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.

 

Is this Nibiru?

page: 5
4
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
reply to post by autowrench
 

...but where do you get that "Wormwood" is Nibiru? Couldn't what was described in that passage simply be a meteorite? And perhaps the poisoning of the water had nothing to do with the meteor, but just happened to coincide with the meteor (thus some people linked the two events).


May I ask where you get that they are NOT one and the same? From years of research I know that humans were created by ET beings, and they had to come from somewhere. I learned about Nibiru long before there was an internet or computers. Some have been watching it for years, and the Vatican is one who is watching. Get your head out of the Bible and do some study.




posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by autowrench
May I ask where you get that they are NOT one and the same?

Because it seems like quite a stretch and logical leap to read...

"And the third angel sounded, and there fell a great star from heaven, burning as it were a lamp, and it fell upon the third part of the rivers, and upon the fountains of waters; And the name of the star is called Wormwood: and many men died of the waters, because they were made bitter."
...and get out of that passage that there is a rogue planet in our solar system that makes an occasional appearance.

Other that fact that this passage makes a mention of a "star", what else about it makes you think it is a passage talking about Nibiru? And what does a "great falling star" have specifically to do with Nibiru in the first place?

I'm not saying it definitely CANNOT be about Nibiru, but you seem pretty convinced that it definitely IS about Nibiru. What is it about these words makes you so sure it's not about something else, such as a meteorite?

I suppose what I'm asking is what is it about this passage that specifically screams "Nibiru!" to you, rather that being about a myriad of other things?


edit on 12/28/2010 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 08:06 AM
link   
Simply because Nibiru is not a planet, it is a Star, a so called Dark Star, or Failed Star. I know not the names of the planets in orbit around the Dark Star. But is is a Star, dark red in appearance, with a "beard" of sorts that should be visible when she gets close enough. If she does get close enough.



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 08:56 AM
link   
reply to post by autowrench
 

Well, I still don't understand how you are equating Revelations 8:11 to Nibiru. Let's stipulate that there is a "dark star" as you call it (perhaps a brown dwarf?) that is a companion to our Sun. If it "burned as it were a lamp" as Revelations 8:11 says, wouldn't we see it by now if it is to wreak havoc in 2012? -- or do you believe the 2012 date to be incorrect?

Furthermore, would a dark star really "burn as it were a lamp"? Also, why would it "fall from heaven"? What do the passages "fall from heaven [upon the river]" and the "many men died of the waters, because they were made bitter" have to do with the idea of a dark star?

It seems the only thing that passage has in common with what you believe is the single use of the word "star" -- but even their star "burns as it were a lamp", while you say yours is too dark to see yet.



posted on Jan, 4 2011 @ 05:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Morgil
 



But on the other hand, I have seen no proof that it doesn't exist either so I am on the fence. The ancients must have been referring to something when they talk of Nibiru, whether that is a planet or maybe a star that has since went nova, or any number of things, is the big mystery though.

There is good evidence that there is no Nibiru as a planet. The evidence comes in 2 parts. First, there are gravitational studies. Any mass exerts a gravitational force on other masses. Gravity studies of our solar system show no missing mass within the orbits of the known planets. No unknown planet could exist that enters the orbits of the known planets. Whole sky surveys also show that there are no planet sized objects within 320AU. That's 8x the distance to Pluto. So there is proof that new planets entering the orbits of the known planets is not possible.



posted on Jan, 4 2011 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by christina-66
 


The Venus transits can be accurately predicted millennia into the future since the solar system mechanics are so well understand. For that very reason Nibiru and other claims are nonsense.



posted on Jan, 4 2011 @ 06:59 PM
link   
reply to post by NahumTheCelestial
 


You are completely wrong. It is demonstrable that Nibiru does not exist.



posted on Jan, 4 2011 @ 07:03 PM
link   
reply to post by autowrench
 


First off the ancients did not claim Nibiru was a planet. That is a modern hooey tale.

Second the ancients did not always write fact. They wrote down myths as well. They wrote stories down. You may call it fiction or religious notions of the day, but there is nothing showing that they only recorded fact.



posted on Jan, 4 2011 @ 07:07 PM
link   
reply to post by autowrench
 


There is nothing here to conclude that these things are the same. Planet X has nothing to do with religious notions and certainly nothing to do with Nibiru which is not described as a planet except possibly when used in reference to Marduke, aka Jupiter. The idea of Planet X has nothing to do with a planet that enters the orbits of the known planets. Today we know that the search for planet X was based on a mistaken value for the mass of Neptune. That's out. If you want to claim that Wormwood is planet X, then Wormwood does not exist since planet X has been shown to be nonexistent.



posted on Jan, 4 2011 @ 07:13 PM
link   
reply to post by autowrench
 


There is no evidence that people were created by aliens.

No one can possibly be watching a nonexistent planet. If you did any research whatsoever you'd already know that a planet due here in 2012 would be easily seen by the naked eye and would have been observable by amateur astronomers for possibly decades. It's simply laughable to claim that this hoax called Nibiru or Wormwood is being watched by the Vatican. Please take some time to do research.



posted on Jan, 4 2011 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by autowrench
 


To suggest that Nibiru or whatever nib-heads want to label this hoax is as massive as a failed star is even more laughable. Such an object would be detected by whole sky surveys more than 4000AU out. Such a discovery would be Nobel prize material. Even amateurs would have picked up such an incoming object not only due to its brilliance as it reflected the sun's light, but also by the fact that amateur astronomers would have noticed the planets not moving to their predicted locations.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join