Elenin=Planet X, Nebiru (Mathematical proof)

reply to post by PlanetXGuy


Here is a bunch of unsubstantiated malarkey you've been blah blah about. This isn't true or in a few cases normal.

Earth is experiencing mass animal deaths all over the globe and super storms and magnetic pole migration that has been going on since 2004 and increasing in frequency and intensity. Volcanoes all over the planet are waking up with increases in earthquakes, rogue tides, earth wobble, severe winter weather, sea level strangeness, moon out of place, solar flares/storms and ocean conveyor disruptions. Greenland had sunrise two days early, because a large object with large mass appears to be bringing a huge gravity well to the center of our solar system.

1. Mass animal deaths are normal not unusual
2. Magnetic pole wandering is normal and has been happening since the position was first determined.
3. Volcanic activity has been stable for decades.
4. Earthquakes are not increasing
5. Earth wobble is normal
6. Winter weather is not more severe
7. Where are sea levels strange?
8. The moon is not out of place
9. Solar activity is not is not abnormal.
10. Ocean currents are not being disrupted.
11. The Greenland sun rise issue was related to melting ice lowering the horizon

So your claim that this suggests a large mass entering our solar system is a hoax. Nothing you posted is unusual or odd or in many cases even true.

If you really wanted to show that a large mass had entered the solar system you could look the effects it would actually cause: 1) affect the motions of the known planets 2) show us where to see the object.

Instead of dealing with the primary effects you hint at things that are weakly or not even affected.

Well by now I would think there should be some explaining from NASA as to why all our money cannot tell us how big this thing is and why we haven't any pictures yet.

I did notice there have been several references here (one from a Super Moderator as well) in regards to nothing abnormal about the Moon, yet there has been a thread stating the "eccentricity" of the Moon has changed. Is this not abnormal? Is this something that has happened in our lifetimes previously? Although this change is small, how many times have we all seen something small become something large? (oh no, don't answer that!)

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Seriously, don't say the Moon is normal if it is not! Don't say the weather is fine if it is not! Don't say this cometoid is just a smitten of a thought when in fact NASA dedicated so much, and so little towards it. Just remain open as we all are and realize that a hypothesis or supposition is likely going to hit the nail on the head! If not, then fire off, but in the meantime it just shows a very poor ability to be open about what may or may not be.

I am not in the position to stand against the less-kind or less-gentler folks here on this Thread, but seriously we are all reading and it just makes me sick that there are some in this World who think that everything is just peaches and cream!

OK, bash away, I just think saying the Moon is normal is probably short-sighted at best.

Personally, I believe we are all going to be in for a heck of a shock when the darn thing takes its mask off in the Plaza!

reply to post by Greensage


Great post. I flagged it.

This thread is just like many others in the 2012 section. Filled with mis-direction.

We will know by this fall.

CU

reply to post by PlanetXGuy


Thanks PXG, I appreciate the detailed answer. I just naturally assumed that the series of pics were legitimate but I noticed that some on here are questioning their authenticity, I thought they were from one of the Official European Astronomical Observatories, hence me taking them as legitimate. Naturally if they are fake it shines an entirely different light upon the whole thing.
It is a shame that there are some that put incredible time & talent into producing either fake or altered info because if this does turn out to be a hoax it just means that even more people will dismiss a future reported disaster when one does occur but hey that has always been (part of) mankinds MO.
Cheers

reply to post by Greensage

it just shows a very poor ability to be open about what may or may not be.

Actually, it is very poor ability to accept possibilities that are impossible such as this being a massive object. Simply ask yourself what a massive object does in the solar system. Those that want to believe in a new planet often point out the issue of perterbations that were discussed before 1989. Now, when a claim is made for a massive object they dismiss the issue. No perterbations means no unknown mass.

Is the Moon changing. Yes it is. It is changing in a known manner. It is moving away from the Earth because of tidal interactions. The same sort of interactions cause the Earth to move away from the Sun.

OK, bash away, I just think saying the Moon is normal is probably short-sighted at best.

The only thing you posted is a vague suggestion that things are not as they seem. It might help to tell more. Any change in eccentricity could be small, maybe in the 9th or 10th digit. I'm not sure how small it is, but it could be on that order. Being able to detect such minor changes shows how advanced astronomical measurements can be made today.

reply to post by Grasim

Thanks PXG, I appreciate the detailed answer.

Too bad he got the details wrong. The image was "stacked," not "time lapse," and the "other objects are stars that leave multiple images because of that process. He arbitrarily claims that the comet is moving from left to right and makes no accounting of its apparent celestial motion. He changes it from an icy ball of gas to a massive "dead star" with a wave of his magic hands, then finds correlations between "alignments" and certain earthquakes without explaining exactly what he means by "alignment." If you review the entire list of earthquakes over 6.0 on the Richter scale with the motion of the comet and planets as projected here, you will see that there is no correlation of any kind. PlanetXGuy is chopping his data to suit his baseless hypothesis.

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Greensage

 

OK, bash away, I just think saying the Moon is normal is probably short-sighted at best.

The only thing you posted is a vague suggestion that things are not as they seem. It might help to tell more. Any change in eccentricity could be small, maybe in the 9th or 10th digit. I'm not sure how small it is, but it could be on that order. Being able to detect such minor changes shows how advanced astronomical measurements can be made today.

The change in eccentricity of the moon's orbit amounts to a change in difference between apogee and perigee of 8.4 millimetres per year. Over the 38.7 years the effect has been measured, it's led to the moon being 16 centimetres closer at perigee and 16 centimetres further at apogee than it should be given a constant orbital eccentricity. It really is negligible, unless you're the one keeping track of the moon's distance and orbital parameters to the nearest millimetre over several decades.
Also, I want to point out that, in the paper that presented this change in the moon's eccentricity, they (perhaps patronizingly) took the existence of some Nibiru-esque object into account, and concluded that it would fail to have the observed effect. The change in eccentricity, as of the time of the writing of the paper, has no explanation. However, it also has no impact on anything. It's practically a non-effect.

reply to post by CLPrime


Thank you for the info; it seems one effect is as much a norm as another yet the unexpected can still remain a factor, whatever that might be. I will keep your considerations in my thoughts as I believe there are forces involved on all ends that warrant scrutiny. I still suspect most and still I am not in fear of it any less. I want to know size and it seems no one is telling anyone anything until it shows up; this is the most suspect arrangement having the imagination come up with answers, coupled with the norm, for what ever that is worth.

Stereologist,

I beg to differ in your opinion often.

1. Mass animal deaths are normal not unusual--

When a specific location is hit by any animal death in mass numbers any amount of normality is thrown out the door when we are talking generations of memories not having experienced it directly. There are man-made chemical and biological aspects to our understanding of environmental challenges right now; that isn't normal in my book. Death should always be suspect en mass.

2. Magnetic pole wandering is normal and has been happening since the position was first determined--

Past to present we know of shifts and we understand by strata that the motion of liquefaction is not so often "subtle". Ironically there are times we fail to recognize the connection between the magnetic poles and our physical/floatable land masses. Normal or not we are aware enough to note scrutiny beyond "normal" if we do have a polar shift, one could surmise it takes a magnetic shift first.

3. Volcanic activity has been stable for decades--

Stable is one thing active is another, damage and harm seems prevalent in one scenario!

4. Earthquakes are not increasing--

Intensity and destructive capabilities would say otherwise, again, effective to the principle at hand and by any account loss is ultimately increasing.

5. Earth wobble is normal--

I don't know about any wobble outside of what is already a wobble.

6. Winter weather is not more severe--

I personally experienced 3 degrees in a region which has never seen 3 degrees in my lifetime. It killed plants which have thrived in this region, overnight, that have lived here for 30 or more seasons. It was devastating, and the toll in freeze damage to an area that was not prepared for it was costly to everyone involved. Any additional winters in this range would severely put this region into a limited fauna environment; loss of biodiversity is consider severe.

7. Where are sea levels strange?

There is an ATS thread on the abnormal flooding in Peru. www.abovetopsecret.com... Saying it is normal does not explain why people are experiencing this in less than a normal way. It is washing up into a community that has not seen this problem often enough to deal with it. Definitely one step above strange.

8. The moon is not out of place--

This I will remain as questionable but with a better sense of by what degree thanks to CLPrime.

9. Solar activity is not is not abnormal--

There is no doubt in my mind that a Sun that goes quiet for so long, and then also produces a new form of particle would be above the normal range at the moment. Maybe not abnormal, but definitely not so norm for us to know what it will do next.

10. Ocean currents are not being disrupted--

The GOM is still actively a disaster! Reading about millions of crabs washing up dead because of changes in temperatures pretty well speaks of currents to me.

11. The Greenland sun rise issue was related to melting ice lowering the horizon--

Fascinating and definitely surprising; bet that happens enough to be "normal"?

OK, well that is how I differ in opinion. I am just not getting you man, you are relentless with your effortless ways.

reply to post by Greensage


1. Mass animal deaths

You do not claim that it is unusual. In fact, these sorts of events happen often in the world. About the only ones that get media attention are whale strandings.

2. Magnetic pole wander

We only have a couple of centuries of data. What we do know is that the position of the magnetic pole changes. People have been dealing with that for a long time. The important thing to understand is that pole shifts do not happen. There has not been a "pole shift" in 200My.

3. Volcanic activity is normal

There has been no change in volcanic activity levels in decades. That is well known. The country of Indonesia for example has on average a dozen active volcanoes. Eruptions are dramatic and dangerous. That does not mean that the worldwide levels are changing. Worldwide levels are not changing.

4. Earthquakes are not increasing

The only thing increasing is the human population which puts more people at risk. There simply is no evidence that earthquakes are increasing. There actually has been a small decrease, but the evidence for that is small.

5. Not of interest

6. Winter weather is not more severe

You are extrapolating one event to a worldwide situation? That is the whole problem here. People are not looking at the big picture.

7. Where are the sea levels strange?

You allude to an event in Peru which I will check out and get back to you on.

8. The moon is not out of place.

The moon is observed with great skill and precision. It is not out of place as claimed by unaided eye observers.

9. Ocean currents are not being disrupted

The deaths of crabs was not due to a disruption of currents. The currents are still flowing. The claim of current disruption is based on an internet hoax of a paper written by a nonexistent Italian and pushed by Moore who is a fraud.

10. Solar activity is normal.

The sun is not doing anything unexpected. It is entering a solar maximum.

11. The Greenland sun rise issue was related to melting ice lowering the horizon--
Fascinating and definitely surprising; bet that happens enough to be "normal"?

The claims of this change in the horizon vary from a new planet or a comet or pole shift or all sorts of ridiculous claims. The fact is that the horizon has changed and the horizon is ice.

None of these issues has anything to do with 2012.

There is an ATS thread on the abnormal flooding in Peru. www.abovetopsecret.com... Saying it is normal does not explain why people are experiencing this in less than a normal way. It is washing up into a community that has not seen this problem often enough to deal with it. Definitely one step above strange.

Nothing in that thread discusses strange sea levels. It is a discussion of wave activity over a period of more than a day.

reply to post by stereologist


You are missing the Human Element in your thought processes. The Experience itself has such a profound effect that nothing is ever "Normal". This increase that people notice within their geographical experience, on a personal level, is a part of the equation; but you miss the mark.

There are no coincidences at this point.

It has been fun! See you in the next thread!

People are so desperate to believe the whole Nibiru fairy tale. They heard the story once. The fell for it and it seems they are to embarrassed to think that they could be wrong, so they come up with all these other ideas why we can not see Nibiru or what else Nibiru could be. Tis a sad commentary on this site.

reply to post by Greensage


Just because some people think something is special or out of the ordinary does not mean it is. Reasoning is not a popularity contest or a place for whimsy. It is all about testing whether or not a claim has merit.

Are things abnormal? No.

ept. 4, 2010 - Christchurch, New Zealand - 7.1 earthquake
Elenin-earth-sun alignment

Feb. 7, 2010 - Chile - 8.8 earthquake
Elenin-earth-sun alignment

Mar. 11, 2011 - Japan - 9.0 earthquake
Elenin-earth-sun alignment

Once is an accident. Twice is coincidence. Three times is a pattern.

1 Peter 4:17 For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God...

Sept 4, 2010 - Christchurch, New Zealand

Kind of interesting, eh?

"And therefore as a stranger give it welcome.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." - Hamlet, Act 1, Scene 5

So, now we await the next Elenin-Earth-Sun alignment in September, when we will see whether the theories regarding a coming pole shift turn out to be true or false. If we have food, water, survival gear, bug-out bags ready, and a plan in place, we've lost nothing if the pole shift does not occur. But if it does occur and we haven't prepared, then we are screwed.

If the pole shift doesn't happen and we've prepared, that means we will still be prepared for whatever other disasters may occur in the near future. After all, the economic collapse of the United States and World War III are still very real possibilities with or without a pole shift. And we've been warned repeatedly that Yellowstone can erupt at any time. Anyone living within the kill zone of that super volcano is either ignorant or crazy. Also, we've just witnessed the devastation visited on Japan. We know what earthquakes can do. Anyone who believes that a 9.0 or greater can't destroy Los Angeles is living in a fantasy world.

Sept. 4, 2010 - Christchurch, New Zealand - 7.1 earthquake
Elenin-earth-sun alignment

Feb. 7, 2010 - Chile - 8.8 earthquake
Elenin-earth-sun alignment

Mar. 11, 2011 - Japan - 9.0 earthquake
Elenin-earth-sun alignment

Once is an accident. Twice is coincidence. Three times is a pattern.

1 Peter 4:17 For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God...

Sept 4, 2010 - Christchurch, New Zealand

Kind of interesting, eh?

"And therefore as a stranger give it welcome.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." - Hamlet, Act 1, Scene 5

So, now we await the next Elenin-Earth-Sun alignment in September, when we will see whether the theories regarding a coming pole shift turn out to be true or false. If we have food, water, survival gear, bug-out bags ready, and a plan in place, we've lost nothing if the pole shift does not occur. But if it does occur and we haven't prepared, then we are screwed.

If the pole shift doesn't happen and we've prepared, that means we will still be prepared for whatever other disasters may occur in the near future. After all, the economic collapse of the United States and World War III are still very real possibilities with or without a pole shift. And we've been warned repeatedly that Yellowstone can erupt at any time. Anyone living within the kill zone of that super volcano is either ignorant or crazy. Also, we've just witnessed the devastation visited on Japan. We know what earthquakes can do. Anyone who believes that a 9.0 or greater can't destroy Los Angeles is living in a fantasy world.

reply to post by Khazaq


How are you calculating these Elenin-earth-sun alignment?

reply to post by stereologist


With regard to your comment about the sun. The sun has taken longer to wake up from the last solar minimum. Over the past 2+ years there have been long streches with no sun spot activity which is very unusual.

Saying that it's probably normal and down to lack of data. Cycles within cycles.

Originally posted by The Asgard
reply to post by Khazaq

 

How are you calculating these Elenin-earth-sun alignment?

Easier if I just show you.

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by The Asgard


Agreed. The Sun is the closest star and is certainly a tricky study. Despite our proximity and the relative ease of observation it seems rather difficult to predict what the Sun will do next.

reply to post by Unity_99

Computer simulations by Quintana, Adamas, Lissauer and Chambers (The Astrophysical Journal, Vol. 660, p. 807, 2007) show that planets can form within 2 AU from the primary when the minimum separation of two stars is 10 AU. That's not enough to form a Jupiter that will herd water-carrying bodies to the inner planets, but at least most planets in this case will have nearly circular orbits. Planets farther out will have too eccentric orbits or their orbits will be perturbed by the other star and will probably be expelled. Out of 200 extrasolar planets or so discovered so far 33 are known to orbit components of binaries or triple stars, but the separations of the stars are larger than 100 AU. At those distances, a solar type star will have no influence on the temperature of a planet closer to the primary. Three planets have been discovered in binaries with separations less than 20 AU. This does not mean that closer binaries have no planets, but discovering them with available techniques is difficult. By the way, a recent investigation by Eggenberger, Udry, Mazeh, Segal and Mayor (Astronomy and Astrophyics, Vol. 466, p. 1179, 2007) failed to confirm the existence of a Jupiter-like planet around HD 188753 A.

if there is a binary star system and the primary star is more massive then the secondary star all planets that would form would form around the primary star if they formed around the secondary star they would be expelled from the solar system because there orbits are so eccentric

If one of the stars is far enough or have much less mass than the other, planets will form around the more massive star, called the primary star, and will have nearly circular orbits. This is important to prevent the planet from becoming too hot or too cold at different times of the year

www.madsci.org...

i don't get it whenever a comet is about to pass us people say it "wormwood" or "nibiru" why can't it just be a comet why does the passing of a comet always spell disaster to some people

whne both halleys comet and hale-bopp passed again people were saying that it is the supposed "wormwood" or the supposed "nibiru"

"wormwood" is from the bible....the bible defenitley one of the most believeable books out there
"nibiru" thank you Nancy Leiber for telling us to kill our pets way to go sweetheart oh and also when she was proved wrong she just simply chnaged her date to guess what 2012

its a comet people....not the end of the world....deal with this fact