Getting Our "Facts" About Nibiru Straight

reply to post by NWOnoworldorder

if u want to get technical then a brown dwarf is a star that is smaller than a planet and has a mass equivalent to less than one-tenth of the Sun's mass.

That's a bit off. A brown dwarf would be a little larger than Jupiter.
A brown dwarf runs 10 to 90 Jm. The sun is roughly 1000 Jm so a large brown dwarf is roughly 1 to 9% of the Sun.

Originally posted by NWOnoworldorder
reply to post by loagun

 

lol...i think you just shut him up...either that or hes frantically scouring the net for a rebuttal.

I did good

reply to post by jessejamesxx


It's good to think out of the box. Regardless of speed objects are not "tied down" in their orbits. The greater force by the sun would overcome the force of the smaller star and the object would soon no longer orbit the smaller star.

reply to post by stereologist


really? oh right well tell that to the encarta world dictionary.

reply to post by stereologist


also i think thats complete nit-pickery on your part.

the sun is ALMOST ten times the size of jupiter, a brown dwarf is the around the size of jupiter so i think saying a brown dwarf is one tenth the size is pretty darn acurate.

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by NWOnoworldorder

 

if u want to get technical then a brown dwarf is a star that is smaller than a planet and has a mass equivalent to less than one-tenth of the Sun's mass.

That's a bit off. A brown dwarf would be a little larger than Jupiter.
A brown dwarf runs 10 to 90 Jm. The sun is roughly 1000 Jm so a large brown dwarf is roughly 1 to 9% of the Sun.

would you mind explaining what a Jm is as I googled brown dwarf 10 to 90 Jm, but only this post comes up with any relation to the search. what exactly is a Jm?

is this what 10 to 90 Jm is suppose to mean?

Brown dwarfs occupy the mass range between that of large gas giant planets and the lowest-mass stars; this upper limit is between 75[1] and 80 Jupiter masses (MJ)

reply to post by loagun


Jm is Jovian Mass. In Roman mythology another name for Jupiter was Jove. Thus, Jm is the mass of Jupiter.

reply to post by Xcalibur254


ahh thank you for that.

reply to post by NWOnoworldorder


opp you made a tiny typo there by accident i am sure. Jupiter approx 1/50 the diameter of the Sun, and 0.001 it's mass. you can see a diagram here www.saintjoe.edu...

Yeah right...This kind of thread is getting old. I'm sick of it so will you quit making these do or die threads?

Here's my input on Nibiru. I don't know if it exists. I'm on the fence. I know the scientific facts suggesting it's highly improbable. I know its mythology. And I know that if it's true and that it is coming, scientific datas are modified in order to hide it from the public. This is logic right??

Ok, so everything suggests it's not out there. But Nibiru is suggested by some to be an interdimensional body, which is not impossible (electrons are, carbon-7 is as well). Now get this, one of the nicknames of Nibiru is "The Lord of the Harvest". If you don't know what is the Harvest, it is the natural shift of consciousness spoken all accross the web. Now the Harvest is supposed to put some of us in the 5th dimension, a 4th density dimension. So this is a multi-dimensional concept, so it becomes obvious that Nibiru would be an inter/multi-dimensional object. When we speak of other dimensions, all the known physics and scientific concepts are thrown out of the window, because they don't apply in other dimensions (well, they apply in the first, second and third dimensions, butthe higher ones are totally different). So yes, if it is indeed a multi-dimensional body, it is still possible that it will show soon.

Another theory is that it is a planet sized ship. A space ship. I won't go too far in this one but, a planet sized ship, made out of extraterrestrial technologies...We don't know what this technology can do so hasicly everything is possible with it...

As for the more traditional interpretations, the posters above did a good job.

Tyche is not Nibiru.

I don't know ifyou agree with the NWO/Illuminati/world elite theory, but look. With all the space news lately, it is almost like the governement is slowly disclosing about it because it's impossible to hold it any longer. Betelgeuse Going supernova, partial alien life disclosing (the arsenic bacteria), a possible Nemesis, now Tyche...

Tyche is not Nibiru, but it looks like TPTB is slowly pouring the sheeples brain with an upcoming space event. But that's my own interpretation.

So there you go. But weren't you a bit lazy? You could have find this information by yourself, seriously.

No S&F, these threads are annoying. Sorry!

Ps: no sources, it's all over the web and I simply remember the info.

reply to post by loagun

Yes I do, the Moon is 3474 km in diameter, and Dwarf Planet Eris is 2300–2400 km in diameter. Did you ask me this just so I could look it up for you? Or to point out in my favor how small indeed and irrelevant the 'discovery' of 'dwarf planet' Eris is?

Wrong. and NASA initially described it as the Solar System’s tenth planet. click here to actually read about the history of Eris....

this is right from NASA's website...
A planet larger than Pluto has been discovered in the outlying regions of the solar system.

read the rest of the story before you start lying.....
So I was right. Thank you.

Thank you for proving me right. As you so correctly point out there was no such classification as a dwarf planet when Eris was discovered. Hence it was referred to as a planet. Due to the discovery of Eris, Mark Brown decided to propose a new classification of solar system objects called dwarf planets. The discovery of Eris showed that there was a new type of object. Pluto and the other objects were part of a new class.

So you were again wrong. Thank you.

right from the Washington Post article of 1983.... thank you....

Thanks for pointing out what a pathetic article that was. The suggestion that it was possibly a planet was one of many possible explanations and the one that was correct was the galaxy explanation.

At least the article does not state that it is a planet. It says that a planet is a possible explanation. There are many liars that think people are so stupid that the article says it was a planetary discovery, but who would so foolish as to fall for that?

I stand by my 4 statements. Even in the post I am responding to you misrepresent the fact that Eris was used as evidence to create the classification of dwarf planet. It was not down graded as you claim.

Clearly, you are very,very,very,very confused.
Confusion 1 - In 1983 NASA announced the discovery of a new planet. Did not happen.
Confusion 2 - A planet and moon are different because of orbit, not diameter.
Confusion 3 - The reassignment of Eris from planet was due to its discovery. There was no dwarf planet class before Eris was discovered.
Confusion 4 - An object 50 trillion miles away would [not] be part of our solar system. That's 8 light years away.

Having reread my hasty post I noticed that I left out the word 'not' as indicated by the [ ...] brackets.

Confusion 1 - The Washington Post article never says a new planet was discovered.
Here is what you wrote.

and directing attention away from the planet 'X' they found in 1983.

I believe that point itself proves NASA's intention of covering up their 1983 confirmation of the massive object looming in our solar system

It's readily apparent that you are confused as to the contents of the statements in the 1983 article.

Confusion 2 - A planet and moon are different because of orbit, not diameter. A planet orbits a star. A moon orbits a planet or other body.
Here is what you wrote.

really just a Moon, that or Jupiter's Moon's should all be reclassified as Dwarf Planets

Confusion 3 - The reassignment of Eris from planet was due to its discovery. There was no dwarf planet class before Eris was discovered.

Confusion 4 - An object 8 light years away would not be part of our solar system.
Here is what you wrote.

I believe another reason for the massive object's extremely cold temperature may also be because of it's great distance from our sun which was estimated to be 50 trillion miles away(in 1983).

You claim it was a new planet, but you put it 2x the distance to the closest star away.

I have already proven your rebuttles wrong here using actual EVIDENCE.

No. In fact you've proved yourself wrong time and again.

The issue is that Eris was part of the data used to form a new classification. Nothing was down graded or reassigned as some sort of diversion as you have suggested. All you have done is misrepresent. You've misrepresented the 1983 article.

I NEVER, NOT ONCE, NOWHERE said the object that was seen by NASA telescopes was OUT of OUR solar system.

Here again you claim something was seen in the solar system. That is not true. Repeating a falsehood time and time again is tarnishing you.

and FYI minor planets/subplanets/planetoids/plutinos Ceres and Haumea were discovered BEFORE 'dwarf planet' Eris, it was not the first one!

May I respond with Duhhh! And then Eris is found making it clear that a new classification should be used and the discoverer of Eris makes a proposal and a number of similar objects are classified as dwarf planets placing them all in the same class. The definition for planet is changed to exclude these types of objects.

reply to post by NWOnoworldorder


Would you like to show us how they got it wrong by providing a quotation and link? Or are you bluffing?

reply to post by NWOnoworldorder


When you say size you are talking what units? What part of my statement are you calling nitpicking?

Niburu is the same as the time share flat the "New Jersey loan shark like dressed" salesman is trying to sell you. Complete and utter nonsense. There's one exception of course, you have credible evidence that the time share exists, something we can't claim when it comes to that whacky Niburu planet or brown dwarf.

reply to post by loagun

would you mind explaining what a Jm is as I googled brown dwarf 10 to 90 Jm, but only this post comes up with any relation to the search. what exactly is a Jm?

is this what 10 to 90 Jm is suppose to mean?

Sorry about that. I should not have used an abbreviation. Different authors use different notations. Jm is another notation for a Jupiter mass.

reply to post by Gab1159


It's not lazy. If you check my other threads you will notice that they tend to follow a Socratic method. Not only does this allow other people to explore their own beliefs and ideas and ways they may not have in the past, it also let's everyone get a better understanding into why these beliefs and ideas are held. Nibiru topics tend to be the same arguments back and forth, the goal of this topic is to explore some of the issues that underly these arguments and hopefully cut down on superfluous topics.

reply to post by Xcalibur254


It's just past Pluto there's about's...

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by NWOnoworldorder

 

It can't be a brown dwarf and a planet...

It speaks volumes actually about the type of people who believe in this kind of stuff. NFI!

IRM

reply to post by stereologist


omg... wow i love how you just make things up. i am going to finish up a few things, and then i'm going to rip your last 'rebuttal' apart. you are not going to win this one....

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by Gab1159

 

It's not lazy. If you check my other threads you will notice that they tend to follow a Socratic method. Not only does this allow other people to explore their own beliefs and ideas and ways they may not have in the past, it also let's everyone get a better understanding into why these beliefs and ideas are held. Nibiru topics tend to be the same arguments back and forth, the goal of this topic is to explore some of the issues that underly these arguments and hopefully cut down on superfluous topics.

Thanks for precising this one. The purpose of the thread is now clearer to me. Sorry for calling you lazy, but I had the impression it was an annoying do or die thread!


No disrespect!