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.

 

Nibiru's 'First Phase' Due Fall 2009!

page: 40
18
<< 37  38  39    41  42  43 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 10:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mogget

Actually, all the evidence I have read suggests the complete opposite, except if the Brown Dwarf star is younger and therefore burning hotter - which is not the case in our system.



Brown dwarfs around the age of the Sun (5 billion years old) are very cool and dim, and therefore are difficult for telescopes to find.


A brown dwarf that is supposed to pass through the inner solar system in December 2012 would be much easier to detect than one at stellar distances. Are you seriously trying to tell me that a planet would be easier to detect than a brown dwarf at the same distance from Earth ? If you are, then you're wrong.


4 years is a long time friend, and if a body were to be approaching the other planets in our system it would speed up as it got closer due to the combined gravitational effects of those planets and Sol. Now who is to say it still isn't WAY out there beyond the point of where it is visible?

Another point, in the first post I made in this thread I started out by saying something that Im sure you read, and took notice of:



While I do not fully believe in the theory of Nibiru......




posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 10:24 AM
link   
Here is some is some interesting info about the late Robert Harrington and the research he did into planet X

www.bibliotecapleyades.net...



posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 10:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Kryties
 


All in all, and as I have repeated for what seems like an eternity, there is no Nibiru. Never was, and never will be, except in the minds of the delusional and the gullible.

The Earth, at some point, what hit by another large astral body. The evidence for this is in the size of the core, which is much larger than it should be. The likelyhood it it was absorbed, after impaction.
Veliskovsky did a fair amount of research into pole shifts (not magnetic pole!), by digging into the Earth, and recording the direction, wether clockwise or anti-clockwise, of shelled creatues. Seems their shells will grow one direction or another, dependant upon their position North or South of the equator! The equator obviously being perpendicular to the axis of rotation, would show shifts in its angle of axs. His tests, although innovative, were pretty inconclusive.

Did I also mention that Nibiru and 2012 are total bunk?



posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 10:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by cruzion
reply to post by Kryties
 


All in all, and as I have repeated for what seems like an eternity, there is no Nibiru.


Fair enough, but can you prove it?

I have said several times myself that Im not entirely convinced that there is a Nibiru, but then again Im not entirely convinced there is not either.



posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 11:15 AM
link   
What about that plutonium powered satellite we sent to Pluto some years back? New Horizon should be able to take a peek at what is out there by now.

MORE TUNA FOR THE CATS!!



posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Kryties
 


That's not logical! Why would I have to prove something doesn't exist? The onus of proof is upon those that claim it does exist.
Read through this thread again on reasons why it doesn't exist. There is plenty of material contained in this thread alone to debunk the Nibiru nonsense.
You have been had by conmen and those that believe the conmen; nothing more.



posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by cruzion
reply to post by Kryties
 


That's not logical! Why would I have to prove something doesn't exist? The onus of proof is upon those that claim it does exist.
Read through this thread again on reasons why it doesn't exist. There is plenty of material contained in this thread alone to debunk the Nibiru nonsense.
You have been had by conmen and those that believe the conmen; nothing more.


Dear oh deary me. Why is it so hard to read my previous posts (by the way they are on the previous page, you won't have to look far). I have been trying to make the point that some of the die-hard skeptics are using sketchy evidence to back up their claims, which is detracting from their point of view.

Never at any point in time have I said that I believed it. I have been 'had' by nobody. I read the claims, examine the evidence and draw my own conclusion. And my conclusion in this case is that the 'irrefutable evidence' of SOME of the skeptics is not what I would consider absolute.


[edit on 12/8/2008 by Kryties]



posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 12:48 PM
link   
The brown dwarf theory has been disproved by Pioneer 10 and 11. The probes did measurements beyond the solar system and showed no gravitational or radiation measurements that would indicate a brown dwarf near our solar system. As for a planet the size of Earth beyond the orbit of Neptune, it is quite possible as they have been discovering planets beyond Neptune in the past few years.
As for a Nibiru that comes close to Earth every 3600 years? Sorry, I think Mr Sitchin had something in his Cocoa Puffs when he wrote that theory.
According to his theory, Nibiru was last hear @600BC. Why didn't the ancient civilizations around at the time mark the event?
Why didn't the Sumerians know about the moons of Saturn or Jupiter?
Why didn't the Sumerians know about Eris, Sedna, Makemake and all the other trans Neptunian planets recently discovered?
Many questions Sitchin or his believers have yet to answer. I would not hold my breath.

BTW, I did read Sitchin's books.

edited to add.

[edit on 8/12/2008 by kidflash2008]



posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 12:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Kryties
 


What would constitute 'absolute' proof?
There are multiple universities and institutions scanning the heavens, constantly. None of them have found anything. You could say "Aha! Proof of a conspiracy! They do know, and aren't telling us!"'
OK, it has an orbit; therefore, it must have a center of attraction that it moves around. Its plane of orbit moves through the Earths plabe of orbit. Therefore, we must be able to detect the central mass or influence that holds Nibiru on its orbital plane. Simple, right? The sphere of influence from the central body MUST extend as far as us if Niburus orbit is close to us.
OK, is there any proof at all of this central mass, whose influence extends as far as Earth? No, none at all.
Do you need it any clearer?



posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 01:12 PM
link   
reply to post by cruzion
 


Wow, I hope you didn't strain yourself too hard and rupture a vein! Take it easy mate, I'm not here to cause trouble yet you seen to be attacking me rather vehemently.

I believe that there are an infinite number of things that are well beyond the scope of human understanding. When I look at the evidence, I do not discard the possibility that our understanding of the laws of physics and space/time is flawed or underdeveloped.



posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by xnibirux
The brown dwarf Nibiru(Planet X), sister to our very own sun, will enter its first known phase of passing Earth above the ecliptic of our star system by fall of 2009, causing much planetary disturbance.

Please share your thoughts on this subject matter, thanks.


Well, figuring that Sitchin said that Nibiru was a planet and not a brown dwarf star, are you sure its the Sumerian Nibiru?

How are the Anunnaki suppose to be from a brown dwarf star?



posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 02:59 PM
link   
reply to post by dalan.
 


It has been suggested that perhaps the planet revolves around the brown dwarf star. While the star stays out well beyond Pluto's orbit, the orbitary path of its planet "Nibiru" swings it into our vicinity.


[edit on 12/8/2008 by Kryties]



posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Kryties
 


OK, so our interpretation of reality may well be flawed, and Nibiru might just appear out of the 6th dimension and wreck us out of our paranoid existance...but failing that, I'll stick with proven physics and the reality of my senses.

www.space.com...

There are numerous computers that scan doppler scans of space, looking for shifts. It's all automated, and covers a lot of space-area (there's a damn lot of it!). You would have thunk they might have spotted something just outside of Plutos orbit, right? No, these astro-physics guys haven't got a clue what they're doing...



posted on Aug, 13 2008 @ 04:33 AM
link   

4 years is a long time friend, and if a body were to be approaching the other planets in our system it would speed up as it got closer due to the combined gravitational effects of those planets and Sol. Now who is to say it still isn't WAY out there beyond the point of where it is visible?


4 years isn't that long when we are talking about objects in solar orbit. If a brown dwarf or large planet was 4 years away from perihelion (closest approach to the Sun), and had an orbital period of 3600 years, it's current position would be between the orbits of Saturn and Uranus. That is easily close enough to be detectable with small telescopes, and even with the naked eye.

I have been studying the long term motion of short period comets and asteroids for years on my PC (using Dance of the Planets; ARC Science Simulations; www.arcscience.com ), so I know a fair bit about gravity and orbits. In fact, I can add objects to the software database, so I might just do that tonight. If I assume a perihelion distance of 1AU, a perihelion date of 2012 December 21, and an orbital period of 3600 years, I will be able to determine the (hypothetical) object's current distance from the Sun.

Stay tuned........


[edit on 13-8-2008 by Mogget]



posted on Aug, 13 2008 @ 04:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Mogget
 


Don't get me wrong guys, I believe you are right. I am simply attempting to open further discussion and get people thinking 'outside the box'. It seems to have worked thus far, and I would love to see what comes out the other end of your space model



posted on Aug, 13 2008 @ 05:08 AM
link   

It has been suggested that perhaps the planet revolves around the brown dwarf star. While the star stays out well beyond Pluto's orbit, the orbitary path of its planet "Nibiru" swings it into our vicinity.


If that happened, the Sun would rip Nibiru from the brown dwarf's grasp at the first attempt. Therefore, the brown dwarf/Nibiru system couldn't have passed by at any time in the past, and therefore the Sumerians would have no knowledge of it.



posted on Aug, 13 2008 @ 08:41 AM
link   
I have used my Dance of the Planets software to check how far away an object would be right now if it had an orbital period of 3600 years, a perihelion distance of 1AU (Earth's distance from the Sun), and a perihelion date of 2012 December 21......

Distance from Sun on 2008 August 13......13.96AU (almost exactly halfway between the orbits of Saturn and Uranus).

If the object was the size of Uranus (and reflected the same amount of light), the apparent magnitude would be +4.5. In other words, it would be visible to the naked eye as a faint point of light.

If the object was the same size as Jupiter (and reflected the same amount of light), the apparent magnitude would be +2.3, and it would therefore be almost as bright as Polaris (the north pole star).

If it was a brown dwarf, it would be even brighter than that, and would have been headline news a long time ago.


[edit on 13-8-2008 by Mogget]

[edit on 13-8-2008 by Mogget]



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 06:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Mogget
 


What if this object was the same size of Earth?

Anunnaki (the bad ones) and the Alluminati are one and the same.

I'm moving to higher ground just to be safe, any chance of moving to Mars to be safe, hold on the Anunnaki might use it as a transit station too.

Dang.



posted on Aug, 20 2008 @ 04:52 AM
link   
If it was the same size and reflectivity as Earth, the magnitude would be +7.8 (exactly the same as that of Neptune). That's invisible to the naked eye, but easily visible in binoculars and small telescopes.

[edit on 20-8-2008 by Mogget]



posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 02:45 PM
link   



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 37  38  39    41  42  43 >>

log in

join