Proof that C/2010 X1 is not a Comet as US Govt/NASA states, but is something extremley larger in mas

reply to post by belsoember


Great, well dammit, I was hoping to have Christmas this year, I did not plan on last year's being the LAST ONE.

By chance do they still stick to "It will only be a transition of ages" theory or is doom and gloom too?

Originally posted by Hijaqd
reply to post by belsoember

 

Great, well dammit, I was hoping to have Christmas this year, I did not plan on last year's being the LAST ONE.

By chance do they still stick to "It will only be a transition of ages" theory or is doom and gloom too?

Transition.

if there is an object destined to collide with earth perhaps we could stop it with the satellite based weapon system that fires 1 milion rounds per second and nukes combined hightechweaponry.blogspot.com...

Originally posted by Hijaqd

I have some theories of my own, they too involve multiple sources, however I do not believe that you can utilize a source and then completely distort them to suit your needs.

How can you distort something when you study notable researchers and then form your own opinions based partly on the past researchers? They guy has written his own books with his own opinions. Do you understand???

Originally posted by PaidDisinfoAgent

Originally posted by my3911
The so called discoverer was made by someone that doesn't exist.... "Leonid Elenin"... come on... NASA is naming this so called "comet" ELENIN, "ELE" is commonly known as "Extinction Level Event" and can you seriously think someone would actually be named after the Leonids and ELENIN.... seriously?

Even still how have you studied something for over a year, when it has not been publicly announced till October 2010.

You are not to be trusted.

This is a priceless troll response Hey op I, as well as others appreciate your thoughts and interest in worrying about individuals on this rock we call the earth. I just wouldn't put too much energy into this sight as half seem to not be able to open a ear to listen, and or have become so dissolved in their text books which change on a daily basis due to lacking information.......

keep up the good work, appreciate your time in this matter

Alots of Comet NASA Supporters




Heres the real photo of the comet notice the small objects trailing it?


The photo was taken by a space probe.

reply to post by allprowolfy


How exactly is this a troll response? The OP stated he has researched the matter for a year or more; the announcement about comet Elenin (comets are usually named after their discoverer) was made quite recently. How exactly has the OP researched this for a year when a year ago nobody knew about this comet? The argument about Elenin being equal to ELE is just laughable. I could as easily claim that they made up the name or mistyped it, see the guy is really called Leonid E. Lenin, but NASA was too embarrassed to used that name. Ridiculous, yes, and so is the claim about Elenin signifying ELE. Stop worrying, comet Elenin is not going to collide with earth; there is no giant spaceship hiding behind it etc.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by Hijaqd

I have some theories of my own, they too involve multiple sources, however I do not believe that you can utilize a source and then completely distort them to suit your needs.

How can you distort something when you study notable researchers and then form your own opinions based partly on the past researchers? They guy has written his own books with his own opinions. Do you understand???

Look, believe what you want, if the Orion Collective makes sense to you then great.

If using Sitchin's translations and accounts of what our ancients laid out as the truth, and then trying to incorporate other researchers interpretations and ideas on the subject is one thing, that is not what I have a problem with.

It is a distortion to use it as a jumping off point, then proceed to twist translations, completely ignore other facts to the story, and try to draw in other cultural references that do not share the same viewpoint as "proof" of your newly forming theory.

Anyone, with the skill, can write books, writing a book does not automatically equal credibility. It just doesn't, it is his OPINION of how he sees it, and is completely entitled to it, I'm saying it doesn't jive with the very same source material he is basing it on, that is my equally valid opinion.

My simple advice to you, was not to put too much stock into his theory, do YOUR OWN RESEARCH from the very same source material, if after that you do come to the same conclusions as Farley, then you may feel justified, I would hazard to guess that you actually come up with your very own theory instead though, but you came to it on YOUR terms, not somebody that is just saying "Take MY word on it."

I would just like to say that this thread suffers from a fair number of logical and rhetorical fallacies.

1: Argument from ignorance (Link)
2: Correlation does not imply causation (Link)
3: Mind Projection Fallacy (Link)
4: Post hoc ergo propter hoc (Link)
5: Regression Fallacy (Link)
6: Hasty Generalization (Link)
7: Ad Hominem Attack (Link)
8: Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy (Link)

Please post less fallacious arguments in the future.

We are living in a tiny blip in the time of this planet, solar system, human history, etc etc. I don't feel lucky enough to be living through end times. Sorry, but nothing is going to happen. Don't quit your job and keep doing homework with your kids.

reply to post by allprowolfy


People are under the impression that ATS exist to promote alternate media when the truth is the purpose is to debunk it. By making everyone think they just want to get the truth out ensures of continuous flow of topics for debunking.

Basically, if you really believe what you are saying and/or if you can prove it, you're not doing yourself or your topic any favors by posting it here. In the end, the topic will go no where but not until you've had to argue your case with every scientist and expert on the internet... even if you waste your time trying to prove it, it's pointless. For the most part everyone, including possibly yourself, uses the guise of a truth seeker when in their minds they already believe they know what the truth is and any sort of evidence to support that idea is all that matters.

Just look at the people who are well known on ATS and what they are known for...debunking.

reply to post by rebeccabrowning


lol, so our government have a plasma weapon based satellite, but I can barely get a decent signal on my phone?

The Government has known about this coming event for a long time. It will take place sometime around September (extreme earth changes). Seek higher ground and prepare beforehand. And the poster is correct; it’s not a comet, but a dwarf star.

What I want to know is how can this object change direction anyone have an explanation for this? Also why is it blocked from view by the sats?

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
Alots of Comet NASA Supporters




Heres the real photo of the comet notice the small objects trailing it?


The photo was taken by a space probe.

edit on 30-5-2011 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)

That is EXACTLY what China was talking about!
ATS Thread - Chinese Scientists State That Behind Elenin Comes a UFO


[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/8e0752e57555.jpg[/atsimg]

Notice it is NOT a Brown Dwarf, it is NOT a rogue planet, just isn't Nibiru or Nemesis.

Originally posted by BriggsBU
I would just like to say that this thread suffers from a fair number of logical and rhetorical fallacies.

1: Argument from ignorance (Link)
2: Correlation does not imply causation (Link)
3: Mind Projection Fallacy (Link)
4: Post hoc ergo propter hoc (Link)
5: Regression Fallacy (Link)
6: Hasty Generalization (Link)
7: Ad Hominem Attack (Link)
8: Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy (Link)

Please post less fallacious arguments in the future.

it is possible that you are correct but your observation is more of an opinion.

I just gave my opinion on your observation and I welcome your opinion on my opinion

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Char-Lee

 

Great!!

You have linked the video that DEBUNKED that ignorant fool, and his "investigation" of a (

) "invisible star"!

Wow..that alone, is worth its weight in comedy gold! "Invisible star"!! Priceless....

Where are the moderators!!! So, Weedwacker can call another ATS member "that ignorant fool" without consequence. I got a warning on a different thread and a 500 point penalty for saying essentially the same thing in response to a poster who said that all cops, judges, and lawyers are criminals. [It was the dancing at the Lincoln Memorial thread] Do certain members get a free pass to say the same things for which all other ATS members warnings and large point penalties? As a favored ATS member, should not weedwacker be held to a higher standard?

For what it's worth, I personally find this thread to be thoughtful, intriguing, and well worth following. True, the OP's hypothesis may turn out to be disproven, but time will tell, and we will know for sure with plenty of time to head for higher ground if that's what is called for by the scientific evidence (assuming it isn't cocnealed from the general public). Let's give it the test of time rather than hurl uncalled for insults such as "ignorant fool" at anyone.

reply to post by weedwhacker


you know your stuff thanks

Originally posted by boncho

Originally posted by Signals
reply to post by weedwhacker

 

Why is "invisble star" so funny?

They certainly do exist...

www.telegraph.co.uk...

You do realize what that article is talking about is celestial bodies that (at the very least) are outside our solar system and (at the very most) are billions and billions of light years away?

Hardly something to duct tape you windows over.... Which I think is what this whole thread is about....


The YouTube video of the "invisible star" was a lens flare. So it was invisible, in that it didn't exist. As WW said... Comedic Gold.

edit on 30-5-2011 by boncho because: (no reason given)

That something is "invisible" does not mean that it doesn't exist. It simply means that you cannot sense it visually, i.e. it is outside the range of human sight, i.e. the radiated energy it emits or reflects has a frequency our eyes cannot detect. At some early age most children learn that just because something is no longer visible, i.e. it has been removed from their visual field, does not mean that it has disappeared, has ceased to exist, or has never existed.

I have just one question about all this, Nasa has been poopooing this thing and saying don't worry be happy.
What happens to NASA when we all find out that they are lying to us all and have been for 50 years?