We have our Brown Dwarf, interacting with and Bombarding asteroids of Oort against Pluto and Jupiter

HERE IS THE EXPLANATION FOR ALL OF THE OP ABOVE

Well sort of..

They are using the wrong model of Cosmology. In fact, the Oort Cloud does not exist, it's a fairy tale.

I do not understand all of this but I will bet you that the Electric Model of the Universe can explain the things they are observing.

I just learned about this last night and it is truly fascinating.

The Electric Model of the Universe has been able to answer all questions about the universe that the normal school of Cosmology have failed to explain or account for.

If you watch this video on it to understand the concept, I think you will find the answers lie within.

video.google.com...# -Thunderbolts Of The Gods

It seems very likely to me these observations can be explained by this model.

This model is changing everything we know in Science.

I am especially interested in hearing Phage's thoughts on this model.





[edit on 10-12-2009 by JohnPhoenix]

reply to post by Phage


All I know is that reduced activity does not signal things are to be taken lightly, when reviewing quake data.

At one point in my life, I trusted Government agencies. After working with those agencies in my business endeavours, worldwide, there are few people and no government agencies I can entrust with anything. The events, something like this would bring to inhabitants of earth, are worthy of conspirancy.

I am only going on a life time of experience dealing with agencies we are supposed to trust. They have failed countless times. Why sould they change over night?

They've been building dumbs in earnest since roughly 1983. Quite a lot happened that year in the science world, that article in Washington Post for example, La Violette I think and others discussing extinction level events in past records, theories, core emissions from the center of the galaxy. The planetary lineup that precluded Mt St Helens erruption was mentioned somewhere. It took me weeks of research and don't intend to redo it after wiping the computer like I have, but in general, there are many possibilities as to what is coming, or what they think may happen, either as a real observation that they're hiding from us, or as a safegard against future possibilities. We don't know.

Earth's history shows many events that took place, some seem to happen all at once, some take longer. What the actual cycles are isnt really clear, as in huge events. For example the Horizon Project talks about a regular cylcle, in the terms of a few thousand years, for major crustal events. It could not possibly be like that and still have life as we know it. But perhaps on a bigger cycle. Or perhaps, events can happen like lions or lambs depending on the number of outside influences.

Ie. a geomagnetic pole reversal can take thousands of years, some of the revert and go back "home" so to speak. Some have been catastrophes due to outside influences, meteors, energy hitting, whatever it is, and happen all at once.

It would be nice to know more about this. Fobbing off a non-danger as a danger isn't just fraud to me, some people have committed suicide over the planet x idea already.
On the other hand, its obvious we aren't being told the truth and so its also imperative to try and get all possibilities on the table.

Originally posted by Unity_99

Ie. a geomagnetic pole reversal can take thousands of years, some of the revert and go back "home" so to speak. Some have been catastrophes due to outside influences, meteors, energy hitting, whatever it is, and happen all at once.

Hmmm... this just made me think that the Bermuda Triangle could have been one of two of our past poles. It would explain the magnetic field of madness within the Bermuda Triangle. After all, a pole would do that to your compass.

Originally posted by JohnPhoenix
HERE IS THE EXPLANATION FOR ALL OF THE OP ABOVE

Well sort of..

They are using the wrong model of Cosmology. In fact, the Oort Cloud does not exist, it's a fairy tale.

I do not understand all of this but I will bet you that the Electric Model of the Universe can explain the things they are observing.

I just learned about this last night and it is truly fascinating.

The Electric Model of the Universe has been able to answer all questions about the universe that the normal school of Cosmology have failed to explain or account for.

If you watch this video on it to understand the concept, I think you will find the answers lie within.

video.google.com...# -Thunderbolts Of The Gods

It seems very likely to me these observations can be explained by this model.

This model is changing everything we know in Science.

I am especially interested in hearing Phage's thoughts on this model.





[edit on 10-12-2009 by JohnPhoenix]

The Electric Model of the Universe hs been so thoroughly debunked as to be laughable. See for instance www.bautforum.com... and www.physicsforums.com...

Originally posted by 4nsicphd

Originally posted by JohnPhoenix

The Electric Model of the Universe hs been so thoroughly debunked as to be laughable. See for instance www.bautforum.com... and www.physicsforums.com...

Originally posted by 4nsicphd

Originally posted by JohnPhoenix

The Electric Model of the Universe hs been so thoroughly debunked as to be laughable. See for instance www.bautforum.com... and www.physicsforums.com...

In MHO I would have to disagree with you on this matter. The electric plasma model is the only one that makes any sense to me. Although I do not believe that that is all that is going on but certainly space is not empty. It is teaming with electrical currents and plasma currents and chemicals and compounds in all forms. I believe the model you are speaking of and I care not to mention is dead and all left to do is bury it.

peace and good will to you

daz

Originally posted by Unity_99

Extinction level events seem to be how it all works.
Sometimes I think it would be better not to know what is around the corner. Although my quest for knowledge drives me all the time to keep seeking. I have come to the conclusion that it makes no difference whether we know or not because these are events which are totally out of my control and also cometry impacts could be the reason we are here. So if that were the case would you try to stop such an event if you could. Me personally would not try stop the event or try to escape. It is the nature of the universe after all..

peace to you
daz

Originally posted by win 52
reply to post by Phage

 

I am only going on a life time of experience dealing with agencies we are supposed to trust. They have failed countless times. Why sould they change over night?

I don't think any of the agencies you speak of failed at all. I think they are very good at what they do and have been very sucessful at keeping the truth from people and keeping them afraid. I think it is a big mistake to trust anyone but yourself.

peace

daz

Originally posted by JohnPhoenix

Good man comrade.
Another fellow EU believer.

I do tend to agree with what you say about the Oort cloud.
It is of coarse called the theoretical Oort cloud because to this day it still has not been observed. I don't believe the electric model explains everything because there are many more much subtile things such as Plasma which would be the conduit for the electricity.

That does not mean I don't believe that a brown dwarf could not have material in orbit that could be of a dangerous nature to us or our planet..

peace to you

daz

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
reply to post by Pauligirl

 

So astronomers who were using an infrared orbiting telescope couldn't tell the difference between a "giant gaseous planet that casts no light" and an "ultrahigh-luminosity galaxy?"

Seems implausible...



[edit on 10-12-2009 by GoldenFleece]

I agree. These guys will say just about anything and get away with it. I have seen them change their stories on many occasions and still never get to the truth in spite of serious pressure. It always seems there is another story that can be spun.

daz

Originally posted by SheaWolf
reply to post by daz__

 

Great post, now we must all keep an eye on the situation and try to find as much info as possible. SHTF could be bigger and any of us expected.

Edited to delete redundant information.

[edit on 10-12-2009 by SheaWolf]

Nice to know that there will also be someone else keeping an eye out for more on this from time to time.

peace to you

daz

Originally posted by DrMattMaddix

Originally posted by GoldenFleece

Originally posted by Phage
.

I wanted to comment also that the quakes have indeed shown much more extensive damage throughout the world. They may only be 6-7 maybe 8 but they are hitting the worst places possible and killing many more people and damaging property more severely.

A few years back the earthquake numbers were downgraded by a factor of one maning an 8.0 would now be a 7.0 and a 6.0 would now be a 5.0.

perhaps this is the reason the quakes seem so distructive.

as to why they were downgraded I don't know. perhaps they are expecting some serious activity and this was a way of hiding the changes..

peace to you

daz

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by DrMattMaddix

 

I'd like to see Dr. Chalko's published work on the subject but can't seem to find any. Can you help with that? See, I have a problem understanding that MSM article. I'd like to know more about how he comes to his conclusions.

Here is a chart of the annual number of earthquakes of 7.0 and greater since 1900. If anything, it appears that there has been less activity (not more) since 1990.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7f4d694099d1.png[/atsimg]
neic.usgs.gov...

[edit on 12/10/2009 by Phage]

You should add this part:

Based on new techniques, such as moment magnitude, a systematic review of all large events is underway. It is expected that as this review continues, these numbers will change. The review has been completed for events from 1990 to the present.

How will this change things?

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by DrMattMaddix

 

I'd like to see Dr. Chalko's published work on the subject but can't seem to find any. Can you help with that? See, I have a problem understanding that MSM article. I'd like to know more about how he comes to his conclusions.

Here is a chart of the annual number of earthquakes of 7.0 and greater since 1900. If anything, it appears that there has been less activity (not more) since 1990.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7f4d694099d1.png[/atsimg]
neic.usgs.gov...

[edit on 12/10/2009 by Phage]

Alright Phage.

Do you remember when the Earhtquake factors were downgraded a few years back. Now consideringing they were downgraded by a factor of one what happens to you'r analysis when you upgrade all the factors you have by +1 meaning a 7.0 becomes an 8.0 and so on..

peace to you

daz

Originally posted by win 52
reply to post by Phage

 

To me, that means things are being saved up for a big event. We should not take things easy thinking we are not going to see any increase in activity. At least that is how things seem to work on this planet.

The way I see it is nothing is being saved up. It seem's to me the earthquake scene is as bad as it always was if not worse even though on paper it doesn't seem so bad.

peace

daz

Remember, Dr. Chalko analyzed 386,000 earthquakes between 1973 and 2007. He didn't just count the number of >7.0 earthquakes. Big difference and I totally believe seismic activity has increased by a factor of 5 over the last 20 years.


[edit on 10-12-2009 by GoldenFleece]

Originally posted by liveandletlive
How will this change things?

I don't know.
Do you?

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
Remember, Dr. Chalko analyzed 386,000 earthquakes between 1973 and 2007. He didn't just count the number of >7.0 earthquakes. Big difference and I totally believe seismic activity has increased by a factor of 5 over the last 20 years.


[edit on 10-12-2009 by GoldenFleece]

I agree with you but do you not think a factor of 5 is a bit much. I myself think it is a lot worse but I wouldn't rate it so high. I will stick my neck out and say activity has increased by a factor of one due to the fequency of 7.0 earthquakes which I believe should be counted as 8.0's

daz

reply to post by GoldenFleece

That's why I asked to see his published work, to see the data set he was working with.

If he was simply using all of the recorded earthquakes there could be a problem. The number of recording instruments worldwide has been increasing. When there were fewer seismographs, weaker earthquakes in remote regions would not be recorded. This is one reason it makes sense to use higher magnitude earthquakes which can be detected at greater distances. By reviewing his work, it would be possible to see if he has made statistical allowances to account for this.

In 1931, there were about 350 stations operating in the world; today, there are more than 8,000 stations and the data now comes in rapidly from these stations by electronic mail, internet and satellite. This increase in the number of stations and the more timely receipt of data has allowed us and other seismological centers to locate earthquakes more rapidly and to locate many small earthquakes which were undetected in earlier years.

earthquake.usgs.gov...

[edit on 12/10/2009 by Phage]

Originally posted by daz__

Do you remember when the Earhtquake factors were downgraded a few years back. Now consideringing they were downgraded by a factor of one what happens to you'r analysis when you upgrade all the factors you have by +1 meaning a 7.0 becomes an 8.0 and so on..

peace to you

daz

Can you give me more information about this. I wasn't aware of an across the board change.

[edit on 12/10/2009 by Phage]