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.

 

Zeti 2 Reticuli Planet erased from the records?

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 10:13 AM
link   
I've hit upon several references to this lately. As some here know, we have recently embarked on identifying other planets around other stars... There is an official library of such, and lately, I've seen many references to the famed planet said to exist (of Zeti-Reticuli 2) by both the Hills, and Lazar, as well as other abductees, informants, etc.

Here's a snippet, from one site:

"From the Extra Solar Planets Encylopedia: Star Name Distance
(Parsecs) Spectral
Class Visual
Magnitude M[.sini]
Jupiter mass: (J)
Earth mass: (E) Semi-Major Axis
(AU) Period
years (y)
days (d) Eccentricity Inclination
(degrees) Radius
(Earth
Radius)
Zeta 2 Reticuli 11 pc G1V 5.24 0.27(J) 0.14 AU 18.9 d 0 -- --



In a rather strange about face, the above information was removed from the Extra Solar Planets Encyclopedia site after 4 days. The official reason for removal was that the data may have been misinterpreted and there probably is no planet.

Now this big quarter of a Jupiter mass planet is in an orbit about Zeta 2 Reticuli which lasts 18.9 days and has a Semi-Major Axis of 0.14 Astronomical Unit (AU). For comparison Mercury has a Semi-Major Axis of 0.387 AU equal to 36 million miles and Earth has a Semi-Major Axis of 1.00 AU equal to 92.9 million miles. Now if we assume that this newly discovered planet, which we will name Reticulum 1 in accordance with Bob Lazars convention, is the closest one to Zeta 2 Reticuli (its hard to imagine a closer one), then following Bodes Law (the law which states each planet is about twice the distance from its sun as its inner neighbor) Reticulum 2 should be at 0.28 AU, Reticulum 3 should be at 0.56 AU and, INTERESTINGLY, Reticulum 4 would be at 1.12 AU in between the Earths 1.00 AU and Marss 1.52 AU, well within the life-zone of a G class star!"

And a link:

www.gravitywarpdrive.com...

Other sites have also corraborated this, but I'm currently checking it out through more official channels...but it sure sounded interesting...


[Edited on 29-2-2004 by Gazrok]




posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 10:16 AM
link   
so you are saying its a real planet but some retard erased it??



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 10:44 AM
link   
Pretty amazing. In abut a decade, NASA may send up 2 telescopes that are able to see earth-type planets. It will be interesting to see what develops then...



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 10:46 AM
link   
Maybe aliens erased it?



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 12:35 PM
link   
That is incredible.You know we're in serious trouble when the powers that be are so desperate to suppress info that they are trying to cover up PLANETS.lol

From what I remember,the zeticular region was a binary star system?



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 12:37 PM
link   
lmfao covering up planets thats funny...sooner or later theyre going to have to move there someday when the suns helium energy runs out



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 12:59 PM
link   
I did a search on Scirus.com and didn't find any announcement of it as an extrasolar planet anywhere. A news search on Zeta Reticuli on several news engines (some with many older stories) did not turn up any announcement of the star.

Can you find a reference (we could look it up in cache, which isn't erased and is persistant on a number of sites) that announces the planet?



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 09:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by 11thdimension
That is incredible.You know we're in serious trouble when the powers that be are so desperate to suppress info that they are trying to cover up PLANETS.lol

From what I remember,the zeticular region was a binary star system?


It's not a binary. It's two very close stars travelling parallel to each other.



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 11:12 PM
link   
Gee is this something to do with there never being enough evidence for people? Are some of you WAKING UP YET?



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 11:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by THENEO
Gee is this something to do with there never being enough evidence for people? Are some of you WAKING UP YET?



It's very easy to put something on a website and say it's real. Asking to make sure it actually is real isn't keeping our heads in the sand, it's keeping them out of our asses.



[Edited on 29-2-2004 by Esoterica]



posted on Mar, 1 2004 @ 12:02 AM
link   
interesting but how true is it? A lot of the stuff bob lazar said seemed hard to swallow. It's possible the records never did exist and that they are just claiming they were removed to add to the story of the existance of the star. But I guess the only way to be certain is to send something out there far enough and have it send back some photos.



posted on Mar, 1 2004 @ 02:10 AM
link   
The Zeta Reticuli thing did not start with Bob Lazar. It started with the Betty and Barney Hill abduction where Betty drew a star map she was given by her alleged alien abductors during a hypnotic regression session. Years later, some other lady took that star map Betty drew and matched it perfectly to the Zeta Reticuli system. The Hoaxster Bob Lazar simply used that little tidbit of info to make his story more plausible in the minds of UFO believers.

[Edited on 1-3-2004 by heelstone]



posted on Mar, 1 2004 @ 02:26 AM
link   
Flinx, what do you think a binary star system is?


binary star
n.
A stellar system consisting of two stars orbiting about a common center of mass and often appearing as a single visual or telescopic object. Also called double star.

Here is a simulation for reference:
instruct1.cit.cornell.edu...



posted on Mar, 1 2004 @ 02:30 AM
link   
And a little more information on the types of binary star systems:
What are Binary Stars?
Most stars are found in groups of stars that are gravitationally bound with each other. The majority of these stars are found in binary systems which are systems of two stars in orbit around a common center of mass.
One can classify binary stars based on their appearance from earth. Stars that are far enough apart to be distinguished from each other are known as visual binaries. Other binaries are too close and far away to be seen separately but can distinguished using the doppler shift of their spectra. These are spectroscopic binaries.

In rare instances, such as with the star Algol the binary stars are close enough so that the eclipse one another. In this case, one can calculate not only the mass of the binary star systems, but also the radii of the stars.

Link:
www.physics.sfasu.edu...



posted on Mar, 1 2004 @ 08:51 AM
link   
You have to read closely... About the only planets we can detect are large ones... The one that was detected, was about Jupiter sized... It's only from mathematical extrapolation, that you can surmise where the 4th planet would be (the one claimed by the Hills, Lazar, the Aviary, and other sources to be the homeworld of the Greys). However, it would be in the "life zone" and that's what's intriguing...

Here's another source, including the date of when it was announced, then retracted, and reasons given...


On September 20, 1996, astronomers at the European Southern Observatory announced that they had detected possible indications of a giant planet around Zeta2 with around 27 percent of Jupiter's mass, moving in a close inner orbit (0.14 AUs) with a period of 18.9 days. Within two days, however, the discovery announcement was retracted because the detected radial velocity variations could be attributed to the aging star's pulsations (more). In any case, the orbit of an Earth-like planet (with liquid water) around Zeta2 would have to be centered at around one AU -- the orbital distance Earth in the Solar System -- with an orbital period of just over a year. Around dimmer Zeta1, the orbit of an Earth-like planet would be closer in around 0.9 AU -- between the orbital distances of Venus and Earth in the Solar System -- with an orbital period of around 320 days. Astronomers would find it very difficult to detect an Earth-sized planet around either star using present methods.


So it IS believable that it was a miscalculation, but the fact remains:

1. They announced, then retracted the planet discovery.
2. The 4th planet would be in the "life zone" of the 2nd star...right where the witnesses said it would be.

And THAT is pretty damned amazing stuff....



posted on Mar, 1 2004 @ 09:02 AM
link   
Gazrok: Very interesting! This is a longshot conspired guess but maybe NASA got them to erase it. I guess if they have US government power they can get anyone to do anything. It's interesting how this has happened just as NASA's robots have recently been exploring the surface of MARS once again!! Maybe they've found some amazing info on Zeta Reticuli, e.g. pics, and all that other scientific data jargon they test for.



posted on Mar, 1 2004 @ 09:06 AM
link   
Well, it actually happened back in 96 it appears... Still, it was approaching the 50th anniversary of Roswell, and certainly a time when aliens were more front page...



posted on Mar, 1 2004 @ 09:16 AM
link   
there is no doubt in my mind that in the mass expanses that are beyond our comprehension, there are countless other earth-type planets with thriving life. by sheer probability of it, any statistician would have to say the same. well, ANYONE that looks at the probability would have to say the same. it is exciting to think of who else is out there. as a christian, i tend to believe God made much better use of the entire universe than to just put life on one speck of a speck of a speck that we call home. i would think that there are planets spread throughout the universe that have life, and they are probably humans like us, or very close, because God created us in His own likeness, so He could share His love with us, and to spread His glory, and He most likely used the whole universe to do so, not just earth.



posted on Mar, 1 2004 @ 09:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok

2. The 4th planet would be in the "life zone" of the 2nd star...right where the witnesses said it would be.

And THAT is pretty damned amazing stuff....


To be fair, one would assume that a life-bearing planet would be said to be in the life zone. And you've got a 50-50 chance as to which star you say it's orbitting.



posted on Mar, 1 2004 @ 11:23 AM
link   
point well taken...but what I meant was, that using known astronomical measurements...and predicting the orbits of planets, the life zone is a fairly narrow area, and that a 4th planet, would fall in between the zone...

Actually, not a 50/50 chance, the second star is the one cited by Lazar, and some later references as well, and the Aviary.

I don't think Lazar was full of it, I just think he was an unwitting disinfo agent...as he fits the profile for it....and the evidence (obvious background tampering, etc.) seems to support it, as it does with other such agents...




top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join