Originally posted by MrXYZ
Originally posted by Ophiuchus 13
reply to post by MrXYZ
Just consider more advanced technology or celestial travel of natural objects. It can run into one of the lil blackholes in the vicinity and pop up right below Earth. Or if natural lol can catch a ride of the suns or SOLs mag. field speeding up its travel. I dont know if 2012 is late or early. I understand that fear can cause disbelief but this isnt the first time an object out there has been discussed. So 1 only recommends KEEP OPEN MINDS. Sometimes we got to evaluate thing of instinct not try to use what we of EA know and assume no others have better ways of travel.edit on 2/14/11 by Ophiuchus 13 because: (no reason given)
Ok, first of all, nothing entering a black hole "pops out again" to our knowledge, so you are SPECULATING. Magnetic fields like the one around earth also don't speed anything up.
All I'm saying that rationally, there is ZERO evidence that thing exists. Some people though choose to believe in it anyway, kinda like religious followers. But just like religious followers, their belief isn't based on logic or rationality, it's based on blind belief
Originally posted by drphilxr
reply to post by TheCardigan
try 3,600 years +/- , about a 'shar', for the orbital period.
Originally posted by Al E. Inn
reply to post by MrXYZ
And the proposal is the planet exists in an orbit 15,000 au from the Sun. Not an elliptical orbit proposed by Nibiru fanatics, but an orbit that remains at 15,000 au effecting the manner in which asteroids/comets are ejected from the Oort Cloud.
Exciting news, but a giant ball of gas in the Oort Cloud doesn't have a thing to do with 2012 Nibiru nonsense.
Exciting times...tho im more worried about the suns coming solar max and the as i right this post storm thats about to smack in to us
are these connected?
Originally posted by _Phoenix_
Putting Nibiru in the title sort of distracts from the real news.
Did people always mention nibiru when they found new planets in the past? I don't think so. Why should this be any different?
Originally posted by skeptic_al
reply to post by Wildeagle
Astronmers are finding new Planets all the Time.
Nibiru has never been proclaimed to exist by Scientists or Astromers, only Fiction Book writers claim it exists. BIG DIFFERENCE, Astronomers do it for Science, Book writers do it for Profit.
Originally posted by Xcathdra
Originally posted by ANClENT
So scientists finally admit planet x is real, about freaking timeedit on 14-2-2011 by ANClENT because: (no reason given)edit on 14-2-2011 by ANClENT because: (no reason given)
Now now... Its difficult to detect a planet that is 4 times the size of Jupiter in the solar system.. Its not so hard to detect a planet existance in a solar system 70k light years away...
Chances are they have know about it, and wanted time to study it before making the announcement so they can answer the planet X - Niburu questions that are bound to come flooding in.
Originally posted by TreX-UK
First thing that sprang to mind when i read this was the IRAS survey in 1983 there was a big thing that they found a planet as big or bigger then jupiter
"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." However, further analysis revealed that, of several unidentified objects, nine were distant galaxies and the tenth was "intergalactic cirrus". None were found to be Solar System bodies."
*Taken From Wikipedia*
Saying "4 times bigger than Jupiter" I mean the size (4 times the volume or radius of Jpiter) , if the article means the mass then my post is irrelevant.
Originally posted by jovanoti
Is it necessary to be 4 times bigger than Jupiter? If the scientists take in mind the mass and for real the planet is gas giant then t should be 4 time bigger than Jupiter, but if it is rocky planet or dying star with great mass equal to 4 times greater than Jupeter mass, hence the gravity impact, should be the same then it should cause the same indirect results on its near neighbors.edit on 14-2-2011 by jovanoti because: (no reason given)