It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


<---The Rabbit Hole has Vanished--->

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 04:47 PM
If they wanted to get rid of the information one would assume they would delete all the youtube videos mentioning it, not to mention all the other countless websites that talk about the information presented on that website, including this one.

posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 10:52 PM
reply to post by stereologist

PROJECT PAN-STARRS post = You trading insults with a guy name Zeus

JEWETT post = A broken link which says The requested URL /~jewitt/papers/2004/J2004.pdf was not found on this server.

MIKE BROWN INTERVIEW = Pretty interesting. Thanks for finally posting something I could actually check up on.

It took me about 10 seconds however, to find out that a year before the Mike Brown / Ian interview you posted, Mr. Brown was singing quite a different tune:

Check this out:

After reading the stuff by Mike Brown, I’m now researching the work of Patryk Lykawka and Tadashi Mukai. Thanks for that by the way. I’m looking more into this research because of how adamant you are to have me… well .. not.

By the way, read the last sentence of the 2008 Mike Brown paper (link I posted above). What a complete flip-flop huh?

I've noticed that your comments arguing against Planet X are pretty abundant all throughout these threads, but usually with no links to your research or evidence. Why is that?

If the rabbits-hole site is such complete and utter bunk, and according to you, devoid of scientific facts or good research, I’d think you’d be comfortable in directing people to go there and check it out for themselves, rather than doing what your doing; which is making every effort to keep people away from it. Why are you so worried about people going to that site to do their own research?

We should all just listen to you instead?

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 12:09 AM
reply to post by Katt23

Seems that the group in Hawaii did not intend for the link to be public and has since restricted access to the paper. Unfortunately I do not have a copy myself.

I tell people to go look and BEWARE. Go ahead. I can't stop you, but I will warn you that the authors of the site are not honest folk.

Brown's blog suggests that a planet is possible. Notice that they put this object out in the Kuiper belt. So the object is not close, nor will it enter the orbits of the known planets. It is given the small mass of the planet Mars. Brown even suggests that it may be so far away that it will take the next generation of telescopes to locate it.

The Jewett paper puts the closest for such at object out 320AU. That's out there.

[edit on 23-4-2010 by stereologist]

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 12:51 AM
reply to post by hotbakedtater

Well, at least to me the link you provided, and other links in it work well.

BTW, for those who want to claim CO2 and temperatures coincide...just look closely and you will see that TEMPERATURES lead by at least 800 years if not more, and CO2 is ALWAYS BEHIND...

CO2 does not affect temperatures, temperature does affect CO2 levels, sometimes at least... If you look at other graphs CO2 and temperatures don't match at all, but you can be certain that CO2 is a benefitial gas for Earth and all of mankind.

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 01:32 AM

Originally posted by stereologist
The Jewett paper puts the closest for such at object out 320AU. That's out there.

The research I have found states that there is something at about 20 AU which accelerates comets and makes then arrive days earlier into the inner Solar System than they are supposed to, and it causes the same acceleration that we started noticing with the Pioneer craft...

6 The increase of the Astronomical Unit

6.1 The observation

From the analysis of radiometric measurements of distances between the Earth and the major planets including observations from Martian orbiters and landers from 1961 to 2003 a secular increase of the Astronomical Unit of approximately 10 m/cy has been reported (36) (see also the article (37) and the discussion therein).

6.2 Search for explanation

Time–dependent gravitational constant and velocity of light This increase cannot be explained by a time–dependent gravitational constant G because the ˙ G/G needed is larger than the restrictions obtained from LLR.

It has also been speculated that a time–dependent change in the velocity of light can be responsible for this effect. Indeed, if the speed of light becomes smaller, than ranging will simulate a drift of distances. However, a inspection of Kepler’s third law
T2 4π2
a3 = GM⊙


shows that, if one replaces the distance a by a ranging time a = ct, then effectively the quotient G/c3 appears. Only this combination of the gravitational constant and the speed of light governs the ratio between the orbit time, in our case the orbit time of the Earth. Consequently, a time–dependent speed of light is equivalent to a time–dependent gravitational constant. Since the latter has been ruled out to be possibly responsible for an increase of the Astronomical Unit, also a time–dependent speed of light has to be ruled out.

Cosmic expansion The influence of cosmic expansion by many orders of magnitude too small, see Sec.9.2. Neither the modification of the gravitational field of the Sun nor the drag of the planetary orbits due to the expansion is big enough to explain this drift.

Clock drift An increase of ranged distances might also be due to a drift of the time scale of the form t → t + αt2 for α > 0. This is of the same form as the time drift needed to account for the Pioneer anomaly. From Kepler’s third law one may ask which α is suitable in order to simulate the increase of the Astronomical Unit. One obtains α ≈ 3 · 10−20 s−1 what is astonishing close to the clock drift needed for a clock drift simulation of the pioneer anomaly, see Eq.(16) and below.
7 The quadrupole and octupule anomaly Recently an anomalous behavior of the low–l contributions to the cosmic microwave background has been reported. It has been shown that (i) there exists an alignment between the quadrupole and octupole with > 99.87% C.L. [38], and (ii) that the quadrupole and octupole are aligned to Solar system ecliptic to > 99% C.L. [39]. No correlation with the galactic plane has been found.

The reason for this is totally unclear. One may speculate that an unknown gravitational field within the Solar system slightly redirects the incoming cosmic microwave radiation (in the similar way as a motion with a certain velocity with respect to the rest frame of the cosmological background redirects the cosmic background radiation and leads to modifications of the dipole and quadrupole parts). Such a redirection should be more pronounced for low–l components of the radiation. It should be possible to calculate the gravitational field needed for such a redirection and then to compare that with the observational data of the Solar system and the other observed anomalies.

8.2 Other anomalies?
There is one further observation which status is rather unclear bit which perhaps may fit into the other observations. This is the observation of the return time of comets: Comets usually come back a few days before they are expected when applying ordinary equations of motion. The delay usually is assigned to the outgassing of these objects. In fact, the delay is used for an estimate of the strength of this outgassing. On the other hand, it has been calculated in (44) that the assumption that starting with 20 AU there is an additional acceleration of the order of the Pioneer anomaly also leads to the effect that comets come back a few days earlier. It is not clear whether this is a serious indications but a further study of the trajectories of comets certainly is worthwhile.

Then we also found the following.

Secular increase of the astronomical unit and perihelion precessions as tests of the Dvali–Gabadadze–Porrati multi-dimensional braneworld scenario
Lorenzo Iorio JCAP09(2005)006 doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2005/09/006

PDF (313 KB) | HTML | References | Articles citing this article

Lorenzo Iorio
Viale Unità di Italia 68, 70125, Bari, Italy
Abstract. An unexpected secular increase of the astronomical unit, the length scale of the Solar System, has recently been reported by three different research groups (Krasinsky and Brumberg, Pitjeva, Standish). The latest JPL measurements amount to 7 ± 2 m cy−1. At present, there are no explanations able to accommodate such an observed phenomenon, either in the realm of classical physics or in the usual four-dimensional framework of the Einsteinian general relativity. The Dvali–Gabadadze–Porrati braneworld scenario, which is a multi-dimensional model of gravity aimed at providing an explanation of the observed cosmic acceleration without dark energy, predicts, among other things, a perihelion secular shift, due to Lue and Starkman, of 5 × 10−4 arcsec cy−1 for all the planets of the Solar System. It yields a variation of about 6 m cy−1 for the Earth–Sun distance which is compatible with the observed rate of change for the astronomical unit. The recently measured corrections to the secular motions of the perihelia of the inner planets of the Solar System are in agreement with the predicted value of the Lue–Starkman effect for Mercury, Mars and, at a slightly worse level, the Earth.

Whatever it is, is close enough to be affecting all the planets and it's increasing the distance between the Sun and the planets. This has to be some massive solar object that is denser than the Sun itself, but it can't be seen yet, most probably a dead star, or what the Hopi call, the Red Star that will make it's approach and unfortunately will bring much transformation, tribulation and suffering.

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 01:39 AM
I can view it , Im in Norway.
I have refreshed couple of times and no problems here..

Its your Freedom of informtion gone ! LOL . Im joking, maybe some other reasons for this...

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 06:25 AM
reply to post by ElectricUniverse

Again, where did you get this information. It appears to be bits and pieces of multiple papers. One of the papers never mentions comets.

The planet Uranus is out about 20AU. If there were a planet out there backyard astronomers would see it. Uranus can be seen with the naked eye at times. Any planet within the orbits of the known planets would cause alterations to the orbits that would be measureable. Measurements show that no planets are within 320AU of the sun.

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 06:30 AM
Although some of the info I linked to earlier is no longer available I did find this summary.

Where is Planet X? Where is Nemesis?

Iorio concludes that the minimum possible distances at which a Mars-mass, Earth-mass, Jupiter-mass and Sun-mass object can orbit around the Sun are 62 AU, 430 AU, 886 AU and 8995 AU respectively. To put these distances in perspective, the minimum possible distance a Mars-mass Planet X could orbit is over two times further away from the Sun than Pluto’s 39 AU (average) distance from the Sun.

Nothing can exist at 20AU as you mentioned. Even a small body has to be way out there in the Kuiper belt, way out beyond Pluto.

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 09:24 PM

Originally posted by stereologist

Iorio concludes that the minimum possible distances at which a Mars-mass, Earth-mass, Jupiter-mass and Sun-mass object can orbit around the Sun are 62 AU, 430 AU, 886 AU and 8995 AU respectively. To put these distances in perspective, the minimum possible distance a Mars-mass Planet X could orbit is over two times further away from the Sun than Pluto’s 39 AU (average) distance from the Sun.

Doesn't that say "MINIMUM POSSIBLE DISTANCE" ?? - ok what about maximum possible distance? I'm not an astrophysicist, so I'll have to do some research here. Do you remember, Stereologist, anything in those papers mentioning the maximum distances in which these objects can orbit?

I'll see if I can find the info also. In the meantime, I thought it timely to post this link:

NASA is now admitting that they are actively searching for Planet-X; maybe because they won't be able to hide the truth much longer.

The eclipse on July 11th may be bringing us some VERY visible evidence.

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 09:25 PM
Sorry... forgot this.

Planet X is thought to be 4x the mass of Jupiter. Not equal to the mass of Mars.

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 09:40 PM
reply to post by Katt23

You are right that is the MINIMUM POSSIBLE DISTANCE. That's the closest something could be.

NASA is not actively searching for Plant-X. They are looking for whatever is out there. The truth is that if there is a planet out there it is so far away that it is not coming our way.

So if there is an eclipse in July it means what? It means we can look at the direction we were viewing 6 months earlier. We saw nothing in January. So nothing is there.

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 09:42 PM
reply to post by Katt23

Better yet. Instead of the closest it could possibly be being 320AU. It puts it some 2000AU out or more. That's great. That's about 1/32 of a light year out. That means the orbit never gets the planet any closer than that.

posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 05:41 AM
link did not vanish. Well not exactly. The REAL Rabbit Hole site is at The Rabbit Hole

This is the situation. I allowed someone to put The Rabbit Hole presentation up on that site (the-rabbits-hole) for free to the public. They were told they could collect any advertising rev drawn by the site and my presentation.

Well… They decided to start selling my presentation against my will, misrepresenting it, and not actually filling the orders people had made. They were selling it as a 500 page presentation when it’s actually only around 250 pages and they were marketing the video as high quality DVD when it could have been nothing more than a Youtube rip, very low quality. I have the only high quality video available and along with the presentation are now copyrighted.

It was a big fiasco with these people. Now they are refusing to remove the presentation from their site.

So that is what was happening...It's over with them. Stick a fork in um.


top topics

<< 1   >>

log in