Leaked images of Nibiru orbited by Planet X taken by South Pole Station Telescope

reply to post by superdeluxe


It passed close by in May 2003 and caused an Earth Crust Displacement (the first in Earth's history) resulting in the death of billions of people. I'm surprised no-one remembers? Still, at least it means it's 3594 years before Nibiru returns again

*sigh* I have shamelessly self-promoted myGreen Flash photos all over ATS. Shamelessly, I tell you. The reason? I take sundown sequence photographs every time the air is clear, and have been doing so for the past three years. NO OTHER object near the sun, EVER. We have exceptionally clear air here in the Caribbean, Saharan Dust Layer notwithstanding.

It just can't be, folks. Any photo you see that has an "object" near or next to the sun....... it isn't there, not really. I would have seen it, and you can bet your shiny britches I would've photographed it and make a giant flag-magnet thread about it right here. Alas, no Nibiru, just the occasional green flash, and a whole lot of beautiful sunsets.

Is it possible a cometary body might swing by here in 2012? Yes, possible, although it would have to actually impact the Earth to have any serious consequence. A mere flyby would not do it. Now, it's no secret that various asteriods and the occasional comet "sneak" up on those that monitor near-Earth-objects. It happens. There IS an asteroid that will make a VERY close pass to Earth in April of 2011, at least according to the JPL projection.

In short, I don't believe there is a possibility of a conspiracy of such a giant magnitude being globally supressed.

I leave my perceptions and paradigms open a crack for the possibility of something happening in 2012, however it's not going to be a red dwarf that somehow accelerates at 10^3 lightspeed and perturbs Earth's orbit in 2012. NOT going to happen.

*endsigh*

dont know if anyones said this already but those photos were uploaded on youtube a year or so ago by nibirushock2012 who later came on this site and freely admited that they were fake and he created them with photoshop, im far to tired at the moment to argue the so called facts about this crap but if you belive a jupiter sized planet id meandering around the cosmos piloted by aliens then I CAN SAVE YOU just send £29.99 in cash to neil collier c/o ATS and i'll send you a magical brussel sprout which will also make you live forever, give you a horse sized penis and cure cancer and constipation.........jeez i really cant belive this crap is still doing the rounds!

reply to post by logicalview


Just because you do not pay attention to the skies does not mean that it is not happening. I make a habit of checking out the sun sets and when there is a 30 degree discrepancy from where the sun SHOULD be (as in where it has set since I was a child) and where it currently is setting, then I take notice.

The debunkers are in full force as the sheeple are starting to wake up. How about you, copper top? Check the skies and do your own measurements. That is if you can get historical data that has not been doctored.

The astronomers are not going to call foul as they get grants from TPTB, and if it is Natl Security then it will not get public attention until the oceans are 200 miles inland and the spiral tail of Nibiru's moons are knocking us around and all the drinkable water is turned red with oxidized iron dust.

Sound familer?

Originally posted by Skada
reply to post by logicalview

 

... when there is a 30 degree discrepancy from where the sun SHOULD be (as in where it has set since I was a child) and where it currently is setting, then I take notice.

Could you please explain in detail the nature of this observed 'descrepency' in the sun's position ?

What is it you mean ? The place where it sets on a given day ? The speed with which its apparent position changes throughout the day and/or year ?

Originally posted by Skada
reply to post by logicalview

 

Just because you do not pay attention to the skies does not mean that it is not happening. I make a habit of checking out the sun sets and when there is a 30 degree discrepancy from where the sun SHOULD be (as in where it has set since I was a child) and where it currently is setting, then I take notice.

I assume this is really a response to me, since the post you're responding to is a response to me. I pay very close attention to the skies and the sun is not off 30 degrees from where it should be. If it were I would be completely unable to slew to it or anywhere close to it with my computerized telescope (don't try this at home unless you know what you're doing).

The debunkers are in full force as the sheeple are starting to wake up. How about you, copper top? Check the skies and do your own measurements. That is if you can get historical data that has not been doctored.

I've done plenty of my own measurements; the sun is just where it should be, as is the big dipper. In fact, I would have been completely unable to get this picture of the sun rising out of the morning clouds a couple years ago had I not been able to pre-slew to the correct location.
farm1.static.flickr.com...
Even a half a degree discrepency would have killed that shot. I've been doing solar astronomy since then (not much photography though since the sun is boring atm) and nothing's changed.

And what the heck is that supposed to mean about altered historical data? Have you been miscalculating where these things should be? The math is tricky if you haven't done it before, but properly precessing the coordinates from historical epochs is critical...

The astronomers are not going to call foul as they get grants from TPTB,

Since when do amateur astronomers like me get grants from TPTB? What's keeping us quiet, are you suggesting we've been paid off?

[edit on 30-6-2009 by ngchunter]

Originally posted by Skada
reply to post by logicalview

 

Just because you do not pay attention to the skies does not mean that it is not happening. I make a habit of checking out the sun sets and when there is a 30 degree discrepancy from where the sun SHOULD be (as in where it has set since I was a child) and where it currently is setting, then I take notice.

The debunkers are in full force as the sheeple are starting to wake up. How about you, copper top? Check the skies and do your own measurements. That is if you can get historical data that has not been doctored...

I don't mean to insult your intelligence, but hopefully you took into account that the Sun "normally" sets in a different location every day of the year as the year progresses -- so from summer to winter the Sun will set in a completely different location.

Here's a graphic I found that shows the difference in the location of the Sun over the course of a year (this graphic happens to be the Sun as seen from Allentown, Pennsylvania USA):
www.astronomy.org...

However, if you are saying that the Sun's position has changed even after taking into account the Sun's normal seasonal migration across the sky, I would have to vehemently disagree with you based on my own observations...


Personal Observations:
I've lived in the same house for the past 30+ years, and I know EXACLTY where the Sun sets during the various times of the year -- and they have not changed. I know in the summertime that the evening Sunshine is blocked by my neighbor's big stone chimney, and the shadow makes for a nice cool spot to put my chair on my front porch. The general location of that shady-cool spot during the middle of summer has not changed as long as I can remember. If the Sun had moved 30 degrees, the shadow would noy even be anywhere on my porch.

In fact, the position of the setting Sun has NOT change appreciably over the past several decades (although precession would account for changes in the Sun's position in timescales of hundreds and thousands of years -- but 'precession' is well understood and is not related to Nibiru).

That's why the "henges" (such as Stonehenge) and other astronomical observatories built by ancient and not-so-ancient people still work today -- because the Sun always ends up rising or setting in virtually the exact same place in the sky as it did exactly 1 year earlier, and 1 year before that, and so on in a highly predictable manner. Those ancient observatories told ancient people when spring (and the planting season) had arrived, and those sun alignments still work today.

There are people who have built modern 'henges' and other crude Sun-alignment observatories. I say this because a good friend of mine built one -- just for fun -- in his garden several years ago... The 9:00 AM Sun on the day of the spring equinox shines onto a small rock obelisk, and the point of that obelisk casts a shadow onto the center of a little medallion of the Sun. It's a fun and cool little garden feature. Granted -- the shadow also falls on that medallion a few days before and a few days after the equinox, but it's still a pretty cool thing to see.

My friend has had this fun little "stone observatory" for about 15 or 20 years now (I should ask him when he built it), but the shadows still fall on the same place during the spring equinox as it did when he built it -- so his "observatory" has not noticed changes in the Sun's location, either.

Obviously, as I said, the Sun will set in a completely different place in winter as it would in summer -- even the difference over three months is quite noticeable. However, this also has nothing to do with Nibiru and has everything to do with Earth's 23.5 degree axial tilt.



[edit on 6/30/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]

the best way to find out any information on nibiru is to find out where the closet observitory is and actualy ask sum 1 who is looking at the sky constantly with all the kit and gizmos , he will be able to tell you more than any internet site cos the internet has lost a lot of validity cos on the subject of nibiru most people on these panic sites have phd's/Ma's after there names

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People


I just want un-doctored data. It displeases me that we are always being lied to, and are constantly told that we (the masses) are stupid when the opposite is true.

soylent, if you could ask your friend with the garden deco: keep watch and note anomalies. If you would be so kind. thank you. This is all I desire at this juncture.

Although I don't believe that a huge planet is going to come out of nowhere and kill us all, if it did, oh well! We are always completely at the mercy of the universe that we live in. We cannot control what happens on a cosmic scale! If the world ends via huge object passing Earth, we should all be ready for the next journey of life. Im not going to create a shelter,horde canned food, or even worry about it. Why would I want to be some of the few survivors of a doomsday event? I want to be dead and gone with most of humanity. I can understand the human will to survive but, in a case like "Planet X," I would be completely willing to watch Earth be destroyed and me along with it.

What is the point in talking about this? Is there a solution to this "problem" if indeed this theory is true? The youtube videos with scary music and sinister writing are just meant to scare you. Why do you want to be scared over something you cannot control? Accept it and live while you can, stop living in fear. Life is a gift no matter how short it is. If planet x comes, bring it. If planet x doesn't come, good for humanity.

Originally posted by Skada
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

 

I just want un-doctored data. It displeases me that we are always being lied to, and are constantly told that we (the masses) are stupid when the opposite is true.

soylent, if you could ask your friend with the garden deco: keep watch and note anomalies. If you would be so kind. thank you. This is all I desire at this juncture.

What makes you think we are being lied to about the existence of Nibiru. What data has been doctored? What are we being told about Nibiru that is the opposite of the truth?

Do you have real hard evidence other than what "alternative websites" have claimed.

I personally think that the 100s of amateur astronomers who scan the skies looking for asteroids and comets to discover would have noticed Nibiru coming -- and they would have noticed (along with me) if the Sun and stars were in the wrong place in the sky, especially if it was off by 30 degrees.

[edit on 7/1/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]

Originally posted by Skada
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

 

I just want un-doctored data. It displeases me that we are always being lied to, and are constantly told that we (the masses) are stupid when the opposite is true.

Indeed. For years I've been seeking un-doctored data to show that the Moon is made of cheddar and gorganzola, is mined by aliens from Epsilon Eridani who are serviced by the fast food outlets run by the 6ft fluffy pink bunnies ...... I know its true and the fact that everyone else says otherwise simply proves they are in on the conspiracy.

still waiting for anyone to post the gravitational effects of nibiru.

rofl @ "it passed by and displaced the earths crust".

Whoever gave you a star for that should have their star giving ability revoked.

Yes, it passed by earth and effected the earths crust, but not the orbit of any solar body or any body of water on earth.

This is why people think "conspiracy theorists" wear tinfoil hats.

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People

Originally posted by Skada
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

 

I personally think that the 100s of amateur astronomers who scan the skies looking for asteroids and comets to discover would have noticed Nibiru coming -- and they would have noticed (along with me) if the Sun and stars were in the wrong place in the sky, especially if it was off by 30 degrees.

[edit on 7/1/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]

How many times a year (with last year's data in mind) do you really check out the sky? Also, if the theories have even the littlest bit of truth and there is a Brown Dwarf with a massive cloud of Iron Oxide dust around it, do you really think that it would be visible to the back yard astronomers?
It would be dark, it would not produce any light on its own.

Also, if (again the theories are true) the brown dwarf is around the sun and has a magnetic mass of 4 times the earth, (which so happens to be the size of the hole in our magnetosphere) do you think that we would see any sunspots, all the while having extreme weather and extreme heat in some places and cold in others?

Also, if the dwarf did have an impact on the earth, as in, slowing the crust rotation and the core was still spinning, do you not think that the oceans would heat up causing a rise in ocean temps melting the poles from underneath and not from top down. Also, if this slowing of the crust was occurring, do you not think that earthquakes would not be on the rise and in places where there has not been earthquakes in quite some time. As in June there was 2 earthquakes in the first week in Cleburne, Texas which is south east of Dallas. Also, with warm water comes more intense hurricanes as in reference to Rita and Ike.

Also, if the Dwarf was a magnet of 4 times the mass of earth, do you not think that our wobble would get worse and thus have the discrepancies in the stars for the season and the out of place orbit of the moon (which I'm sure you haven't noticed).

I'm not attempting to berate anyone, or be defensive, I am only presenting observances that can be verified with research through the Internet. I won't give you the links as I am sure that you wouldn't believe me even if I did.

Originally posted by Skada
How many times a year (with last year's data in mind) do you really check out the sky?

At least once a month in-depth, once a week if weather and time allow. Still trying to get set up at a new home though so the last month has been too busy.

Also, if the theories have even the littlest bit of truth and there is a Brown Dwarf with a massive cloud of Iron Oxide dust around it, do you really think that it would be visible to the back yard astronomers?
It would be dark, it would not produce any light on its own.

Handwaving. Prove a brown dwarf would be surrounded by iron oxide in all directions; clouds around stars form discs. A globule of dust would collapse under gravity, leaving at most a disc, which would leave the dwarf's light exposed above and below the disc (not to mention the fact that the dust itself would reflect our sun's light). In short, I should have no problem finding it if it's out there, especially if it's approaching the inner solar system.

I'm not attempting to berate anyone, or be defensive, I am only presenting observances that can be verified with research through the Internet. I won't give you the links as I am sure that you wouldn't believe me even if I did.

Research with a telescope and binoculars is far more effective at finding out if there are any rogue brown dwarfs in our backyard or not.

[edit on 8-7-2009 by ngchunter]

Originally posted by Skada
...Also, if this slowing of the crust was occurring, do you not think that earthquakes would not be on the rise and in places where there has not been earthquakes in quite some time. As in June there was 2 earthquakes in the first week in Cleburne, Texas which is south east of Dallas. Also, with warm water comes more intense hurricanes as in reference to Rita and Ike.

There are historical records of many past earthquakes occurring in "usually quiet" places. Four of the most intense earthquakes ever in the U.S. occurred in the area along the border of Missouri and Tennessee. Those four earthquakes happened in 1811 and 1812 -- and the area has been relatively quite ever since.

Also, there have been many hurricanes of the the last 100 years that have been equally or more powerful than Ike or Rita. There was hurricane Andrew in 1992 and Hurricane Camille in 1969. The 1935 Hurricane that hit the Florida Keys was one of the worst ever as was the 1900 Hurricane that destroyed Galveston Texas. True, Ike and Rita were powerful -- but last hurricane season and the year before that have been pretty quiet...how do the quiet hurricane seasons fit in with your theory?

My point is this...the Hurricanes and Earthquakes of the past 10 years have not been that much different than the 10 years before, or the ten years before that, and so on, and so on. Conditions may be favorable for a usually quite area to become prone to earthquakes for a while. Plus Weather conditions may be favorable for several intense hurricanes during the same season. However, this is not a new phenomenon. This has been going on for a long time. What leads you to believe that this time is more special than all of the other times? What leads you to believe that this time it is a brown dwarf and not just a natural earthly event?

There is NO evidence showing us that any body in space is causing havoc with the crust of our planet.

[edit on 7/8/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People


Yes. We are in the heart of a 40-year propensity toward more hurricanes. This cycle has been clearly documented. 2004 - many hurricanes. 2005 - not so many, but three that impacted the U.S., so the prevalent view is of more hurricanes.

2006? crickets chirping, for the most part.

so on and so on.

Last year? totally consistent with the pattern. As it turns out, this island I live on was devastated in 1932 and on the anniversary of that landfall (Nov. 8) we were again hit by a Cat 5 storm.

So it goes. Al Gore notwithstanding, nothing to see here. Be safe. Prepare.

No Nibiru.

Here are a couple of pictures of the SPT guys.




I've left them large for better detail.
Hump

reply to post by Hump01

Those are great pictures -- thanks ...

...but the larger fact still remains that there is no object in space that only can be seen from the South Pole. If Nibiru was in space directly "south" of the South Pole, astronomers in most of the Southern hemisphere would still be able to see it.

For example, Polaris (the "North Star") is directly over the North Pole, but most of the Northern hemisphere can still see it. I live almost mid-way between the pole and the equator, and Polaris is relatively high in my sky.

Has to be fake. How could a planet orbiting a dwarf star cast a shadow on the star. The principal light source (the star) would cast the shadow the exact opposite direction. Even if there was another, more powerful star close enough to cast a shadow in that direction, the light emitted from the dwarf star would negate any shadow.

How easy is it to create a shadow on a lightbulb?