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.

 

Getting Our "Facts" About Nibiru Straight

page: 4
12
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 08:40 PM
link   
Nvm
edit on 15-2-2011 by Gab1159 because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by loagun

I would like to know exactly how I was wrong? YOU said that Eris was never downgraded, and yet that is FALSE because right here at this link NASA'S OFFICIAL RELEASE CALLING ERIS THE 10TH PLANET FROM NASA.COM anyone, including yourself, can read the RELEASE : 05-209 article titles Scientists Discover Tenth Planet. In case your too lazy here are some highlights...

The planet was discovered using the Samuel Oschin Telescope at Palomar Observatory near San Diego, Calif. The discovery was announced today by planetary scientist Dr. Mike Brown of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, Calif., whose research is partly funded by NASA.

and here is my personal favorite to prove you wrong in your 'it was never downgraded disinfo'....

The planet is a typical member of the Kuiper belt, but its sheer size in relation to the nine known planets means that it can only be classified as a planet, Brown said. Currently about 97 times further from the sun than the Earth, the planet is the farthest-known object in the solar system, and the third brightest of the Kuiper belt objects.

That it can ONLY be classified as a planet, Brown said.... Looks like you're wrong; again. Try to prove now that it was never classified as a planet, HA!

FYI the term Dwarf Planet which as I already stated was the grouping of the already existing non-planet classifications (minor planets, subplanets, planetoids, and plutinos) into a single group. The category of solar bodies being too small to be classified as 'planets' was created in the EARLY 1990's, and NOT with the 'discovery of Eris. The term 'dwarf planet' is simply a refurbished name for an already existing category. Also the name 'dwarf planet' was not created until 2006, a full year after the discovery of Eris which was, until it's downgrade to a 'dwarf planet' in 2006, classified as a PLANET. THE 10th PLANET.

One more time for your here is the link to NASA's official webpage 10th Planet Is Discovered

Thank You, but you were wrong again. (PS. Yes there was a classification prior to 2006 for objects too small to be categorized as planets, again they were called minor planets, subplanets, planetoids, and plutinos.)


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.


This is not fact at all, but YOUR OWN PERSONAL OPINION. The fact of the matter is that, as I already PROVED, NASA classified Eris after it's January 2005 discovery to be the 10th planet. It does not matter what it was re-classified as over a year later in 2006, because again as seen on NASA's wepage page for it's official Eris press release '10th Planet Discovered', NASA and Dr. Mike Brown titled Eris the 10th planet. Have I repeated this information enough already for you get that it indeed was tagged as the 10th planet???? Regardless of your 'the one that was correct was the galaxy explanation' opinion, ERIS WAS TITLED THE 10TH PLANET BY NASA. YOU CANNOT DISPROVE THIS! SO STOP SAYING THAT IT IS UNTRUE WHEN IT IS IN FACT TRUE FOR ANYONE TO READ!!!

ahhhh.... and that's all i have time for right now because I am going out. ta ta for now...

edit on 15-2-2011 by loagun because: spell check....



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 09:42 PM
link   


Nibiru means Crossing.
Zecharia said it meant "Planets Crossing"
Zecharia has a degree in "economic history" therefore not qualified to interpret, decipher or translate ancient languages.
Z man first wrote that "Nibiru" would be here in 2096. Based on what?
Since the 2012 caught on, he has changed the arrival to coincide to sell more books so that he can pay for the membership fees for the groups he belongs in that help make him look credible.

He WAS a poor scholar.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 11:13 PM
link   
If Tyche turns out to really exist, it's like 375 times as far away as the distance from here to Pluto. Way on the other side of the Oort Cloud.

And it's still debatable. Although there are gravitational effects on the outer planets that would indicate it's a possibility. We need way more evidence seriously to figure this one out.

A brown dwarf star is a failed star, about half the size of our sun. Correct me if I'm wrong.

We do not classify brown dwarfs as planets. They are consider star's that lack the ability to fuse atoms in their core. A burnt out or yet undeveloped "main sequence" star , if you will.

The opposite of a brown dwarf would be maybe a proto-star, which would be the very early stages of the beginning of a star's life cycle. protostar


Currently there is some debate as to what criterion to use to define the separation between a brown dwarf and a giant planet at very low brown dwarf masses (~13 MJ ), and whether brown dwarfs are required to have experienced fusion at some point in their history.


brown dwarf

So we are still trying to clarify the meaning of it still on several points.

We may have to split it into 3 or 4 sub categories.

Things like this change all the time.

Hell back in 1850, they considered Jupiter the 20th planet apparently!



During the early 19th century, as asteroids were discovered, they were considered planets. Jupiter became the sixth planet with the discovery of Ceres in 1801. Soon, three more asteroids, Pallas (1802), Juno (1804), and Vesta (1807) were discovered. They were counted as separate planets, despite the fact that they shared an orbit as defined by the Titius-Bode law. Between 1845 and 1851, eleven additional asteroids were discovered and Jupiter had become the twentieth planet.


link

So just remember, facts may remain for a long time, but our interpretation of those facts and the conclusions we make change over time. Also our terminology changes rapidly too.

I think this fast shift of the scientific community has led to all kinds of misunderstandings, confusions etc. We have to be careful to recognize how that effects discussions like this.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 11:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Opspeculate
 



Pretty hard to argue with that, friend. Well stated and postulated. I too am a student of Sumerian History, and no, I don't think they wrote fiction stories on those clay tablets either. They wrote down what they knew, what they saw with their eyes, and heard with their ears. TPTB will do virtually anything at all to keep this under wraps by "debunking" every story about it that gets posted in a forum or blog. If the religious folks ever were to find out who their Gods really are, they would be angry. Very angry. And depressed. Many would commit suicide, small groups willing to fight them would form, a resistance would be born. I guess human beings are not yet ready to stand free, on their own, they must have some kind of Messiah, some kind of God must be there.
One day all will be free of the chains imposed upon them, and those freely taken on.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 11:42 PM
link   
reply to post by loagun
 



That it can ONLY be classified as a planet, Brown said.... Looks like you're wrong; again. Try to prove now that it was never classified as a planet, HA!

I'm sorry reading and comprehension are not part of your skill set. But clearly being a liar is. I have stated that Eris was detected as an object that had to be classified as a planet, but led to the realization that a new classification should be constructed for a set of objects. It was the discovery of Eris that clinched the new category of solar system objects.

That isn't too hard to understand I hope. You seem to have a great deal of diffficulty in understanding a rather simple set of concepts. I will look over the rest of your drivel tomorrow.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 11:49 PM
link   
I don't see the big fuss over Nibiru. It's just a theory. Nothing really more.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 01:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by loagun
 



That it can ONLY be classified as a planet, Brown said.... Looks like you're wrong; again. Try to prove now that it was never classified as a planet, HA!

I'm sorry reading and comprehension are not part of your skill set. But clearly being a liar is. I have stated that Eris was detected as an object that had to be classified as a planet, but led to the realization that a new classification should be constructed for a set of objects. It was the discovery of Eris that clinched the new category of solar system objects.

That isn't too hard to understand I hope. You seem to have a great deal of diffficulty in understanding a rather simple set of concepts. I will look over the rest of your drivel tomorrow.


WTF I am a liar????? Oh please, please, pretty please point out where I lied. As seen in your posts, you are now lying. As seen in your post on page 2 of this thread you state "Eris was not downgraded." And yet I have clearly, and several times now showed you that it was downgraded in 2006 after it's original January title of being the 10th planet in our solar system. You are trying to skip over a whole year, a whole year where Eris was classified as a planet by NASA and your beloved Dr. Brown. Did you actually read the link I referenced to where i quoted "That it can only be classified as a planet, Brown said...." this comes directly from NASA press release on Eris from 2005.

You also are hanging onto the idea that because of the discovery of Eris we know how a classification for solar bodies that have mass too small to be categorized as 'planets'. And as I clearly stated several times now this classification already existed with these bodies being referred to as minor planets, subplanets, planetoids, and plutinos. If NASA wanted to identify Eris as a non-planet solar body then it could have, as it would have fit into the category of being a minor planet, or a subplanet, or a planetoid, or a plutinos.

Just because you said Eris was never categorized as a planet, and it's discovery was only made to bring forth the new(not new)classification of 'dwarf planets'(minor planets, subplanets, planetoids, plutinos), and what you said turned out to be wrong(as clearly NASA and Dr.Brown tagged Eris as the 10th planet in 2005 as per NASA's official website and press release, and the existence of smaller non-planet solar body categorization was created in the early 1990s) doesn't mean I am a liar. Just because you do not want to agree with the information that proves your original points(not the cleaned up ones of your last post) to be untrue doesn't make NASA's official web page a 'hoax' since you seem to reference it a lot in posts.

In closing I know Eris lead to the new addition of the term 'dwarf planet' to the category of "bodies too small to be labeled 'planets'" that already existed before the discovery of Eris(I already previously stated the discovery of 2 minor planets before Eris was even thought of). You however, in review stated Eris was discovered, never labeled a planet, and was discovered to bring forth the new 'dwarf planet' category. While elements of what you are saying may be true, things did not happen the way you are trying to make them appear to have.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 02:04 AM
link   
1. How can a brown dwarf have life it is a failed star?
2. Even if there is a Moon that orbits this brown dwarf where would the light come from to support life and it's evolution on this moon? This fabled planet spends much of its time out in the cold expanses of space not a great place for advanced life.
3. Isn't a planet that spends most of its time outside the solar system then zips back in on a crazy crash course ever 3000 or so years a bad candidate for evolving life and especially advanced life capable of interstellar travel.
4. Even if advanced life did evolve on this crazy hypothetical wrecking ball planet would in not have made sense for them to ditch this planet and set up shop else where? For example why not teraform mars? Heck if they were once here on earth why not set up shop as lords and masters here?
5. What does Niburu have to do with 2012 isn't it supposed to return much much latter if at all?

I'm not against the idea of ancient ET's I just think that if they came they came from other star systems light years away not some crazy wrecking ball planet called nibiru.
I was once open to the idea but the more I looked at it the more questions I asked and the more holes I saw.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 02:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcalibur254
 


I personally dont care about this planet but why start a thread just to bust peoples balls ur quite cocky and must think ur all that cool out its a site that is all about talking about what some think back off bro with the attitude and let everyone have their own thoughts richard



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 03:25 AM
link   
this is the best response to nibiru questions i can find....


Question
Nibiru Redux: Six recent questions about Nibiru: (1) I have found a lot of stuff about a so called planet. Planet x or nibiru. It anything they say possible like revolving around the sun clockwise and it has been said that its orbit is way far out past Pluto. Also there are statements that it has a 3600 year orbit around the sun an that is is supposed to return in the near future. Is this possible at all? It sounds fishy to me, but there are supposed pics of it and a lot of scientist talk about it. I even wikipedia searched it. I would just like to find out some info please. (2) Nibiru does exist and I can prove it. Nibiru is in the old testament Exodus 6:4. and you are watching Nibiru from a lab on the south pole. also I have images from a telescope of Nibiru. and people from the southern hemisphere can see Nibiru in the daytime. is that proof enough for you? (3) many signs tell that something big is out there coming and why wouldn't it be true about nibiru / planet x there is a lot of fact historical and scientific but i do understand your awnser but why build a telescope at the south pole an photos and such with this redish dwarf star moving fast in 1983 it was 50 billion miles away and 10 years later it is alot closer is it hiding behind the sun i know you all dont want to start a world wide panic. (4) I read were you said that Nibiru is a hoax. My question to you is why would anyone let the american population know about such a catastrophy? Isnt it the governments job to keep the population at ease? (5) You say Nibiru is a hoax, and no such planet exists, but is Nibiru not Eris? (6) What is this a picture of? www.greatdreams.com... It's said to be Nibiru, but as you say Nibiru is a hoax. so what is this really a photo of?
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
February 7, 2008



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 03:56 AM
link   
reply to post by ELahrairah
 


A common misconception is that the 'gods' are coming back on Nibiru(as in physical beings). This is not true to Sumerian history. They believe the object of 'Nibiru' itself though passes close to the Earth every 3,600 years on it's elliptical orbit around the sun. The don't believe 'beings' come to Earth and destroy civilization every 3,600 years, but it is the object itself that reeks havoc on the planets as it passes by.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 04:01 AM
link   
reply to post by discostu123
 


what a load of crap



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 04:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
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?


got what wrong exactly? i can provide links from nasa confirming what i sed if that is at all usefull?

www.nasa.gov...

and this is where i read that the sun is ten times larger than jupiter

www.enchantedlearning.com...



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 04:26 AM
link   
reply to post by discostu123
 


have u ever heard of paragraphs??

second



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 04:27 AM
link   
reply to post by loagun
 


which part, and why?



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 04:28 AM
link   
reply to post by NWOnoworldorder
 


it was quickly copied and pasted...its still readable though...



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 05:57 AM
link   
reply to post by loagun
 



Also the name 'dwarf planet' was not created until 2006, a full year after the discovery of Eris which was, until it's downgrade to a 'dwarf planet' in 2006, classified as a PLANET.


There you go agreeing with me. Thanks.


NASA and Dr. Mike Brown titled Eris the 10th planet.

Because that was the available classification system in 2005. Eris was first seen in 2003, but its motion detected in 2005.


ERIS WAS TITLED THE 10TH PLANET BY NASA. YOU CANNOT DISPROVE THIS! SO STOP SAYING THAT IT IS UNTRUE WHEN IT IS IN FACT TRUE FOR ANYONE TO READ!!!

No matter how much shouting you do all you are doing is misrepresenting the process by not understanding what happened fine. Since we're getting nowhere in having you understand the process of classification we'll just have to agree to disagree.

The real issue is that this is a 2012 forum and a thread about Nibiru. When it comes to Nibiru you have made the appallingly FALSE claim that NASA has discovered planets in 1983 and in 1992. So far you've shown zero evidence for this.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 06:02 AM
link   
reply to post by PaR3v
 


When you say theory you mean guess or wild spculation.. There is no theory about Nibiru as scientists would use the term.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 06:03 AM
link   
My favorite part:


Originally posted by discostu123
this is the best response to nibiru questions i can find....

Question
(4) I read were you said that Nibiru is a hoax. My question to you is why would anyone let the american population know about such a catastrophy? Isnt it the governments job to keep the population at ease?

Answer:
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.

In any case, the job of NASA scientists is to discover and tell the truth!

I see -- since the government makes frequent references to terrorist threats, why wouldn't they warn us of a catastrophe?!



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join