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.


I don't even believe in Nibiru, but please explain this video!

page: 7
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 04:44 PM

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Canadianinsight

I've looked through the Lucus videos. They are basically a collection of irrelevant stuff slapped together and mean nothing.

If there was a big object out there it would affect the movement of the known planets. A large object also reflects light. Some people claim it's a brown dwarf and you can't see it because it is only seen in t he infrared. Silly claim. It is true that the object emits its own radiation in the infrared, but it also reflects other EM such as visible light. If you can see Jupiter and Saturn without the aid of a telescope, then you should be able to see something massive in our solar system. You can't see it. You can detect it affecting other planets. Guess what it is not there.

Mike Brown]
I posted the Mark Brown interview in which he makes it pretty clear that nothing large can exist within the orbits of the known planets. This guy Brown has discovered 100 Kuiper belt objects. He knows how to find things out there.

LOL it is my favorite skeptic.

Always has the answers to everything. He must have an IQ past Einstein's!

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 05:01 PM
reply to post by Unity_99

Just because the rabbit hole mixes in real articles from newspaper does not change the fact that the material is presented in a fraudulent fashion. In many cases the information is old and lumped with unrelated material to present a case that is dead wrong.

The problem with the rabbits hole is that the place is full of conclusions (false information) and then asks you draw your own conclusion. Lucus for example says that a petroglyph shows dead trees, and dead animals. The spiral is associated with death. Right there Lucus has drawn a conclusion. I looked up a lot of information on spirals and found that no place did it associated spirals with death. This is the tip of the iceberg when it comes to comes to the rabbits hole and its poor research, a research method I call a fraud.

There is no man-made screwing with the earth's magnetic field. It has been decreasing in strength ever since it was measured by Gauss in 1835. This decline is well known and has been progressing long before HAARP.

I wouldn't be surprised if there was a probe using a radioactive power source by Saturn or even Jupiter. Solar power isn't that good out there.

The nine nukes claim is so ridiculous I can't believe it. But I like it for its fanciful thinking. I'll do a little more research on that puppy to see what I can find.

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 05:06 PM
reply to post by Justoneman

What we learn all of the time is that the model that had been proposed to describe the development of our solar system was lacking. That's a well known fact. It was a model based on a known instance of 1 solar system. Everyone knew that. That's what makes finding other planetary systems so exciting. It expands the list from 1 to many.

In our solar system we have measured the motion of the known planets to an accuracy that tells us that no planets can be close. This does not eliminate the possibility of other planets, a companion star, or brown dwarfs. It simply shows that if something is out there it has to either small or quite far away. This isn't saying no. It's saying what the constraints are.

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 06:05 PM
reply to post by Unity_99

So you think that Brown from CalTech was part of 9/11? You think the Italian astronomers are also in on 9/11? You think astronomers worldwide are in on 9/11? I don't have any information on that, but I doubt that astronomers are part of the inner circle of terrorist plots.

So rather than trust good sources for informationyou'd rather trust the junk posted at the rabbits hole? LOL.

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 06:08 PM
reply to post by ChemBreather

Neutron stars are heavy. If a neutron star were headed towards our solar system we'd have seen the effects years ago. If we can detect the presence of an object the size of Jupiter out 2000AU by watching the movements of the known planets, then I bet a neuron star could be detected out 1 light year. A neuron star weighs more than our sun.

The claim is that you can't see it. So what. You can still 'see' what it's gravity does.

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 06:11 PM
reply to post by dragnet53

Thanks for the polite comment, but it takes considerable less thinking to find information and take the time to verify its correctness. Time is what is invested.

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 06:42 PM
Loved the computer in the background with the "not" so believable graph on the screen lol . If I had to guess and this is a long shot......swamp gas.

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 07:46 PM

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by ChemBreather

Neutron stars are heavy. If a neutron star were headed towards our solar system we'd have seen the effects years ago. If we can detect the presence of an object the size of Jupiter out 2000AU by watching the movements of the known planets, then I bet a neuron star could be detected out 1 light year. A neuron star weighs more than our sun.

The claim is that you can't see it. So what. You can still 'see' what it's gravity does.

Well they started building those bases in the 70s/80s. If there is something coming that they're NOT revealing and not telling us any effects of.........they've had a lot of time to move people and hospitals and heritage, not frankenstein monsanto GMO, and free energy, to the interior and better places. They've had time to do this. Instead, the cia, military head, soon I bet the gov't itself are at Denver International Airport.

Looks like they had very good time for their plans should anything have been spotted in the past such as these:

Astronomy Magazine Dec 81:
Search For The 10th Planet.

New York Times: June 82:
Some Kind Of Mystery Object Is Really There.

Newsweek June 82:
Does The Sun Have A Dark Companion?

Astronomy Magazine Oct 82:
Searching For the 10th Planet

IRAS from Wikipedia:

The observatory also made headlines briefly with the discovery of an "unknown object" that was at first described as "possibly as large as the giant planet Jupiter and possibly so close to Earth that it would be part of this solar system.

New York Times Jan 83:
There Is Something Out There.

Washington Post Dec 83:

A heavenly body possibly as large as the giant planet Jupiter and possibly so close to Earth that it would be part of this solar system has been found in the direction of the constellation Orion by an orbiting telescope aboard the U.S. infrared astronomical satellite. ...

The most fascinating explanation of this mystery body, which is so cold it casts no light and has never been seen by optical telescopes on Earth or in space, is that it is a giant gaseous planet as large as Jupiter and as close to Earth as 50 billion miles. While that may seem like a great distance in earthbound terms, it is a stone's throw in cosmological terms, so close in fact that it would be the nearest heavenly body to Earth beyond the outermost planet Pluto.

"If it is really that close, it would be a part of our solar system," said Dr. James Houck of Cornell University's Center for Radio Physics and Space Research and a member of the IRAS science team. "If it is that close, I don't know how the world's planetary scientists would even begin to classify it." ...

When IRAS scientists first saw the mystery body and calculated that it could be as close as 50 billion miles, there was some speculation that it might be moving toward Earth.

"It's not incoming mail," Cal Tech's Neugebauer said. "I want to douse that idea with as much cold water as I can."

US News World Report Sept 84:
Planet X - Is It Really Out There?

Shrouded from the sun's light, mysteriously tugging at the orbits of Uranus and Neptune, is an unseen force that astronomers suspect may be Planet X - a 10th resident of the Earth's celestial neighborhood. Last year, the infrared astronomical satellite (IRAS), circling in a polar orbit 560 miles from the Earth, detected heat from an object about 50 billion miles away that is now the subject of intense speculation

New Science and Invention Encylopedia: 1987 Edition: Picture taken by Pioneer 10 as it left the solar system of a "dead" star. There is calculations bottom of page of how long at known speed for such an object, it would take to come dangerously close at its distance.

Some indication that it was heading our way quickly doused! Also this was before they classified dwarf stars.

To me it appears that there was something disovered, it was a brown dwarf, some concerns it was heading our way, and around this time bases were being built in earnest.

Pretty alarming coincindence.

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 07:47 PM
reply to post by stereologist

No, I think I worded that our world is run by the same people who brought us 9/11!
The Corporate Banking Conglomerate.

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 07:48 PM

Originally posted by danj3ris

So serbsta, are you an expert on Nibiru? Are you 100% sure it even exists and what form it exists in?

No I'm not an expert, but others are. Its explained in this post quite clearly if you're willing to read it.

Nibiru does not mean planet.

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 07:50 PM
reply to post by stereologist

The Rabbit Hole doesn't fraudulently do anything. It is not fraudulent to draw a conclusion such as Lucas has, without telling us on his site nor for those who do share what conclusions they draw with us. Or do you think using your head to think with in anything outside of the official statements is fraudulent?

Do you know he actually formed that body of documents for his skeptical friends, wanting to wake them up, and he was meticulous, in chosing only evidence for a timeline of suspicious events, that was hard fact, and didn't interject his personal conclusions. How is that fraudulent. That is what any "good" reporter would be trained to do, except they don't exist in the public media anymore.

[edit on 24-4-2010 by Unity_99]

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 08:12 PM
reply to post by Unity_99

It's fraudulent to repeat ad nauseum that you are posting only facts, when that is not the case. To suggest that these are facts, when they are conclusions is wrong.

Lucuc repeats and repeats that he is only providing facts. That's not true. You know that is not true don't you? You stated in your post that he draws conclusions, yet his claim stated time after time after time is that all he is doing is providing facts.

Lucus spends a lot of time portraying myth as history. What Lucus does is the same as Creationists, Velikovsky, Von Daniken, Sitchin, etc. They claim myth is history and when needed provide their own incorrect translations.

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 08:13 PM
reply to post by Unity_99

If Lucas can't even realize the mistake he's making by accepting Sitchin's claims without doing his own research and finding in fact that there is nothing that supports Sitchin in Sumerian literature, then he is only perpetuating fraudulent claims.

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 08:23 PM
reply to post by serbsta

I didn't click into any of Sitchin's links, and if he included them they are one in many. The links that mattered to me where the reports,and the timeline of events, where they started pooling money and doing really confusing things that when seen together make some sense, and all the information on Colorado.

When you're researching you are entitled to be swayed by things another may not be, and include it in your long list if you wish to. It wouldn't matter what anyone said to my brother, he is a Sitchin fan, and has nearly all his books I think. I found some real language experts discussing him, but my brother wouldnt listen. I think Sitchin was illuminati information by the way.

If its in there in the historical information it doesnt distract from his long body of research.

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 08:26 PM
reply to post by Unity_99

That's great Unity 99. You have purposely not paid attention in hundreds of posts in which we have discussed these matters.
1. You refer to old accounts of astronomical data from the 80s

In doing so you show that you have not learned that in the 80s there was reason to believe that something might be out there. It turned out that the data available in the early 80s was ridden with measurement error. New measurements from better instruments showed that the existence of a new large object close to our sun was impossible.

2. Newspapers are not reliable sources for scientific information

Although they can get it right they often do not. In the case of the analysis of planetary orbits the speculations made by the papers were unwarranted. In the case of the IRAS they simply got it wrong. What was reported was just wrong.

It turns out that the object seen by IRAS was a new type of galaxy.

The Planet X Saga: Science

IRAS was designed to look in the far-infrared, well past what our eyes see. At the time, no one was really sure what it would find. To everyone's surprise, several bright point sources were found that did not correspond to anything seen on optical images taken of the same areas. In the press conference, the two scientists said that these objects could be almost anything, from a tenth planet in our solar system to distant galaxies.

Guess which it turned out to be? Sure enough, much deeper images were taken, and some of the objects were found to be dense gas clouds in our own Galaxy, while others turned out to be very distant galaxies. In fact, these observations heralded the discovery of a new type of object: Ultra-luminous Infrared Galaxies (ULIRGs).

So if we go to the rabbits hole and check out what they post we see that this FRAUDULENT website misrepresents the IRAS case.

So what did the liars from rabbits hole leave out.
IRAS - wikipedia

However, further analysis revealed that, of several unidentified objects, nine were distant galaxies and the tenth was "intergalactic cirrus".[4] None were found to be Solar System bodies.

I invite everyone to visit the rabbits hole page linked to by Unity 99 and the wikipedia page and see how the frauds over at rabbits hole do business.

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 10:29 PM

Originally posted by MakeSoap
The TimeWave Zero graph starts its final drop in 11-14-10, my friggen birthday! (Sarcastically) Fantastic! Unless this timewave zero has something to do with ME!!!! AHHHHH!!! honestly, I have NO IDEA what the timewave zero graph, which I see all over the place mind you, is or where it came from. Can anyone explain how it was created? Thanks.

Sorry that it took me a second to get to this, but I was away.

I hope that I answer your question appropriately.

Timewave Zero is....

Quote from Wikipidea.

"Timewave zero" is a numerological formula that purports to calculate the ebb and flow of "novelty", defined as an increase in the universe's interconnectedness, or organised complexity, over time.
According to Terence McKenna, who conceived the idea over several years in the early-mid 1970s while using psilocybin mushrooms and '___', the universe has a teleological attractor at the end of time that increases interconnectedness, eventually reaching a singularity of infinite complexity in 2012, at which point anything and everything imaginable will occur simultaneously.
McKenna expressed "novelty" in a computer program, which purportedly produces a waveform known as timewave zero or the timewave.
Based on McKenna's interpretation of the King Wen sequence of the I Ching, the graph appears to show great periods of novelty corresponding with major shifts in humanity's biological and cultural evolution.
He believed the events of any given time are recursively related to the events of other times, and chose the atomic bombing of Hiroshima as the basis for calculating his end date in November 2012. When he later discovered this date's proximity to the end of the 13th b'ak'tun on the Maya calendar, he revised his hypothesis so that the two dates matched.
The first edition of The Invisible Landscape refers to 2012 (as the year, not a specific day) only twice. McKenna originally considered it an incidental observation that his and José Argüelles dates matched, a sign of the end date "being programmed into our unconscious".
It was only in 1983, with the publication of Sharer's revised table of date correlations in the 4th edition of Morley's The Ancient Maya, that each became convinced that December 21, 2012 had significant meaning. McKenna subsequently peppered this specific date throughout the second, 1993 edition of The Invisible Landscape.

Here is a link to the McKenna page on Wikipedia.

(Thank you God(dess) for Wikipedia!!)

So... McKenna was making an educated guess at 12/21/2012, but what should be paid attention is not the final date, but the ebb and flow of the curve.
Like many individuals who predict future events by correlating current patterns, or trends, in society, he made an educated guess at a specific time, but it is not the actual date that is important.

It is the pattern and what it represents that is important.

Here is a GREAT youtube video about the concept right from the horse's mouth...

I hope that this helps.
Cheers and thanks for asking...

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 11:16 PM
reply to post by VendettaBeretta


look at images starting 20100421 thru 20100425

you can clearly see something moving into the frame

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 11:38 PM

Originally posted by Aziroth
reply to post by VendettaBeretta

We sure have had a surplus of new members lately, this one brought something entertaining though; welcome and good job. I am not sure what this is, I have heard about a few comets heading our direction, and I also remember there was a comet that got very close to the sun recently; not sure when that was will look this info up and add it here.

I am sure you will get all sorts of responses to this, just keep going; it also helps to try and debunk your own work, adds a sort of validity to your pursuit for truth.

think it was in 2003, a "comet" twice the size of Jupiter should have went into the Sun. A solar flare pushed it way...

Scientists still haven't figured out why it, and Mercury, didn't get sucked into the Sun based on their progected gravitational mass of this huge object that almost torched us all.

Bet the summer of 2003 was a hot one, can't remember

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 11:41 PM

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Unity_99

Unity 99 as I've told you countless times. No planets can exist within the orbits of the known planets without us having known about it for decades.

What I think is funny here is the double standard used by the 'whatever you want to call it' group. They demand that we establish with a huge pile of information that this is a known object. On the other hand, Unity 99 wants to make unsubstantiated claims based on nothing, or the fraudulent translations from Sitchin or the rabbit hole, or whatever is the dubious source du jour. Almost always there is no source.

But yet we find that brown dwarf called Nemesis in our system and then Scientists are still baffled about planets spinning backwards.

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 11:43 PM
reply to post by kalisdad

You've asked this in several different threads. According to the STEREO website

Stars are always present in the STEREO COR2, HI1, and HI2 images, and can sometimes be seen in COR1.

Read all of your posts to find the answer.

new topics

top topics

<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in