could this be niburu

Originally posted by Blaine91555

Originally posted by Zeus2573

FACT: Lens flares DO NOT show up on negatives!

You have got to be kidding! You just failed Photography 101.

If your going to rant, at least be partially right.

They don't. I have already verified this via four photography majors one is my cousin.( not that I would need to) I am right about lens flares on negatives. Are you the great white hope that has come to prove me wrong? Best of luck to you Blaine, your gonna need it.

Rant? Not hardly.

~ Zeus

reply to post by serbsta


Even if it wasn't true, it doesn't change my views on Nibiru. Therfore, it doesn't matter either way.

Abracadabra! Alakazzam! Sitchin has no longer been arrested! Please.

I still believe in the existence of the planet Nibiru regardless. As I have said before Sitchin really has nothing to do with it. He is just part of the catalyst.

~ Zeus




[edit on 5-4-2010 by Zeus2573]

Not intending to be off topic, but just wanted to show you how well people watch the heavens. Here is an article in which an asteroid is going to pass in front of a star and hide it.

Rare Sight: Asteroid to Hide Easily Spotted Star

This gives you an idea of how well the sky is observed. Lots of people are out there looking and can even predict with great certainty what is observed here on Earth.

And at the bottom of the page is a link. Spotting spaceships
It's a favorite thing we do on camping trips. Who will see the first satellite and who will see the most?

If something is not on a negative, then it can't be printed in the final image. A photo without lens flares begins with a negative with no lens flares. Of course lens flares must be on the negative if they appear in the final photo.

reply to post by Zeus2573


Except Sitchin does play a major role in this. He is the origin of the theory and seeing as how his claims are refuted by experts in the fields he uses, it would mean his theory is wrong. You say you've seen it and I believe that you believe that to be true. However, if you had never read Sitchin would you think that what you were seeing was a massive planet destroying planet/star or that it was an optical illusion of some kind?

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by Zeus2573

 

Except Sitchin does play a major role in this. He is the origin of the theory and seeing as how his claims are refuted by experts in the fields he uses, it would mean his theory is wrong. You say you've seen it and I believe that you believe that to be true. However, if you had never read Sitchin would you think that what you were seeing was a massive planet destroying planet/star or that it was an optical illusion of some kind?

I have never read anything of Sitchins. I don't need to. What is you're guy's intentions? Are you trying to convince me that Nibiru doesn't exist. If this is your intent, you are wasting your time.

This has even gone to the point of some actually saying that lens flares show up on negatives!

It's a done deal. I am positive that it exists. Nothing you say or do is going to change my view point on Nibiru. The more I read your combative post toward me, it just makes me want to believe in it even more than I already do. So, by all means please continue.

~ Zeus

[edit on 6-4-2010 by Zeus2573]

Originally posted by Zeus2573
[. Everyone is always saying he wasn't qualified to translate Sumerian text. In my opinion he is the only one that is qualified to translate Sumerian text. He has put more research into it than anyone else on this Planet.(as far as I know) Actually, Sumerian text was uncommon until Sitchin came along, and yet people are still to this day saying that he was unqualified.

Riiiiiiight, so ancient text proffesors and scholars who have been studying Sumerian languages for all their careers know less about Sumerian than a simple economist?

If you bothered doing any research, Nibiru has more than one meaning in Sumerian, and its pretty much used as a word for "crossing". Sitchin simply added planet there to sell book,s which you have probably blown money on.

Alos, why has it failed to appear so many times in the past? 1998, 2000, 2003 and 2005, and 2006 were all years claimed by Nibiru cultists, for Nibiru to appear...yet nothing.



Explain that

reply to post by OzWeatherman


Yes, the modern day professor's do know less than Sitchin in my honest opinion. They wouldn't even know of the term Sumerian text if it wasn't for him.
Are you claiming to know more about Sumerian text than Sitchin? You would be doing good as to sticking to what you know Oz, such as the weather. Leave the Sumerian texts to someone more qualified such as Sitchin.

I've done more than enough research on Nibiru. Which quite frankly, is none of your business. I haven't spent one dime on my research.

There is an obvious cover up going on about Planet Nibiru. So, you can bring up all the dates you want to. It means nothing to me.

~ Zeus





[edit on 5-4-2010 by Zeus2573]

Sitchin is not the only one to work on those particular Tablets, and is not the only one to reach very similar conclusions. The latest dating I know of for the return of this planet is 2011, according to the work of my old mentor... who has been crapped on here in an older thread by those described below despite the 23+ letters after her name and over 50 years in the field doing hands-on research... as opposed to only study or reading work.

The highly educated always make the simple mistake of thinking that they know it all. I think this is the result of the elitist mentality that higher education instills into those who further their education. Then add to the mix the absolute NEED for Peer Review in their minds and we can easily see how important information is/can be completely ignored if it does not follow this process

And, these same elitists are not privvy to much that the British Museum knows unless they themselves were invovled in either the Translating Process from Tablets to plain English language, or, the well hushed-up research that went into the removal, cleaning and reassembly of bones from failed Anunnaki DNA experiments that were found in the mid 1970's in huge sarcophagai the exact dimensions of which were recorded in the Tablets.

While we see no evidence, as yet, for a planet the Sumerian scribes called "Nibiru/Marduk", we cannot make a blanket statement that it simply does not exist. You can on the other hand say that in Your Opinion it probably doesn't exist.

For me there is a possibility, however slight it may seem, that there is another member to our Solar System with an extended orbit as described. And while I do not "Believe" in Nibiru, I think there is a chance it may exist, given much of the sound scientific information left to us in those Sumerian Tablets.

I take a wait and see approach, despite the reproaches for this by the elitists.

this will be my last post on this one zeus, its pretty clear that you have a huge fan club that didn't bother to bring any money for condiments per sey! the same crowd keeps heckling over and over again with no real credibility! so guess you won as i haven't seen any real evidence on the contrary to your arguement, keep up the good work as you have had several poster with some real evidence on your behalf

I'm uncertain as to why this thread is as hostile as it is. There are people on this board that believe in much stranger things.

Let's look at some recent articles.
Sun's Nemesis Pelted Earth with Comets, Study Suggests - Space.com (Mar 11 2010)

"Sedna shouldn't be there," said Brown. "There's no way to put Sedna where it is. It never comes close enough to be affected by the Sun, but it never goes far enough away from the Sun to be affected by other stars."
Perhaps a massive unseen object is responsible for Sedna's mystifying orbit, its gravitational influence keeping Sedna fixed in that far-distant portion of space.

Search on for Death Star that throws out deadly comets (Telegraph.co.uk - Mar 13 2010)

Astronomers believe it is of a type called a red or brown dwarf – a "failed star" that has not managed to generate enough energy to burn like the Sun.

But it should be detectable by a heat-sensitive space telescope called WISE, the Wide-Field Infrared Survey Explorer.

Launched last year, WISE began surveying the skies in January. It is expected to discover a 1000 brown dwarfs within 25 light-years of the Sun – right on our cosmic doorstep – before its coolant runs out in October.

Seems like there may be something out there. Would you guys prefer if we went back to calling this thing planet x?

Personally, I don't care if you think it's a planet, a space ship or simply a celestial jerk that is occasionally throwing galactic snowballs at us. it's interesting and worth reading and learning about. Why so much infighting?

reply to post by patmac


Because this thread is not about the existance of nibiru. It is about the video provided containing nibiru or not.

Zeus if you want to believe in Nibiru that's okay. You can. That's your opinion and you are entitled to it.

What is a bit odd is claiming that Sitchin is good at translating ancient texts. He is at odds with all others and he has far less experience.
To claim that negatives do not show lens flares is completely wrong. People will tell you when you have made a mistake.
There were claims that Sitchin was persecuted for his beliefs by the justice system. That was a false claim.
To claim that a planet made of shiny gold, therefore a high albedo, can be in the solar system without anyone noticing is well a bit on the unbelievable.

It's fine to believe in things without evidence. It's when the evidence offered is so wrong that it begs challenges that makes people stand up and shake their heads.

Tayesin and patmac, the problem is that the evidence is rather lacking or made up such as the claims of Sitchin's arrest and trial.

Don't forget that the planets Neptune and Uranus were found because they were predicted to exist and found close to their predicted positions. The predictions were based on the observations of the movements of the known planets in the solar system. Yet, here you'd like us to believe that here is an object that has an unstable orbit and large mass that orbits in a stable manner and has no noticeable effect on the other planets and cannot be seen although much smaller objects with less albedo are tracked.

Originally posted by stereologist
To claim that a planet made of shiny gold, therefore a high albedo, can be in the solar system without anyone noticing is well a bit on the unbelievable.

Sitchin never claimed Nibiru was made of shiny gold, he claimed the Anunnaki suspended it in their atmosphere. In which case it would appear sparkly once it reflects light from our sun.

This is one of the things my old mentor fought with Sitchin about, his "addition" to justify the need to mine gold on earth. From my understanding there is nothing saying the Anunnaki suspended gold in their atmosphere for any reason.

Just an after-thought...
Funny how we humans have toyed with suspending aluminium in our atmosphere for various 'reasons'.

Originally posted by stereologist
Tayesin and patmac, the problem is that the evidence is rather lacking or made up such as the claims of Sitchin's arrest and trial.

I'm not supporting Sitchin here, in fact I oppose some of his claims, and I do so based on my mentors work.

Originally posted by stereologist
Don't forget that the planets Neptune and Uranus were found because they were predicted to exist and found close to their predicted positions. The predictions were based on the observations of the movements of the known planets in the solar system. Yet, here you'd like us to believe that here is an object that has an unstable orbit and large mass that orbits in a stable manner and has no noticeable effect on the other planets and cannot be seen although much smaller objects with less albedo are tracked.

All the planets in our system were described in the Sumerian Texts, including their sizes/masses, order, and appearance up-close long before our infant sciences "discovered" them.

And, I'm not asking you to "believe" anything. In fact, I'm very interested to learn more about what science thinks is the cause of much of the perturbations that are being recorded... and that may also align with the record of growing severity of natural events on our little rock.

I still take a wait and see attitude on Nibiru while I go about my daily tasks. I simply cannot discard the entire story as garbage or myth because of the excellent information that I do know from my mentors work with the British Museum an dhaving read their report on the reassembled bones as described quickly in my above post.

[edit on 5-4-2010 by Tayesin]

Thanks Tayesin. I was responding to what was posted in this thread.

reply to post by digby888


Its a sun dog scientific name parhelion. Though you did catch a rear one where a second sun is created.

Sundogs are formed by plate-shaped hexagonal ice crystals in high and cold cirrus clouds or, during very cold weather, by ice crystals called diamond dust drifting in the air at low levels. These crystals act as prisms, bending the light rays passing through them by 22°. If the crystals are randomly oriented, a complete ring around the sun is seen --- a halo. But often, as the crystals sink through the air they become vertically aligned, so sunlight is refracted horizontally -- in this case, sundogs are seen

reply to post by Tayesin

For me there is a possibility, however slight it may seem, that there is another member to our Solar System with an extended orbit as described. And while I do not "Believe" in Nibiru, I think there is a chance it may exist, given much of the sound scientific information left to us in those Sumerian Tablets.

Very well said. This is just about how I think myself. Just a little bit more optimism. This isn't just some rumor like Y2K.

[edit on 5-4-2010 by randyvs]

Originally posted by stereologist
Thanks Tayesin. I was responding to what was posted in this thread.

Sorry mate, it was me getting off the strict topic in the OP and responding to the wider questions in play.

Be well.

Edit:- You posted as I was editing my own post.

Edited this post for the growing dyslexia in my fingers as I get older.

[edit on 5-4-2010 by Tayesin]

Sorry, I've never followed Stitchin before. So, I'm not familiar with his work at all.

However, I do have a hard time believing that - a planet can't have an irregular and/or absurd orbit. Please consider that the universe is absolutely crazy. Don't scientists only have theories to play with. What is certain?

It's all speculation. Everything is often considered to be inconceivable! Until they observe a distant planet doing what they just claimed was impossible.

Also, one thought - If an atom can share an electron, then perhaps a solar system can share a planet. (I'm aware that the theory of relativity doesn't work at this size, but *shrug*). There's dual star galaxies, dark matter, dark flow and dark energy. Who knows?

Can you say without a shadow of a doubt that a planet couldn't act like a comet? They come through our solar system in long elliptical orbits as well.

Anyways, I'm rather new to this form of science, but I love to learn about it. So if I'm thinking about things incorrectly, please point me to a place of interest.