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.

 

Nibiru?? New planet to be discovered. Four times the size of Jupiter!

page: 16
142
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 12:16 PM
link   
I think it's just a big a** spaceship - the Borg



But seriously, the idea of this being Nibiru would be exciting, but there isn't enough information.




posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 12:50 PM
link   
Good evening all,

I joined ATS a while ago because, like everyone - I love a good conspiracy theory, questioning the status quo and challenging conventional thinking is a great thing!

However...

The theory that there is a huge planetary object about to throw a hissy fit in the inner solar system, and cause chaos of biblical proportions is quite frankly - ridiculous.

- Quote from David Morrison, Senior NIA Scientist.....

I hope this is my last comment on the Nibiru hoax, but questions like the above six keep coming in. Most of the entries on the Internet about Nibiru are false. Wikipedia has it correct when they write that "Nibiru is a name in Sumerian, Babylonian astrology associated with the god Marduk, generally accepted as referring to the planet Jupiter." The rest is a hoax, including all the "stuff" questioner #! found on the internet. Questioners #2 and #3 mention the astronomical observatory at the South Pole, but I assure you these astronomers are not looking at Nibiru. The Antarctic is a great place for astronomical infrared and short-wave-radio observations, and it also has the advantage that objects can be observed continuously without the interference of the day-night cycle. If the questioner really thinks that Nibiru is visible in the daytime in the southern hemisphere, they are very confused; this sort of statement is obviously false. Questioners #3 and #4 seem to think that the government would hide information about Nibiru and the catastrophe supposedly due in a few years, but I can't imagine why. My experience is, in fact, that sometimes parts of the government do just the opposite, as in the frequent references to various terrorist threats or warnings about driving accidents on long holiday weekends, which are no more dangerous than any other time. In any case, the job of NASA scientists is to discover and tell the truth! Questioner (5) asks if Nibiru is the same as Eris, and the answer is an emphatic no. This Nibiru hoax has been around for a decade, including predictions that Nibiru would pass close to Earth and cause a catastrophe about 5 years ago. (Guess what: it didn't happen!). Eris, in contrast, is one of several dwarf planets recently found by astronomers in the outer part of out solar system, all of them on normal orbits that will never bring them close to Earth. There is a good write-up on Eris in Wikipedia. Finally, Questioner (6) asks me to identify two pictures. I could perhaps do so if I knew the type of telescope and camera used and the scale of photos. Without that information, I can only guess that (if these photos are real) these might be images of a gas cloud (nebula) ejected by a star in its old age. They are obviously very distant, since we see stars in the foreground superposed on the nebula. Also, since the stars are the same, this object (if it is real) has not moved between the dates of the two photos. It is just crazy that anyone would claim that these are photos of a planet in our own solar system. Let me say once again that Nibiru is a hoax promoted by a cult; it does not exist, and it certainly poses no threat to us. It saddens me that people would be taken in by such nonsense. David Morrison
NAI Senior Scientist



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Wildeagle
 


Very interesting find, I love anything about space and astronomy. This is not Planet X, it's Planet Y
. Very cool discovery and thank you for bringing it to my attention. I remember when Planet X was supposedly found in the 80's and the the info seemed to disapear, but you never heard Nibiru mentioned much back then. I think anything you find in space right now people are going to say it is going to kill everyone.

Peace



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThreeNF
I think it's just a big a** spaceship - the Borg



But seriously, the idea of this being Nibiru would be exciting, but there isn't enough information.

I think the idea of another planet out there is interesting and scientifically exciting enough even WITHOUT it being Nibiru.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Wildeagle
 


This is old news.

Why people still post this as if groundbreaking news or something?

And no proff it's "Nibiru" or some other end-of-the-world planet coming right for us, as in some deluded hippie's predictions.

Just a very weird planet, "hidden" at the outskirts of our solar system.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Kryties
 


Just because matter is whitin gravitatin influence of the black hole doesn't mean it's inside the black hole you clearly can't read English because I stated several times it's matter from the accretion disk accelerated too fast from the black holes gravity that it never enters the black hole. You seem like you didn't even read my post lol.

Oh and if you think you know so much about space I'd like to remind you our galaxy is actually 100,000 ly's across it was confirmed years ago if you know so much more why are you posting info that's been proven wrong ages ago. Get real
edit on 15-2-2011 by XRaDiiX because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by XRaDiiX
reply to post by Kryties
 


Just because matter is whitin gravitatin influence of he black hole doesn't mean it's inside the black hold you clearly can't read English because I stated several times it's matter from the accretion disk accelerated to fast from the black holes gravity that it never enters the black hole. You seem like you didn't even read my post lol.


No, I read your post, it was just plain wrong.

A Black Hole consists of the singularity AND the accretion disk. When matter is in the accretion disk it is considered to be in the black hole - why? Because for the matter to be in the accretion disk in the first place it must be within the gravitational influence of the black hole. Seeing as a black hole is simply a point of infinite gravity and density, the accretion disk is therefore part of it.


Oh and if you think you know so much about space I'd like to remind you our galaxy is actually 100,000 acres this was confirmed years ago if you know so much more why are you posting info that's been proven wrong ages ago. Get real


So you're telling me that the entire Milky Way galaxy is 156.25 square miles across eh? Can you please point me to where you get this information from? Because last time I checked it was much larger than that


Get real?

EDIT TO ADD: My initial quote of 26,000 light years across came from old data - I didn't check the date on the site I visited. Its been found to be more like 100,000 - 120,000 light-years across - still WAY beneath the ''millions of light years" that Ashyr supposed it was. So your point is what then? Oh I get it, just another childish attempt at trying to one-up me.

Pathetic.
edit on 15/2/2011 by Kryties because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by XRaDiiX
reply to post by Kryties
 


Just because matter is whitin gravitatin influence of the black hole doesn't mean it's inside the black hole you clearly can't read English because I stated several times it's matter from the accretion disk accelerated too fast from the black holes gravity that it never enters the black hole. You seem like you didn't even read my post lol.

Oh and if you think you know so much about space I'd like to remind you our galaxy is actually 100,000 ly's across it was confirmed years ago if you know so much more why are you posting info that's been proven wrong ages ago. Get real
edit on 15-2-2011 by XRaDiiX because: (no reason given)


You seem to misunderstand the theory behind blackholes. The accretion disk is PART of the blackhole. Matter enters a blackhole and gathers in the accretion disk before falling into the EVENT HORIZON(then it can not leave).
You seem to be referring to the event horizon, not the blackhole itself. The term blackhole includes the event horizon, the singularity and the accretion disk.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:36 PM
link   
Some observations.

1. MasterJ -good post lots of great points.
2. All of the terms being thrown around need to be adjusted. Its not a "Nibiru Hoax" its a theory. One that could be right or worng based on observed evidence.
3. Modern Cosmology is very far from a settled science. Its constantly being updated to account for the observations that scientists find run counter to their theories.
4. ZS is not responsible for the VAST majority of information that is reported in relation to Nibiru. He postulated a theory and many folks have taken his ideas and ran into left field with them.
5. ZS NEVER gave a date for the passing or apperance of Nibiru.
6. Given that Cosmology is not a settled science there are many other theorys of Cosmology (plasma cosmology, electric univers) that do not conflict with the Nibiru theory because they are not gravity cintric. In an electric universe the orbital nature of planets is not a constant and can alter over the course of time.
7. If this body is so large given the nature of a gravity cintric universe how would it not have swept up the so called ort cloud in its gravity? Does not the presence of this very massive body destroy the ort cloud?


I am familiar with Sitchens work and have read many of his books. I do not take him for exact in every aspect of his work but he does cause me to question modern science and its applications. That being said I think he is wrong on many aspects of the Nibiru question. I dont think it has to be a planet that comes from outside of the orbit of pluto. I think the Sumerians may have witnessed a celestial event that is related more to plasma discharge than a physical planet. Plasma discharge often takes the form of an "X" or cross. If the Sumerians witnessed a cosmic level discharge associated with a regular passing of a comet or even saw Jupiter encounter a massive plasma discharge it would not be out of the question for them to lrefer to Jupiter or a comet as the "planet of the cross". There is ample evidence that pre historic man saw large scale plasma discharges in the night sky. Refer to the pictographs carved all over the world and there unmistakable resemblance to plasma formations in a gas discharge tube.

For more info google "thunderbolts of the gods"



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:37 PM
link   
You know what I find ironic? I was discussing this very same topic with some members who kept saying it is impossible for another planet of that size to exist in the Solar System. I kept providing evidence of links with research all which pointed to the fact that there was a yet undiscovered large dead star. Several of the members just kept claiming it was impossible no matter the evidence I presented.

As to whether this is Nibiru/Wormwood I don't know. If there is a dead star of this size which hasn't been found for this long how many other large planets could there be in the Solar System that we do not know about?...

One of the many reasons why I keep believing that there is something to the story of Nibiru is the information given to us all by Father Malachi Martin.

A lot of people have no idea who this man was, but he was a Catholic priest, theologian, a scholar, a writer, and professor at the Vatican's Pontifical Biblical Institute. This man held three doctorates, in Semitic languages, archeology, and Oriental history. He spoke at least 10 languages and knew several other classical languages. Not to mention that he was a personal friend of Pope John XXIII, and was friend with other high ranking members of the Vatican church.

This man took part in the research of the dead sea scrolls publishing 24 articles on Semitic paleography. Apart from his archeological research he also gathered intelligence for the Vatican.

If I kept writting about the things he did it would be a long post.
en.wikipedia.org...

What is curious about this man, and in reference to Nibiru is that 2 years before he mysteriously died he gave an interview on Art Bell saying that the Vatican knew that something was approaching Earth which would be of great import for us all, and this was the reason why the Vatican took charge of Mt. Graham International Observatory.


Here is a link to an audio file where Father Malachi Martin spoke about this mysterious object that he said is approaching us and would be of great import within 10 years from 1997.

Here is a better link.

www.cyberspaceorbit.com...

www.cyberspaceorbit.com...

To make his story even more mysterious is the way he died. Supposedly he fell down a flight of stairs in 1999 which caused a heart attack.

There is no way that anyone can easily dismiss what this man had to say, he had high contacts within the Vatican, and knew things that very few people can say they know.


edit on 15-2-2011 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dragoon01

7. If this body is so large given the nature of a gravity cintric universe how would it not have swept up the so called ort cloud in its gravity? Does not the presence of this very massive body destroy the ort cloud?


The oort cloud is very large and dense, but has many spaces in between. Its very possible for a large body, even a gas giant to be lurking near or even in the oort cloud without it sucking it all up. Im sure it took some material to form moons etc, but we are far from finding moons around this thing.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 02:04 PM
link   
dont know if its been said but the idea is impossible i joined ATS because of niburu however if there was a planet coming it would be visible and if its that far out all concerns are a waste it would take hundreds if not thousand s of years to get here causing no effect on earth if the convo is simply to say there are undiscovered planets then duh there are countless odds showing orbiting satellites undiscovered not sure where this discussion is heading or why?



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kryties
A Black Hole consists of the singularity AND the accretion disk. Matter is in the accretion disk it is considered to be in the black hole - why? Because for the matter to be in the accretion disk in the first place it must be within the gravitational influence of the black hole. Seeing as a black hole is simply a point of infinite gravity and density, the accretion disk is therefore part of it.
No, the black hole doesn't encompass the accretion disk. While a black hole may be accompanied by an accretion disk, it is not necessarily so. And likewise, we also find accretion disks around normal stars, and they may even form around planets. The extent of a black hole is defined by the Schwarzschild radius. One can say matter or light has entered the black hole when it is at a distance from the singularity equal to or less than the Schwarzschild radius. That boundary is the event horizon.

And secondly, black holes don't have infinite gravity. They merely have high enough gravity such that the escape velocity inside the Schwarzschild radius is higher than the speed of light. Stellar black holes can be as small as 3 solar masses.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 02:08 PM
link   
They announced 5 minutes ago on cnn.com/ali that it is either Dwarf Brown Star or red giant star!!!! OUR SOLAR SYSTEM HAS TWO STARS!!!!!!!!! HAHAHAHAHAAAAAA




posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 02:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Starwise
 


would love to see the video are you sure i would think it would still be airing if it was proven fact i suspect its another mathematical theory based on estimated matter / mass missing



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 02:12 PM
link   
FIX: not a red giant, but a gas giant...
www,cnn.com/ali

Hidden Space Object
There is a HUGE hidden heavenly body right here in our solar system. Evidence is mounting that either a brown dwarf star or a gas giant planet is lurking at the outermost reaches of our solar system...far beyond the planet Pluto. According to the British paper The Independent, the object is four times the size of Jupiter. Experts say the presence of such a massive object could explain a barrage of comets from that direction. Via CNN



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by triplescorpio
 


Do you mean the news? It was on CNN TV.....No they did not show a video
would love to see that one too!!!!



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by nataylor
 


To be completely honest mate I couldn't care less, the poster I'm referring to is nitpicking over something that really has nothing to do with the original OP.

BTW I do know of the theory of rogue black holes with no accretion disk - it would be an extremely bad day for the poor space-pilot who accidentally flew into one eh :p
edit on 15/2/2011 by Kryties because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 02:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Draken
 


Indeed. We don't even know this planet exists! At present we just speculate that if it does exist, then it should be revealed when scientists get to look at the latest data from WISE.

Of course if the data does not reveal its presence it means back to the drawing boards ....


edit on 15-2-2011 by Essan because: typo



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Starwise
 


Sorry Starwise, if CNN is reporting the hypothetical object is possibly a brown dwarf object at 4 times the mass of jupiter they are every bit as clueless ( and most likely using the same source) as the Daily Mail article in the OP.



1) Objects with true masses below the limiting mass for thermonuclear fusion of deuterium (currently calculated to be 13 Jupiter masses for objects of solar metallicity) that orbit stars or stellar remnants are "planets" (no matter how they formed). The minimum mass/size required for an extrasolar object to be considered a planet should be the same as that used in our Solar System.

2) Substellar objects with true masses above the limiting mass for thermonuclear fusion of deuterium are "brown dwarfs", no matter how they formed nor where they are located.

3) Free-floating objects in young star clusters with masses below the limiting mass for thermonuclear fusion of deuterium are not "planets", but are "sub-brown dwarfs" (or whatever name is most appropriate).

Distinguishing low-mass brown dwarfs from high-mass planets


For my own peace of mind, what is the criteria for those ATS members who are "awake" use in discerning when to believe the MSM and when to dismiss them as puppets spreading lies to the sheeple to further the NWO agenda for TPTB?



new topics

top topics



 
142
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join