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.

 

Nibiru This, Nibiru That: STOP, You've been punked!

page: 15
45
<< 12  13  14    16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 18 2010 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 


You make a false claim and you stand by it defiantly. Great. I expect no less from you.


Humm, I wonder what's the difference between not being able to see NEAR-EARTH OBJECTS and objects, planets, and even large stellar objects such as a brown dwarf, or a red dwarf somewhere within the Oort cloud

Let me give you a hint. The NEAR-EARTH OBJECTS objects are small.

I've said it dozens of times to you and you still haven't figured it out. So let's try again. Small things are hard to find. Big things are easier to find. The bigger they are the farther they have to be away to avoid detection.




posted on May, 18 2010 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 



When an astronomer claims "we should have been able to see such objects" is an OPINION, meanwhile models say a different thing...

No matter how you try to "fudge" your claims you still fail.

Constraints are constraints. There are multiple ways to come up with constraints. Choosing the weaker constraint is still the weaker method to use. Gravitational studies are weaker constraints than observational studies.



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 12:53 PM
link   
Let's see if I can make this simpler to understand.

If I stand in a room with eyes closed and do not move my feet, I can wave my arms around determine whether or not something is close to me. Then I open my eyes and look around and see more of the room.

Your claim is that despite being able to look around the room I have to trust my arms instead.



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 09:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist

You make a false claim and you stand by it defiantly. Great. I expect no less from you.


I made the false claims?...


For crying out loud, learn to admit when you are wrong, it is quite healthy to do so...



Originally posted by stereologist
Let me give you a hint. The NEAR-EARTH OBJECTS objects are small.


And planets, and even brown dwarf, or red dwarf in the Oort cloud are even harder to see when you don't know exactly where to look... More so brown dwarfs and red dwarfs which are too faint to see with optical telescopes. They are visible in the infrared, and even then they are hard to see unless you know exactly where to look.

I am not going to repeat myself, this is like trying to to make an intelligent conversation with a wall...



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 09:19 PM
link   
THE DISCOVERY

DECEMBER 1981 - Astronomy Magazine - Search for the Tenth Planet
JUNE 19th, 1982 - New York Times - Some Kind of Mystery Object is Really There
JUNE 28th, 1982 - Newsweek - Does the Sun Have A Dark Companion?
OCTOBER 1982 - Astronomy Magazine - Searching For A Tenth Planet
JANUARY 25th, 1983 - US Government launches IRAS, The Infrared Astronomical Satellite
JANUARY 30th, 1983 - New York Times - There Is Something Out There
DECEMBER 30th, 1983 - Washington Post - Heavenly Body Discovered Possibly as Large as Jupiter
SEPTEMBER 10th, 1984 - US News World Report - Planet X - Is It Really Out There?
1987 EDITION - New Science and Invention Encyclopedia



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 09:24 PM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 


Let's see. You posted a series of articles. You misrepresented them. You have misquoted me. You failed to supply answers to your claims.

I don't expect you to admit your incompetent failures. You know that you have failed to substantiate any of your failed claims.

At the end of your post you admit that objects of any size must be far away. Thanks for admitting your errors.



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 09:25 PM
link   
reply to post by gamma 49
 


Notice how your articles are all in the early 80s. Have you ever wondered what happened after the mid 80s?



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 09:28 PM
link   
If you are certain nibiru does not exist why bother with the thread. This has been discussed to death,drop it already.

80% of the norm is binary or trinary in the known universe so why is it so hard to believe
we may have a binary system. Again why bother your mind is maid up,so stop with this subject enough already.



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 09:35 PM
link   
reply to post by gamma 49
 


It's been discussed to death and you post. Interesting, or not.



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 10:02 PM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 

Look your like talking with my 87 year old father. He still to this day thinks oswald was the lone gunmen. Our goverment is very very good at disinformation, do you think for one second those blood sucking sons a Bsss would tell you jack sht they lie about everything.
I didnt see it on fox,cnn,msnbc,cbs,abc, or well if it was true we would have seen it by now,well the goverment mainly the military own all the big infared telescopes do you think for one second there going to shoot there mouths off and lose all there funding. Look what if they told everyone,there would be mass panic steeling shootings a hugh free for all so your boned either way.



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 10:28 PM
link   
reply to post by gamma 49
 


You do realize that none of your post makes sense. Anyways, tell your granddad to kick your ugly keister around the room till you crack a book and learn.



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 04:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist

Let's see. You posted a series of articles. You misrepresented them. You have misquoted me. You failed to
..........


The only one misrepresenting articles, misquoting the articles, and making conclusions out of thin air has been you. I have backed EVEYRTHING I said. And your claim that "it is the technology" shows again your lack of understanding of the scientific process.

No matter what "technology" you use you need to run at least 20-50 models giving similar constraints, which is the MINIMUM, to corroborate your results, yet I can show you as many and probably more models that say such objects are closer than you claim.



[edit on 19-5-2010 by ElectricUniverse]



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 05:31 AM
link   
reply to post by gamma 49
 


The government and news media don't show stuff about dancing pixies from the far away planet of Bunnydump either, doesn't make it real.

reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 


You do realize that that is in no way a prophecy, right? So you are totally wrong on this point. Further, that section of the Enuma Elish you linked has been misused and abused. Nibiru is referring to Jupiter, hence the 'winged disc' theory is explained. So that makes you wrong on that point as well.

Once again you have failed to show proof that:
- Ancient people prophesied that a planet called Nibiru will come and destroy Earth.

So the above is obviously a lie, yet you are still defending it. Does this make you utterly and incomprehensibly ignorant OR just a bit too stubborn? I think the latter.

[edit on 19/5/2010 by serbsta]



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 05:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by gamma 49
If you are certain nibiru does not exist why bother with the thread. This has been discussed to death,drop it already.

80% of the norm is binary or trinary in the known universe so why is it so hard to believe
we may have a binary system. Again why bother your mind is maid up,so stop with this subject enough already.


He has a job to feed his family. you know about those disino agents.



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 05:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by serbsta
reply to post by gamma 49
 


The government and news media don't show stuff about dancing pixies from the far away planet of Bunnydump either, doesn't make it real.

reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 


You do realize that that is in no way a prophecy, right? So you are totally wrong on this point. Further, that section of the Enuma Elish you linked has been misused and abused. Nibiru is referring to Jupiter, hence the 'winged disc' theory is explained. So that makes you wrong on that point as well.

Once again you have failed to show proof that:
- Ancient people prophesied that a planet called Nibiru will come and destroy Earth.

So the above is obviously a lie, yet you are still defending it. Does this make you utterly and incomprehensibly ignorant OR just a bit too stubborn? I think the latter.

[edit on 19/5/2010 by serbsta]


People like you are stubborn about history. Mayans have predicted that history repeats itself. they were the first to discover this phenomena. every 3600 year cycle something bad happens. Humans are still here because we adapt and survive, but sadly this society there is no hope for that.

This thread I posted awhile back is where an archeologists find the city of ur and translated a tablet.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 05:52 AM
link   
reply to post by dragnet53
 


Stubborn about history? I rather be stubborn than try and invent my own. What does this thread have to do with the Maya? This thread is about Babylonian/Sumerian translations and transliterations of cuneiform script. If you have examples of tablets which support your argument post them here and we'll discuss by all means, otherwise your posts are off topic.

That thread you linked, I already posted there and questioned the validity of the source, as did many other members. The validity is questionable to say the least.

[edit on 19/5/2010 by serbsta]



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 07:54 AM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 



No matter what "technology" you use you need to run at least 20-50 models giving similar constraints, which is the MINIMUM, to corroborate your results, yet I can show you as many and probably more models that say such objects are closer than you claim.


Another failure on your part. The greater constraint is the important constraint.

Do I need to repost the 25000AU issue where you blatantly misrepresented that information and falsely claimed I made statements about the meaning of the distance?



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 07:58 AM
link   
reply to post by dragnet53
 


Please put the 'f' back in disinfo.

Do you support straw man arguments?



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 02:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by gamma 49


you havnt really solved anything.

so google have small sections blocked....why???

you just put a ? for that other sky thing he mentioned...which means like me..you have no idea what it is..so you cant comment on it.

why is NASA blocking things silly? because they always do it? then the question remains....why???

why is soho on and off all the time? did they tell you it wasnt because of nibiru?

sure tectonic plate movement causes quakes...perhaps he means whats causing the extra movements than normal.

ok so the polls have been moving over a couple hundred years...no need to slate his spelling just to try and make his theories sound less plausible.

how would googling meteorology solve anything? if a cosmic source was affecting our weather..then a meteorology google search would really help you. you solved nothing here.

volcanic activity.....see above for earth quakes.

increased UFO activity...you had no answer at all for that one.

so only a few countries are creating underground storage facilities with no clear explanation...the question is still WHY???

and he mentioned ancient civ's and religions and all you had to comment on was his caps?


what do i think about nibiru? probably not true...but im open to the idea and dont slate someone for believing in it.

what do i think of you? ignorant to the max...and you really didnt answer or solve any of his questions.

Google didn't block the sections on purpose, they're a mistake, if you notice, you'll see lots of orange strings floating around too, does that mean orange strings float in space?

Increased UFO activity is speculation at best and is in no way evidence for a new body in the solar system.

SOHO going off an on is probably due to technology problems or because it's filming THE SUN. I'd like to know why he think it's due to nibiru though.


Ancient civ's and religion is the same old drat, thats been constantly paraded through this forum and lambasted by those who know anything about the cultures, the mayans didn't know any planet that wasn't visible to the naked eye.

As for building shelters, Perhaps there IS a great disaster coming, but I'm still wondering why he thinks it's a huge planet coming for us, or they could simply be just in case, the same way there were lots of nuclear bomb shelters built during the cold war, I don't think many people expect humans to make it to the 22nd century.

My question to him is, How can he correlate things that have absolutely no relation and claim it as evidence of nibiru?

[edit on 19-5-2010 by hippomchippo]



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by serbsta
reply to post by dragnet53
 


Stubborn about history? I rather be stubborn than try and invent my own. What does this thread have to do with the Maya? This thread is about Babylonian/Sumerian translations and transliterations of cuneiform script. If you have examples of tablets which support your argument post them here and we'll discuss by all means, otherwise your posts are off topic.

That thread you linked, I already posted there and questioned the validity of the source, as did many other members. The validity is questionable to say the least.

[edit on 19/5/2010 by serbsta]

damn it I want to make fun of people always questioning the source if it isn't mainstream.



new topics

top topics



 
45
<< 12  13  14    16 >>

log in

join