Originally posted by stereologist
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?
Are you now going to claim that you didn't state that such a brown dwarf or red dwarf would be at 25,000au and you kept giving that one article as if it was proof when there are dozens of models which say such stellar objects could be a lot closer?....
the failure is on your part as a "greater constraint" is NOT more important unless you have several models showing this, and you don't...
When you start by learning the scientific method to how models work, and how they are corroborated only then can we start to have a concise argument again, but you keep trying to claim that one constraint alone is enough to dismiss what other models say AND THIS IS NOT HOW IT WORKS...


I gave the part of the Enuma Elish and it speaks by itself. BTW, Jupiter wasn't the only stellar object called Nibiru, they refer to it as a
STAR. I know people like you like to push your own ideas and conclusions, but there is a lot more explanations than the ones you are trying to push
through.... 

