaseous atmosphere is a planet. Just because it has high winds on those planets to raise the dust farther from their surface, definitely doesn't mean that it's a gaseous planet.

Yes, more gases and dust have been raised into the atmosphere, but down below is a solid mass with a strong enough field to keep the gases and dust in captivity while the planet makes its revolutions around our sun.

You and others can see that for yourself by the extreme definition of Neptune. If it were really gaseous, you would be looking at something more like a Nebula, which is gaseous. How many of you have seen a Nebula circling a Sun/Star? ... and you never will see a gaseous Nebula circling a star; if you do, then tell me which Nebula it is that circles a star; ha there are none. Therefore, there are no "real" gaseous planets.

When you look at Neptune, you see a fairly crisp outline of its ball like exterior. You can see that it has an atmosphere, because its surface isn't clear. But its fairly crisp ball shaped outline lets you know there is definite mass not far down under the veil.

The planet Neptune has a very small iron core in comparison to the Earths, per size vs volume.

The photo of Neptune describing its composition I believe is incorrect. I believe the Upper Atmosphere and Atmosphere are correct, but the Mantle is incorrect. The Mantle should be rock intermixed with magma. Also, there is the possiblity that there is crust sticking out of the ice/water in places.



posted on Oct, 29 2007 @ 09:42 PM
link   
The National Science Foundation is not an international body and its only been in existence since 1950. While it may hold some sway over American scientists, I'd be relatively certain that it holds little power over other nations scientists, other than they respect it for what it is.

As for the scientists who believed that the moon had an atmosphere or was populated.....

(in no particular order....)

John Herschel - this was a hoax perpetrated by the New York Sun and had no truth in it. (according to this source)
www.museumofhoaxes.com...

Mikhail Vasin and Alexander Shcherbakov - they came up with the theory that the moon is not a planet, but a big spaceship.
www.foundation.bw...

Mestrius Plutarchus - lived between 46AD and 120AD so probably knew no better.

Aristarchus of Samos - lived between 310BC and 230BC so probably knew no better.

Of the others, I could find no trace of them ever holding such beliefs. But I did only spend 15 minutes having a look.



posted on Nov, 1 2007 @ 07:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear

If a Scientist/Astronomer wants to belong to the club, hold on to tenure, keep a chair, feed himself and his family he needs to toe the party line. And the party line is: whatever the National Science Foundation says it is. Period. Some haven't and they have paid with their reputations and careers. And, no, if you are interested you will have to do your own research but you can start with Hansen, Lowell, Pickering and Firsoff.


I really want to take issue with this.

Are you making this rubbish up as you go along?

Maybe I have looked into the wrong Hansen, Lowell, Pickering and Firsoff.


Peter Andreas Hansen 1795 - 1874

He twice received the Gold Medal of the Royal Astronomical Society and was awarded the Copley Medal for correcting earlier measurements by others on the distance to the sun, amongst many other awards.


Percival Lowell 1855 - 1916

He studied Mars, specifically the canals and thought that these were not natural formations, leading to the idea that Mars may have life. Spent the last few years of his life searching for a planet beyond Neptune. Founded the Lowell Observatory.


William Pickering 1910 - 2004

Worked for JPL for most of his life and worked extensively on the Mariner probes. Retired from JPL aged 66 in 1976. Received numerous awards and accolades during and after his career.


Axel Firsoff 1910 - 1981

Amateur astronomer from Sweden who moved to Glastonbury, UK. Worked for the British Olympic Ski Team in the 1950's. Wrote books about ET life and thought the craters on the moon were volcanic.


If I have used the wrong Hansen, Lowell, Pickering and Firsoff, maybe you should be more exact when dishing out names of astronomers. From what I can tell, none (ZERO) of these paid with their reputation or career for having unusual views or having challenged what was beleived to be true at the time. As for Axel Firsoff, he was never a 'proper' astronomer, just an enthusiastic amateur, so had no reputation to tarnish.

Maybe I have this all wrong. I don't think so. I think you do.



posted on Nov, 1 2007 @ 08:36 AM
link   
reply to post by johnlear
 



oh well that is a relief! No underwater worlds!! phew

I had a freaky dream where I saw these human aquariums. There were women all attached to some jelly fish via tentacle giving it life and then becoming jelly fish spawn... No joke. I was like... I don't want to be a queen jellyfish or jellyfish spawn.

Kill the underwater jellyfish king... LOL and then I was running around severing the tentacles. That was a freaky dream but I am feeling relieved now you state there exist no underwater worlds!!!

woo hoo





new topics
top topics
 
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join