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.

 

New Sign Of NIBIRU

page: 12
27
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 17 2010 @ 09:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by One Moment
 

Right.
Pluto gets close to the Sun every so often, right?


Smart arse! No but Pluto gets detected every so often, right?

[edit on 17-7-2010 by One Moment]




posted on Jul, 17 2010 @ 10:12 PM
link   
reply to post by One Moment
 

No.
It's pretty much there whenever anyone with the capability wants to see it.
www.universetoday.com...



[edit on 7/17/2010 by Phage]



posted on Jul, 17 2010 @ 10:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by One Moment
 

No.
It's pretty much there whenever anyone with the capability wants to see it.



I'm not sure now if we're on the same page or in different books.

That is my point exactly. Pluto is seen. Other planets that they speculate to be out there, aren't.
What am I missing here?

(and I like Phage too! Go figger!
)



posted on Jul, 17 2010 @ 10:25 PM
link   
reply to post by One Moment
 

None of the hypothetical planets have orbits which bring them to the inner Solar System. The notion is absurd when orbital mechanics are considered. Of course, if you wish to ignore orbital mechanics, anything and everything is possible....so what the hell, go for it.


[edit on 7/17/2010 by Phage]



posted on Jul, 17 2010 @ 10:52 PM
link   
The people who are saying Nibiru doesn't exist remind of those same people who felt the Earth was flat and the Sun revolved around the Earth. I think its irresponsible for anyone to simply say something doesn't exist because we can't see it. There is just as much science that says something is out there than it is for NASA to simply say it isn't there.

"We are now calling the hypothetical brown dwarf Tyche instead, after the benevolent counterpart to Nemesis," said Kirkpatrick. "Although there is only limited evidence to suggest a large body in a wide, stable orbit around the sun, WISE should be able to find it, or rule it out altogether."

June 24, 2010 www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/spitzer/news/spitzer20100624_prt.htm

So before we say it doesn't exist let's explore the possibility that it does. Even NASA claims there is some evidence it does exist. Personally, I hope it is Nibiru. At least they might help us out. A brown dwarf doesn't give a darn about us.



[edit on 17-7-2010 by Come Clean]



posted on Jul, 18 2010 @ 12:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Come Clean
The people who are saying Nibiru doesn't exist remind of those same people who felt the Earth was flat and the Sun revolved around the Earth.

There's no equivalence; flat earthers don't reach conclusions based on evidence. Nibiru is a claim that demands certain things must be true if it exists. You can see for yourself that those things are not true.


"We are now calling the hypothetical brown dwarf Tyche instead, after the benevolent counterpart to Nemesis," said Kirkpatrick. "Although there is only limited evidence to suggest a large body in a wide, stable orbit around the sun, WISE should be able to find it, or rule it out altogether."

A brown dwarf in a wide stable orbit around the sun somewhere in or near the oort cloud would not fit the definition of Nibiru. I have no trouble accepting the possibility of the former, but the latter is quite impossible.

Even NASA claims there is some evidence it does exist.

Not unless you change the meaning of the term Nibiru.



posted on Jul, 18 2010 @ 12:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Come Clean
 


I don't see anything in the link to suggest the possibility of Nibiru existing in the popular model put forward by doomsdayers. The link just shows that there is much that science is yet to discover and understand. Though some massive heavenly body on an orbit that will bring it through the inner solar system within a couple of years and possibly wiping us out has very close to 0% chance of being possible. Even that is being generous from what I understand, from the same type of scientists you quote. Though I'm open to the possibility if you can point me to where it says otherwise in the article, or how this link shows the physics concerning motion of the planets in our solar system to now be seen as unreliable. I genuinely mean that. I didn't notice where it was given the possibility of the mentioned (as yet) speculative heavenly body on a "stable orbit" in the outer reaches of the solar system, could be coming into the inner solar system and wreaking havoc a la Nibiru? I dont think some recent discoveries in far off space that are little understood as yet is necessarily enough to point to what doomsdayers are telling us.

I used to be open to the possibility, though I am now with science on this one. I found the only information that points to such a thing as either channeled or coming from “special” people who talk to friendly ET's in their spare time. The rest is pseudo scientific speculation and conclusion, or simply misrepresenting science in a way that is out of context. As an analogy it seems science is telling us apples fall from trees in repeatable experiments and ways that are predictable. While doomsdayers are trying to tell us that apples also defeat gravity and do whatever they like simply because they say so, or saw it in a mystical vision. Yeah, sure......


[edit on 18-7-2010 by Cogito, Ergo Sum]



posted on Jul, 18 2010 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by xspinx
 

youre a moron, NOBODY,not one source has EVER said it will impact Earth, damn some peopel make things up as htey go along.The so-called Nibiru,as hte Suemrians call it travels near Earth on it's elliptical orbit every 3600 years or so, wtf are you smoking dude? impact my ass man. You jsut made that up.



posted on Jul, 18 2010 @ 11:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Valeri
 


Nibiru Collision

The Nibiru collision theory was mainly created by Nancy Lieder, the owner of the website ZetaTalk. She also happens to be the driving force in the claim that Nibiru will return in 2012. So, seeing as how she started both the Nibiru collision theory and the Nibiru/2012 theory I'd say there's a pretty high correlation between them.



posted on Jul, 18 2010 @ 11:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Cogito, Ergo Sum
 


I'm not buying into the Nibiru thing until it shows up. What I do buy is the brown dwarf thing. And if there is a brown dwarf out there then maybe it has a few planets in tow. One of those planets could be Nibiru. I don't know. But I'm not going to discount it because NASA or anyone says it just doesn't exist.



[edit on 18-7-2010 by Come Clean]



posted on Jul, 18 2010 @ 11:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by ngchunter
A brown dwarf in a wide stable orbit around the sun somewhere in or near the oort cloud would not fit the definition of Nibiru. I have no trouble accepting the possibility of the former, but the latter is quite impossible.


Since we agree the possibility of a brown dwarf may exist somewhere in or near the oort cloud. And I think we can agree that there may be planets orbiting this brown dwarf.

Okay...

What is there orbit around this brown dwarf? Could it be an orbit that brings Nibiru around every 3600 years? What if Nibiru orbits this brown dwarf every 3600 years? Or whatever time it takes for it to make a 3600 year appearance in our solar system?



posted on Jul, 18 2010 @ 11:49 AM
link   
“The real discoveries will come when we let the whole world in on the data,” Eisenhardt said.

Seems like everyone should be looking at this data right now. 20 brown dwarves doesn't sound like an episode of Jackass to me. Sounds like we need everyone looking into this data and not just one organization.



posted on Jul, 18 2010 @ 11:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Come Clean
 

If there were a brown dwarf orbiting the Sun and if there were a planet in orbit around that brown dwarf and if that planet's orbit brought it to the inner Solar System it would be "captured" by the Sun (which, of course, has much stronger gravity than a brown dwarf) or it would be flung out into space never to be seen again by the Sun or the brown dwarf.

Orbital mechanics. No planet can have an orbit which works the way the orbit of "Nibiru" works. Not by itself, not in company with a brown dwarf.


[edit on 7/18/2010 by Phage]



posted on Jul, 18 2010 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Come Clean
 

If there were a brown dwarf orbiting the Sun and if there were a planet in orbit around that brown dwarf and if that planet's orbit brought it to the inner Solar System it would be "captured" by the Sun (which, of course, has much stronger gravity than a brown dwarf) or it would be flung out into space never to be seen again by the Sun or the brown dwarf.

Orbital mechanics. No planet can have an orbit which works the way the orbit of "Nibiru" works. Not by itself, not in company with a brown dwarf.


[edit on 7/18/2010 by Phage]


Correct me if I'm wrong. Aren't binary stars engaged in some kind of equilibrium dance? And that there is an area between them that can best be described as dead space. Where gravity equals out between the two? What if nibiru enters our solar system in that dead space. Under your theory all the planets should be rushing towards the sun. Their perturbations should be explain by our Sun alone. What if something is preventing that? What if we also exist in this dead space?

If the pull on the dwarf star equals the pull on the sun then Nibiru would stay the course right? Keep in mind....we don't even know the mass of this dwarf star. If it exist at all. Our sun could be the baby of the two.

The point being this, let's wait until WISE figures out what is going on before we say something doesn't exist.

[edit on 18-7-2010 by Come Clean]



posted on Jul, 18 2010 @ 01:47 PM
link   
I just think I came up with a new theory. In order for a solar system to exist there must be a binary star. Think about it. If there was only one sun in the solar system then every planet orbiting it would rush toward it and be destroyed. So in order for life to exist something has to prevent that from happening on a routine basis.


[edit on 18-7-2010 by Come Clean]



posted on Jul, 18 2010 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Come Clean
 


You're gong to have a VERY long wait...well beyond the end of your lifetime, or anyone else's currently alive...



The point being this, let's wait until WISE figures out what is going on before we say something doesn't exist.



It seems that so many modern examples (in the last fifty+ years) of popular science fiction have had the effect of causing damage to most people's understanding of astronomy, physics and orbital mechanics.

FICTION is fiction, to yell a good tale, spin a yarn...reality is very different.



What if it acts as a battering ram in the oort cloud or kuiper belt.


And?? So what?

Tossing out those terms, with that question, indicates a lack of understanding of distances and velocities of natural objects involved...AND the immense vastness of space, compared to the relative size of any masses (stars, planets, asteroids, planetoids, comets etc) that inhabit it.

~~~~

Adding, from a subsequent post just above, I REST MY CASE!!!



In order for a solar system to exist there must be a binary star. Think about it. If there was only one sun in the solar system then every planet orbiting it would rush toward it and be destroyed.


(Anyone who doesn't realize how WRONG that assertion is should consider some courses in astronomy and physics. Look up "Kepler" and "Copernicus", too....)





[edit on 18 July 2010 by weedwhacker]



posted on Jul, 18 2010 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


I'm not seeing where anything you wrote disproves what I wrote. Please be more specific in your claims.



posted on Jul, 18 2010 @ 02:27 PM
link   
I find it humorous the debunkers have the universe figured out but they can't stop an oil leak or cure cancer right here on earth.



[edit on 18-7-2010 by Come Clean]



posted on Jul, 18 2010 @ 02:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by virgom129
Nice but what does this have to do with NIBIRU??

I'm now officially past the stage of considering NIBIRU/Planet X stuff...

If a huge star/planet was going to impact Earth in 2012 we would be seeing it by now and feeling it's effects...


Wouldnt that be determined by the known speed of an object and angle of approach? Both of which in this case we truly know neither?
Just sayin.



posted on Jul, 18 2010 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Come Clean
 


More nonsense?? Complete non-sequitor nonsense, and you fail to actually go somewhere, learn and get educated???

Is this what the human race is becoming? Because from what's been revelaed in the last two years on this site, it is beginnig to seem so. I certainly hope that a person who signs up for, and reads and posts on, a site dedicated to the concept of denying ignorance would do so.

There are far, far too many who do not.....



new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join