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.

 

There Will Be NO Cataclysm Of Any Kind In 2012!

page: 2
6
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 04:47 PM
link   
Something will happen by 2012. Definitely not the end of the world. Homo Sapiens have been here for what... 150,000 years???? We survived the worst of disasters. We will continue to live through the worst.




posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 06:16 PM
link   
We survived Justin Bieber, we will survive 2012.



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 06:30 PM
link   
Not for nothing I dont think that the world will come to a screeching halt. But I kind of hope that something cool will happen. Maybe like alien disclosure the singularity or something that will change the way people think and live because at the rate we're going the future doesnt look too bright...

[edit on 2-6-2010 by IaM007]



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 06:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Sunveil
 


What it is?



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 08:31 PM
link   
It is funny on this year; people think the world is going to end. One day "earth" was like "You know what on this day (2012) I am going to just screw a lot of lives up. What sounds more believable that or 2012 theories



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by hawkeye1717
Anyone wanna bet?!?!! Remember the end of days in 2000? Or the end of days predicted by preachers in the 1800's?? Or the Black Death being the end of days?? 2012 hocum does one thing, it makes people money by playing on the fears and paranoia of the public. But it is interesting to watch the shows on History Channel!!!!


I don't remember the preacher in the 1800's only have heard about it through history. Sorry some of us aren't 210 years old



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 09:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Sunveil
 





When you have the time, take your digital camera, place a #10 arc welders lens ($4$ @ HD) and take a few pics of the sun. Download them to your computer and using a program like photo shop, under filter, click solarize and help me understand what is at the 7 o'clock position


So please, post some of the pics you obviously have. I got a number 10
lens. I look at the sun through it every morning there is nothing at 7 o clock that I've seen.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 06:54 AM
link   
Addressing ideas that are off the wacko meter
1. lens flares are lens flares
2. we cross the galactic center twice a year
3. the pope's hat has been called unkinder things than a fish head
4. the Sumerians did not write about a new planet
5. there is no known brown dwarf in our solar system
6. it's impossible to have a brown dwarf that has an orbit entering the orbits of the known planets
7. comet Holmes is not the blue star of the Hopi prophecy which is originates from 1959
8. Miller was wrong in the 1840s and this prediction is wrong as well


Can everyone please say apophenia?



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 06:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
Addressing ideas that are off the wacko meter
1. lens flares are lens flares
2. we cross the galactic center twice a year
3. the pope's hat has been called unkinder things than a fish head
4. the Sumerians did not write about a new planet
5. there is no known brown dwarf in our solar system
6. it's impossible to have a brown dwarf that has an orbit entering the orbits of the known planets
7. comet Holmes is not the blue star of the Hopi prophecy which is originates from 1959
8. Miller was wrong in the 1840s and this prediction is wrong as well


Can everyone please say apophenia?



LOL at 4 and 7. You make me laugh.

you act like the whole world revolves around you.



[edit on 3-6-2010 by dragnet53]



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 07:00 AM
link   
reply to post by hawkeye1717
 


NO DUH!

2nd Line.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 07:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Sunveil
 


Solar flare? does it move to different spots when you take photos from different angles?



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 08:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Vonour
 




By Thomas O'Toole, Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, December 30, 1983 ; Page A1
Possibly as Large as Jupiter;
Mystery Heavenly Body Discovered
The correct figure is 50 billion miles. It also might be a Jupiter-like star that started out to become a star eons ago but never got hot enough like the sun to become a star. which is so cold it casts no light so close to the sun it would be part of the solar system....there was some speculation that it might be moving toward Earth Cal Tech's Neugebauer said. "I want to douse that idea with as much cold water as I can." ...."All I can tell you is that we don't know what it is," Dr. Gerry Neugebauer, IRAS chief scientist for California's Jet Propulsion Laboratory and director of the Palomar Observatory for the California Institute of Technology, said in an interview.


I want to point out that this is a jumbled and reconstructed mess from the original article.


The correct figure is 50 billion miles.

This comment comes from the correction since the original article stated trillion, not billion.


It also might be a Jupiter-like star that started out to become a star eons ago but never got hot enough like the sun to become a star.

That is from paragraph 12 of the original article.


which is so cold it casts no light

That is from paragraph 4.


so close to the sun it would be part of the solar system

That is from paragraph 11.


....there was some speculation that it might be moving toward Earth

That's from paragraph 9.


Cal Tech's Neugebauer said. "I want to douse that idea with as much cold water as I can."

That's from paragraph 10.


...."All I can tell you is that we don't know what it is," Dr. Gerry Neugebauer, IRAS chief scientist for California's Jet Propulsion Laboratory and director of the Palomar Observatory for the California Institute of Technology, said in an interview.

That's from paragraph 3.

In summary. What has been posted as evidence is a huge lie. It is a deliberate effort to misrepresent an article by cherry picking pieces of the article and reordering the information into what amounts to a lie.

Let's see what the original article stated.

So mysterious is the object that astronomers do not know if it is a planet, a giant comet, a nearby “protostar” that never got hot enough to become a star, a distant galaxy so young that it is still in the process of forming its first stars or a galaxy so shrouded in dust that none of the light cast by its stars ever gets through.


I highlighted the part of the article that turned out to be the objects being seen by IRAS. Yes, there were multiple objects that turned out to be a new type of galaxy.

[edit on 3-6-2010 by stereologist]



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 08:01 AM
link   
reply to post by dragnet53
 


You make me laugh. Got any proof that the Sumerians wrote about another planet? Holmes was a yellow comet, not blue.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by dragnet53
 


You make me laugh. Got any proof that the Sumerians wrote about another planet? Holmes was a yellow comet, not blue.


You are like talking to a brick wall when it comes to the hopi blue star prophecy. You seriously are here to debunk any credible source when it comes to prophecies or Nibiru. I went to my source here and found interesting that some tablets are yet not translated concerning Nibiru. Just find that little odd.

But here even some people believe that planet X is possible.

adsabs.harvard.edu...

the last update shows 2010.



just for extra reading:

www.subversiveelement.com...

[edit on 3-6-2010 by dragnet53]

[edit on 3-6-2010 by dragnet53]



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 03:58 PM
link   
just in case that link disappears with the harvard link:



Arguments for the presence of a distant large undiscovered Solar system planet
Murray, J. B.
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Volume 309, Issue 1, pp. 31-34.

Aphelion distances of long-period comets show a slight excess around 30000 to 50000au from the Sun. Positions of cometary aphelia within these distance limits are aligned along a great circle inclined to both the ecliptic and the Galactic plane. This paper examines one of the possible explanations for this non-random clustering: that it is due to orbital perturbations by an undiscovered object orbiting within the above-mentioned distances. A model consistent with the observations gives a retrograde orbit (inclination 120 deg) for the object with a longitude of the ascending node at 77 deg+/-13 deg, a period of 5.8x10^6 yr and a radius of 32000au. The same model gives a present position for the undiscovered object of RA 20^h 35^m, Dec.+5 deg, with an error ellipse semimajor axis of 14 deg and a semiminor axis of 7 deg. The magnitude is likely to be fainter than 23. Such a distant object would almost certainly not remain bound for the age of the Solar system, and recent capture into the present orbit, although also of low probability, remains the least unlikely origin for this hypothetical planet.

Keywords: COMETS: GENERAL: PLANETS AND SATELLITES: GENERAL
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1999.02806.x



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 05:33 PM
link   
reply to post by dragnet53
 


I have asked many times why comet Holmes is considered to be the blue star in the Hopi prophecy. All I have ever seen are images that are blue due to the filter used in the telescope. All of the photos without a filter show a yellow comet. If you have other information I'd like to see it.

Can you tell us how you know that the tablets are about Nibiru if they have not been translated. Seems a little odd.

That's an interesting article
Arguments for the presence of a distant large undiscovered Solar system planet

In the abstract from this 1999 paper it says, "a period of 5.8x10^6 yr and a radius of 32000au." So this object is 1/2 a light year out and takes some 6 million years to orbit the sun. Also notice that it says, "The magnitude is likely to be fainter than 23." This means it would be at the limits of the whole sky surveys.

As I've said many times, no new planets can enter within the orbits of the known planets, but beyond that could be some very interesting objects.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 05:40 PM
link   
reply to post by dragnet53
 


There is the abstract in its entirety. Very nice. The one thing we are missing here is the date of publication.

For those that need a little help in reading this jargon please note that this says, "Arguments for the presence". This does not say that something has been found. This is what science is all about is making important predictions and this is a prediction. Then the first several sentences lay out why they are predicting an object, i.e. the thing that is seen that they want to explain. Then they tell us what they predicted including a possible direction in the sky in which to look, the RA and Dec numbers. They predict it is really faint, the fainter than 23. Then there is a sentence about the origin of this object.

In there is says 32000au. It is 39AU to Pluto. This is half a light year away. That is really far.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 05:43 PM
link   
Evidence of suppression:

www.america.gov...



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 07:38 PM
link   
reply to post by rajaten
 


Is there anything there that relates to 2012?



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 12:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by dragnet53
 


I have asked many times why comet Holmes is considered to be the blue star in the Hopi prophecy. All I have ever seen are images that are blue due to the filter used in the telescope. All of the photos without a filter show a yellow comet. If you have other information I'd like to see it.

Can you tell us how you know that the tablets are about Nibiru if they have not been translated. Seems a little odd.

That's an interesting article
Arguments for the presence of a distant large undiscovered Solar system planet

In the abstract from this 1999 paper it says, "a period of 5.8x10^6 yr and a radius of 32000au." So this object is 1/2 a light year out and takes some 6 million years to orbit the sun. Also notice that it says, "The magnitude is likely to be fainter than 23." This means it would be at the limits of the whole sky surveys.

As I've said many times, no new planets can enter within the orbits of the known planets, but beyond that could be some very interesting objects.


It did what it was supposed to do and show the whole world it was there. I say this again. Mayan's and hopi confirm this. Now when the 9th sign comes true the hopi's will stop their dances. Then you know something is up.



new topics




 
6
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join