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.


Connections between Planet Nibiru and new planet just discovered in our galaxy

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 06:52 PM
reply to post by damastadamind

This could very well be Nibiru. If Nibiru does exist, this is it. You have to remember that everything we see in space is actually what happened whatever x number of years ago, where x is the number of light years away. Going off this, it could be a lot closer than they think.

posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 07:13 PM
reply to post by zorgon

Sorry, but Sitchin just spouted loads and loads of junk. He made stuff up, out of some very fertile imagination...and apparently didn't research very well, so his fantasies are easy to spot, and to refute. A portion of what Sitchin said:

Uranus. Uranus' gravity sped Nibiru's orbit. As a result of this close encounter between Nibiru and Uranus, one of Nibiru's moons, Miranda, was captured by and became a moon of Uranus as Nibiru and Uranus pulled at each other.

All of this allegedly a mere 10,000 to 12,000 years ago??

Any idea how ludicrous those claims are, when you examine how stable the orbit of Miranda is, and its (her) relative association with the other 26 (known) moons of Uranus (and its rings)? All of which are undisturbed?

Uranus has five major moons: Miranda, Ariel, Umbriel, Titania and Oberon. They range in diameter from 472 km for Miranda to 1578 km for Titania.


The major moons of Uranus are believed to have formed in the accretion disc, which existed around Uranus for some time after its formation or resulted from the large impact suffered by Uranus early in its history.

In essence, this means that the moon 'Miranda' was there from the beginning of the Solar System's formation, as accretion progressed. AT LEAST 4 Billion years, as a rough (likely low) estimate.

Here, a link to the schematic representation of the orbits of Miranda, and some inner shephard moons, and rings:

Further, any "captured" satellite, as SItchin suggests, would NOT be in such a stable orbit, as the INNER moon, well within the orbits of the other moons, that have MORE MASS. At best, any captured satellite that was 'robbed"' from a passing planet would have a very highly eccentric elliptical orbit, and the orbits of the other bodies (26 other objects, PLUS the ring debris) would have shown signs, from interactions that occurred only 10,000 to 12,000 years ago, of great perturbations.

Sitchin was a hoaxer, possibly not entirely sane, or else sly like a fox. He has NO credibility whatsoever, and anyone with a minimal amount of science and rationality can see why.

Here's some more data, that indicates a very, very long-time association for Miranda, and the other moons:

A past 3:1 orbital resonance between Miranda and Umbriel and a past 4:1 resonance between Ariel and Titania are thought to be responsible for the heating that caused substantial endogenic activity on Miranda and Ariel.

But, perhaps THIS is why, of all the candidate moons, from both Uranus AND Neptune (one would think he would have chosen Neptune, since it's farther away, and therefore harder to get more accurate measurements?? So his hoax wouldn't have been so obvious??)...anyway...this tidbit may have led him to focus on Miranda:

One piece of evidence for such a past resonance is Miranda's unusually high orbital inclination (4.34°) for a body so close to the planet.

Info from but by no means the only source.

Apparently (and pure speculation) he thought that a little bit of "odd" inclination was enough to fool people, with his fantastic tales. (5 degrees? Hardly significant, in comparison. But IF it was a very eccentric ellipse, then he might have had some point...still wrong, but would have more doubt, for a while)...

I just can't see why anyone believes any of the junk that man said, when it is so easily shown, by astronomy and science and physics, to be without any merit.........

edit on 23 November 2010 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 08:58 PM

Originally posted by weedwhacker
I just can't see why anyone believes any of the junk that man said, when it is so easily shown, by astronomy and science and physics, to be without any merit.........

Well not that I consider you any expert on orbital mechanics either... but what does your rather lengthy speech have to do with the fact that Sitchin said Nibiru won't be due till 2900 AD?
LONG after even you have left this Earth.

So using Sitchin as 'proof' of Nibiru coming in 2012 doesn't work very well, does it? Since he invented the planet, and says no show till 2900 AD isn't the rest of the argument moot?

posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 10:00 PM
reply to post by zorgon

Irrespective of any "dates" have to admit, this topic of "nibiru" has been all over the place, with multiple and contradictory "predictions"....seems fishy to me, that Sitchin "revised" his estimate?? Year 2900 makes it pretty certain that his "legacy" shall not be sullied, after his death...since doubtful anyone will remember him in 900 years (or in ten or twenty, for that matter). But, by extending it out that far, he posthumously guarantees no criticism.

Anyway, according to the latest (?) he still maintained, to his death, the "3,600-year orbit" scenario, correct?

SO, for "nibiru" to come by on the 'revised' timescale of year 2900, would mean the last encounter would have been at 2900 - 3,600 years....or, about 700 B.C.E.?? Strange, nothing in the historical records....not from the Greeks, nobody?? Ancient Rome? Persia? Chinese?

Now, of course, I ain't an expert in orbital mechanics either...but, one doesn't really have to be...the science and math is done by the real experts, who then explain it in language that a poor stupid slob like me can understand, and visualize, and relate to.

Here's more about (not only Sitchin specifically, but it's in the article about him, to refute the notion of "nibiru", as claimed, based on science and orbital mechanics and the resulting perturbations that would inevitably occur:

The scenario outlined by Sitchin, with Nibiru returning to the inner solar system regularly every 3,600 years,

. . . implies an orbit with a semi-major axis of 235 astronomical units, extending from the asteroid belt to twelve times farther beyond the sun than Pluto. Elementary perturbation theory indicates that, under the most favorable circumstances of avoiding close encounters with other planets, no body with such an eccentric orbit would keep the same period for two consecutive passages. Within twelve orbits the object would be either ejected or converted to a short period object. Thus, the failed search for a trans-Plutonian planet by T.C. Van Flandern, of the U.S. Naval Observatory, which Sitchin uses to bolster his thesis, is no support at all......

Of course, the Wiki entry has a lot more to say about the man.......and it boggles the mind that anyone would ever have any stock in what he has said?

I think his fifteen minutes of "fame" expired long ago. It is just not right (to me) that nonsense continues to be spread, and "accepted" by some people, the way this 'nibiru' myth has. Fiction, science fiction, and other speculative forms of entertainment are fine, as long as they remain categorized properly...entertainment, not silly, unsupported beliefs that masquerade as so-called "facts". This cause a lot of damage to the rational thought process that should prevail in human endeavours, when it is accepted so readily and unquestioningly, sometimes.

This thread title is prime example of such misconceptions, and how easily they can be spread, isn't it? The article about a star, and its planet, that has the unusual claim to fame of apparently being "foreign" in origin to our Galaxy (acquired through a merger), yet is at least 2000 LY away...simply cannot have ANY 'connection' to a 'nibiru', even if such a thing existed. To not realize that immediately, and continue to "discuss" it, shows an appalling lack of astronomical savvy, IMO.

posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 03:06 AM

Originally posted by FoxMulder91
reply to post by HazyChestNutz

Enlighten us then.

Wheres your proof of the galatic federation or a galactic war?
If you have any id like to see it.


Hear, hear. There's too much speculation flying around, something concrete is needed.

posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 03:27 AM

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by orby1976
How fast is this thing moving? And is there any chance it can be worked
out to see where it will be come 2012?
Surely this can be done by some ats genius!!!

Hmmm only problem is that Sitchin (RIP), the guy who brought us Nibiru in the first place says its a PLANET on a long orbit in OUR solar system and he further said it won't be back until 2900 AD (just read his book)


FINALLY. Someone else said this. This is from "The End of Days", one of his last pieces.

(I can see you've already covered that, after reading all the posts i missed while putting this one up)


He never says the world is going to end at any specific time.

; )

edit on 24-11-2010 by semicolonsmile because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 03:33 AM

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Strange, nothing in the historical records....not from the Greeks, nobody?? Ancient Rome? Persia? Chinese?

Joshua 10:13

"And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day."

And a great flood wiped out all of mankind save a boatload of refugees...

Sodom and Gomarah, blasted by what looked like Nukes in the description..

Joshua 10:11-13. "God cast down great stones from heaven upon" His enemies and they died;

India crashed into the mainland making the Himalayan Mts
Its in the Vedic scriptures with all kinds of Nuclear war type effects listed

I would say someone notice
But the time line is off a tad

Most likely the time line is off because these are stories of long ancient events just retold

edit on 24-11-2010 by zorgon because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 03:57 AM
Just to clarify, I read a few Z.S. books back when I first heard about this, it was pretty interesting stuff.

Then this site came to my attention...

Here we see someone who claims to have real knowledge of the sumerian texts take Sitchin apart piece by piece...I stopped purchasing his books after I looked into this.

Nibiru is not coming. Period. If it were, do you really think The Russians would be preparing to spend however many millions of dollars it is going to cost to try and deflect an asteroid that has a 1-in-45,000 chance of hitting us in the year 2036 if they though Nibiru was coming???

I think not.

; )

posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 04:35 AM

Originally posted by HazyChestNutz

The guy is right. You haven't learn about this galaxy's history? There was a galactic war. Planet Nibiru is a hollowed out planetary spaceship.

I seem to remember seeing a documentary about this and it was truly fascinating to watch. It featured something like a hollowed out planet and a lot about war
Apparently it was a long time ago in a galaxy far far away...

posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 06:51 PM

Originally posted by Daisy-Lola
I seem to remember seeing a documentary about this and it was truly fascinating to watch.

Yeah I recall that one too. AWESOME video

Discovery Channel... I think it was... hmmm lemme see...

Oh yeah here it is

Ah MSM gotta love them

posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 09:49 PM
Alex Collier seems to predicted this a year ago. (He also predicted 9/11) His information was given by the Andromedan race.
Go to 7:30

In his other lectures, he talked about the Orion War and the Galactic War that happened many many many many years ago.
edit on 24-11-2010 by HazyChestNutz because: Link couldn't be found.

edit on 24-11-2010 by HazyChestNutz because: Grammar mistake.

new topics

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in