Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The Elenin/Nibiru conspiracy? Connecting the dots.

page: 3
8
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by NeoVain
 


What does that have to do with the South Pole Telescope getting pictures of Nibiru? The SPT is physically incapable of producing a visual image. I have seen the "leaked" images. They are not trying to pass those off as radio telescope returns in any way. They clearly saw the word telescope and assumed it produced visual images. Unfortunately for them a radio telescope does not produce any images and their hoax was found out quickly.


Ever heard of Radio spectrography or used it? Cause i have. You think those radio telescopes only give out a graph and some numbers? You, sir, are in for a shock. Please download this software jupiter.wcc.hawaii.edu...

Connect to for example hawaii, and you will see the picture starting to appear, fiddle around with the options and you will see that you can set it to display alot of things, even make movies of it. Those movies/pictures about nibiru, impossibly can be taken by a radio telescope?




posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by NeoVain
 


Well you are the one making the claims that Elenin is Nibiru. Elenin is currently between Earth and Mars. So, if it is several times the size of Jupiter and has a reflectance factor of at least 17% it's going to be quite visible. However, since you have made it clear that it is surrounded by iron and not iron oxide I will point out that iron has a reflectance factor of about 50% meaning it would be more obvious than the Moon (which actually has a low albedo).



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 07:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by NeoVain
 


Well you are the one making the claims that Elenin is Nibiru. Elenin is currently between Earth and Mars. So, if it is several times the size of Jupiter and has a reflectance factor of at least 17% it's going to be quite visible. However, since you have made it clear that it is surrounded by iron and not iron oxide I will point out that iron has a reflectance factor of about 50% meaning it would be more obvious than the Moon (which actually has a low albedo).


Where did i claim Elenin is Nibiru? I never claimed this, where did you get that?



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 07:33 PM
link   
reply to post by NeoVain
 


I am familiar with spectrographs. However, they do not produce anything like the "photos" of "Nibiru."



And that's the other thing. These are referred to specifically as photographs. Furthermore, the person even says that it was a photographic telescope. Admit it, this is a complete hoax.



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 07:36 PM
link   
reply to post by NeoVain
 


Never mind, I forgot the part where you called Elenin our savior in the OP. So then how close do you think Nibiru is from us? You claim it is too close to the Sun to see. (While also being invisible in the visual spectrum to begin with?) So then how close is it?
edit on 31-8-2011 by Xcalibur254 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 07:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by NeoVain
 

Counterpoint: Why, if CW leonis was found as early as 1969 (long before google or even the internet, most telescopes etc) is it not marked on google sky?
Good question.

[It's ironic that I am about to post a youtube video for reference.]

Here is a youtube video giving data on CW Leonis, how to find it and how to verify it's existence.



-saige-
edit on 31-8-2011 by saige45 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 08:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by saige45

Originally posted by NeoVain
 

Counterpoint: Why, if CW leonis was found as early as 1969 (long before google or even the internet, most telescopes etc) is it not marked on google sky?
Good question.

[It's ironic that I am about to post a youtube video for reference.]

Here is a youtube video giving data on CW Leonis, how to find it and how to verify it's existence.



-saige-
edit on 31-8-2011 by saige45 because: (no reason given)


Looks like a hoax video to me, especially since its so blatantly obvious that all the sites being pointed to as places to "verify that it is cw leonis and not nibiru" are either governemnt sites, governemnt funded, or government dependant. Does that not ring a bell to you? It is also rather lazily done, with far less data than in most nibiru videos, even some of the obvious hoaxes and disinfo attempts give more data than this. At least they are not as stupid as this one, pointing to government sites for "verification", which basically means they are in control of all this information For what reason you may wonder?



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 08:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by NeoVain
 


Never mind, I forgot the part where you called Elenin our savior in the OP. So then how close do you think Nibiru is from us? You claim it is too close to the Sun to see. (While also being invisible in the visual spectrum to begin with?) So then how close is it?
edit on 31-8-2011 by Xcalibur254 because: (no reason given)


docs.google.com...

If you look at this document, you can see that nibiru is approximately 8 au behind elenin, following it, elenin being the "frontrunner" or "harbinger".



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 08:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by NeoVain
 


I am familiar with spectrographs. However, they do not produce anything like the "photos" of "Nibiru."



And that's the other thing. These are referred to specifically as photographs. Furthermore, the person even says that it was a photographic telescope. Admit it, this is a complete hoax.


What is to say this guy posting that video even knew what kind of telescope it was? Maybe he got it from a friend at the south pole, and assumed they where optic/infrared? (they sure look like the infrared ones from iris to me, though).

Also what is to say they have no infrared/optic telescope there? Have you actually been there or just blindly believe what the government leaks out?

Also of course there is the possibility that it is just a cg hoax. Im not claiming i know this, but i think there is far more evidence abound than those pics to refutiate the whole idea. Some "contributions" are obvious hoaxes, others, not so much. Your ball.



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 08:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by NeoVain
 

Looks like a hoax video to me, especially since its so blatantly obvious that all the sites being pointed to as places to "verify that it is cw leonis and not nibiru" are either governemnt sites, governemnt funded, or government dependant. Does that not ring a bell to you? It is also rather lazily done, with far less data than in most nibiru videos, even some of the obvious hoaxes and disinfo attempts give more data than this. At least they are not as stupid as this one, pointing to government sites for "verification", which basically means they are in control of all this information For what reason you may wonder?


So are you saying [I'm paraphrasing, please correct me if I'm wrong] that the governments of the world have so much sway over millions of people (meaning scientists both amatuer and professional) that not a single one of them are telling the truth? That all governments do are bad things?

You state the Nibiru video's provide data. Where? Is it verifiable data? As stated previously, I have not found one video and/or reference to anything related to Nibiru that is verifiable. I must take the posters word for it. It's not verifiable data, it is one persons observation and then reflection of their observation.

Whereas with the data that is presented above in those (government) lists is not only presented the same way in each and every one of those lists but also verifiable by millions of people. If a mistake is found, it is corrected and annotated as such. Which means that anyone (millions of students use these day in and day out to refute or validate the data as well), you or I, can go to the list, look up the data, grab our trusty telescope (or use a remote telescope), go to where the data says to look and viola. It's either there or it's not.

I mean look I am typing on the internet, which I must point out, was created and funded originally by the government so therefore it must be evil and nothing on it should ever be believed, because after all the government controls the internet and everyone on it.

-saige-
edit on 31-8-2011 by saige45 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 10:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by saige45

Originally posted by NeoVain
 

Looks like a hoax video to me, especially since its so blatantly obvious that all the sites being pointed to as places to "verify that it is cw leonis and not nibiru" are either governemnt sites, governemnt funded, or government dependant. Does that not ring a bell to you? It is also rather lazily done, with far less data than in most nibiru videos, even some of the obvious hoaxes and disinfo attempts give more data than this. At least they are not as stupid as this one, pointing to government sites for "verification", which basically means they are in control of all this information For what reason you may wonder?


So are you saying [I'm paraphrasing, please correct me if I'm wrong] that the governments of the world have so much sway over millions of people (meaning scientists both amatuer and professional) that not a single one of them are telling the truth? That all governments do are bad things?

Good one. However, how many scientists do you know that do not depend on the governement for their livelihood? That are not employed by the government or a big corporation with close ties to the governement? Private people cannot AFFORD to do this kind of research. Consumer products simply cannot and i repeat, CANNOT see these things. Or maybe your friendly neigbour amateur astrophysict has a 50 billion dollar space based infrared telescope in their garage, ready to send up at any time?


You state the Nibiru video's provide data. Where? Is it verifiable data? As stated previously, I have not found one video and/or reference to anything related to Nibiru that is verifiable. I must take the posters word for it. It's not verifiable data, it is one persons observation and then reflection of their observation.

If you read what i just said above, you would understand that it is not verifiable by anybody. Those that would be able to verify it, depend on the government. However need data? How about check some links, start with this one docs.google.com...

I think you will find the data here is far more than you will find on something like CW Leonis, for example.



Whereas with the data that is presented above in those (government) lists is not only presented the same way in each and every one of those lists but also verifiable by millions of people. If a mistake is found, it is corrected and annotated as such. Which means that anyone (millions of students use these day in and day out to refute or validate the data as well), you or I, can go to the list, look up the data, grab our trusty telescope (or use a remote telescope), go to where the data says to look and viola. It's either there or it's not.

Ever used copy paste? Ever worked with it? Cause i know alot of people that do. Doesn´t it ever bother you that you know most government info is copy and paste?
Also do you really believe your trusty telescope would be able to see something that does not even emit light or barely reflect it, which is claimed to be only observable in IR ? Or maybe your trusty telescope is a IR one. Like IRIS.



I mean look I am typing on the internet, which I must point out, was created and funded originally by the government so therefore it must be evil and nothing on it should ever be believed, because after all the government controls the internet and everyone on it.

-saige-
edit on 31-8-2011 by saige45 because: (no reason given)

Did i ever say the government was evil? They have an interest in self-preservation though, and why would they release info about things that would surely lead to their demise? What do they have, if not the peoples trust and taxes?

If people knew they have been lying, keeping secrets for 50 years, they would loose their trustworthyness and respect. If people knew they where holding technology back out of economic interest(oil taxes, energy taxes, investmenst having to be paid off etc) they would be hanged out in the streets to dry in their necks.

And is it not true that even today they keep censoring lots of stuff on the internet, even having installed a "internet kill switch"?
They knew it wouldn´t come out on the channels they control (TV, papers)
But the internet?

They have fear of the people, if something like this got out, i mean really got out, they would have to shut us down. This explains why there is so much disinfo agents about, it´s cheaper than closing the internet. And they know it.
edit on 31-8-2011 by NeoVain because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 11:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by NeoVain
If you read what i just said above, you would understand that it is not verifiable by anybody. Those that would be able to verify it, depend on the government. However need data? How about check some links, start with this one docs.google.com...

I think you will find the data here is far more than you will find on something like CW Leonis, for example.
Actually I did read that one and ummmm. Yeah starting out by claiming there is no such thing as gravity.

I'm sorry, I understand a bit more about physics than that.

First of all, if everything is magnetically attracted, we all know that a larger magnet will attract with greater force than a smaller magnet. So with that line of reasoning (the Earth being a giant magnet and all) I should never be able to take a smaller magnet and attract anything away from the Earth. Earth bound objects are held in place by gravity. The Earth orbits around the Sun in a sideways, gravity, free-fall. The Earth is always falling towards the Sun but it's sideways motion keeps it in orbit. These are concepts defined by the basic laws of physics.

That being said, it is still not proof of the existence of Nibiru.

So here is the question:

Why is there no repeatable visible proof of the existence of Nibiru? Which is more probable.

A. There is a world-wide conspiracy hiding all the data that states the definitive existence of an object named Nibiru. The way that the conspiracy goes is that this object is being hidden from us not only by the non-existence of data except what has accidentally been leaked out but also by the government by way of chemtrails. People all over the world can see it (except that its supposed to be only visible from the Southern Hemisphere which is why the SPT [a telescope that does not take images of the visible light spectrum] was built) except on clear days. Some of the pictures presented represent a spherical object that seems to orbit around the Sun at an amazing speed (pictures taken at a time frame of 5 - 10 minutes apart) and at a 90 degree plane in relation to the Earth. But yet people can still see it (even though it is also said to be only visible in the infra-red spectrum). It is something that is hypothetically 6 times the size of Jupiter but somehow only magically seems to affect the Earth (even the Earth's moon is safe).

-or-

B. Nibiru does not exist. And everything else is just a paranoid thought process.

Why can't a telescope in Antartica be simply a telescope. Why is it so impossible to realize that everything reflects light. The only thing that does not truly reflect light is a black hole. It is theorized that this is because the gravity of the mass at the center (or the collapsed star) is so powerful as to not allow light to escape. Why is it so impossible to realize that what the human eye see's is far different from what our digital eye's can see. Since when is a photoshopped image (I'm sorry, photo-enhanced image) that is presented as proof of the existence of Nibiru not viewed as conspiracy, but a photo-enhanced image provided by NASA immediately alludes to conspiracy. Here's the difference though, while the Nibiru image is claimed as authentic and unaltered. NASA states up front that the image has been manipulated.

I guess only time will tell. As I have stated on a couple of occasions. No matter what your proposed end-date is, I'll be at the bar, living it up.

-saige-

-saige-
edit on 31-8-2011 by saige45 because: (no reason given)
edit on 31-8-2011 by saige45 because: (no reason given)
edit on 31-8-2011 by saige45 because: (no reason given)
edit on 1-9-2011 by saige45 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Actually I did read that one and ummmm. Yeah starting out by claiming there is no such thing as gravity.

I'm sorry, I understand a bit more about physics than that.

Come on, no one knows what gravity is, no one can explain it, and u know it. His theory is at least as plausible as anyone else i have seen, which are also unverifiable. That does not mean anything about the nibiru facts provided, in fact it enhances their probability to be true, under that theory.



That being said, it is still not proof of the existence of Nibiru.

So here is the question:

Why is there no repeatable visible proof of the existence of Nibiru? Which is more probable.

A. There is a world-wide conspiracy hiding all the data that states the definitive existence of an object named Nibiru. The way that the conspiracy goes is that this object is being hidden from us not only by the non-existence of data except what has accidentally been leaked out but also by the government by way of chemtrails. People all over the world can see it (except that its supposed to be only visible from the Southern Hemisphere which is why the SPT [a telescope that does not take images of the visible light spectrum] was built) except on clear days. Some of the pictures presented represent a spherical object that seems to orbit around the Sun at an amazing speed (pictures taken at a time frame of 5 - 10 minutes apart) and at a 90 degree plane in relation to the Earth. But yet people can still see it (even though it is also said to be only visible in the infra-red spectrum). It is something that is hypothetically 6 times the size of Jupiter but somehow only magically seems to affect the Earth (even the Earth's moon is safe).

-or-

B. Nibiru does not exist. And everything else is just a paranoid thought process.

Out of those 2 alternatives, id say alternative A is more probable, based on the current data. That is what bothers me. Thank you for you input, i hope for you continued support in debunking this.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 02:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by NeoVain
 

Come on, no one knows what gravity is, no one can explain it, and u know it. His theory is at least as plausible as anyone else i have seen, which are also unverifiable. That does not mean anything about the nibiru facts provided, in fact it enhances their probability to be true, under that theory.

Okay. Fine, I can agree with that. Gravity is still a theory (a widely supported theory, but a theory nonetheless).

Let us first start by declaring the basis of the theory you presented as a source.

Thesis: Everything in the universe is attracted via Magnetism.
Definition of Magnetism:

Magnetism is a property of materials that respond at an atomic or subatomic level to an applied magnetic field. Ferromagnetism is the strongest and most familiar type of magnetism. It is responsible for the behavior of permanent magnets, which produce their own persistent magnetic fields, as well as the materials that are attracted to them. However, all materials are influenced to a greater or lesser degree by the presence of a magnetic field. Some are attracted to a magnetic field (paramagnetism); others are repulsed by a magnetic field (diamagnetism); others have a much more complex relationship with an applied magnetic field. Substances that are negligibly affected by magnetic fields are known as non-magnetic substances. They include copper, aluminium, gases, and plastic.


Source

So by the definition of Magnetism we see that *all* materials are influenced to a greater or lesser degree by the presence of a magnetic field. We also know that if a magnetic field is applied to two objects of differentiating degrees of influence that the attraction (or repulsion) of said objects will manifest itself in a constant as defined by the degree of influence as applied from the magnetic field. In other words, a plastic spoon (which is negligibly affected by a magnetic field) will move at a constant rate towards the applied magnetic field based upon the degree of influence that said magnetic field has over it. At the same time, a iron bar, will exhibit the same behaviour based upon the degree of influence. With me so far. Simple expirement, take a rare-earth magnet, a plastic spoon, an iron bar and a rock from your back yard. Attempt to pick up the spoon, iron bar and rock with the magnet. Now attempt to pick up the spoon, iron bar and magnet with the rock from your backyard. Which ones were attracted?

Now using the same articles that you have at your disposal. Drop them on the ground and measure which one lands first? Did they all land at the same time?

The magnet does not affect the spoon but the spoon falls at the same rate and hits the ground at the same time as the magnet. How about the rock, was the rock able to attract the spoon? (Not that it would matter, but the rock and magnet both come from the earth.) Ok, so maybe since they are only a piece of the earth they have lost their magnetic attractiveness. How about the iron bar, we know that the magnet can attract a reaction from that, how about that rock of yours? No? Again, this is interesting. Ok so maybe since the magnet is a compressed form of rock and the rock is not so compressed, maybe we need to make the rock smaller, or better yet, lets split that magnet in half and repeat our expirement. I'll bet, you get the same results.

Undeniable proof of gravity? Perhaps, perhaps not. But enough proof that magnetism is not the primary source of attraction in the universe (or at least on Earth).

Originally posted by NeoVain
 

Out of those 2 alternatives, id say alternative A is more probable, based on the current data. That is what bothers me. Thank you for you input, i hope for you continued support in debunking this.

And you shall have my continued support.


-saige-
edit on 1-9-2011 by saige45 because: (no reason given)
edit on 1-9-2011 by saige45 because: (no reason given)
edit on 1-9-2011 by saige45 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 09:55 AM
link   
reply to post by NeoVain
 


I read something before, and a scientist called Morrison from NASA bluntly said there is no object out there.



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 10:15 AM
link   
Thank you for posting this. When you look at it like that its either, as you said, a VERY elaborate hoax or something interesting is indeed coming this way. I'll come back to S&F.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by NeoVain
 


I've never actually read this entire thing before and I still haven't. The first few pages alone prove that it is just another ELE-tard throwing out their two cents and repeating the same mistakes they all make. I'll skip the only gravity thing since that has been argued on more than enough threads. So, I'll start with page 2.

First off their claim about IRAS. They didn't leave it orbiting Earth. They had no means to return it to Earth. There are tons of deactivated satellites that orbit Earth until they are eventually pulled back down into Earth's atmosphere.

Second, they make it seem like shutting down WISE was some kind of conspiracy. It wasn't. It was launched in December 2009 and expected to have enough coolant for 10 months. Amazingly enough it ran out of coolant in October 2010, ten months later. Now, an IR scope cannot run without coolant because the heat from the scope itself will affect the images it produces. So, in October 2010 the WISE project was scheduled to be shut down. However, the Planetary Division of NASA gave the WISE teams some of their funding to keep the remaining instruments up and running to look for NEOs. The first month proved so successful that they received funding for an extra three months. So, not only did WISE run its scheduled mission it also ran for an extra four months.

Elenin's perigree was never revised to .0004 AU. At least not by NASA (who don't even determine these things) or the IAU or any other astronomic organization. It was revised by an ELE-tard using faulty math. Nothing on the NASA Buzz Room was vetted by NASA. As long as you used the Buzz Room hashtag it showed up on there.

The NASA emergency preparedness announcement has been discussed ad nauseum on here. This is not the first of its kind that has been given and makes perfect sense. When it was posted it was the start of hurricane/flood/tornado season and we had already seen a large number of tornadoes at the time. Furthermore, other companies do this as well, but nobody ever says they're expecting anything. I could also point out the double standards conspiracy theorists use in regards to this warning, but I'll skip that for now.

As for STEREO B, it wasn't turned, it was rolled. It was still maintaining its primary function of monitoring the Sun, but Elenin posed such a great opportunity to observe that NASA took it. Its rare to have a comet approach so closely to one of our satellites, so it just seems logical to take advantage of the opportunity.

Next we have them claiming that both NASA and SpaceObs show Nibiru in their banners. Now, when I look at these I see the objects he claims are Nibiru, yet they look nothing alike. One would think that since their both apparently warning against the same object they would at least have a slight resemblance. But this just shows one of the major problems with this theory it constantly changes so they can fit the "evidence" to their pre-drawn conclusion. Explain to me how both of these objects can be Nibiru when they don't look alike.

Okay now we move on to their claims about Nibiru. Let's start with the names they ascribe to it. Planet X was a term created by Percivall Lowell to explain the perturbations in the orbits of the gas giants. This was corrected with Voyager 2's fly-by or Uranus and Neptune making the need for Planet X disappear. Hercolobus is a completely different mythical planet created by a New Age author. In truth what he identified Hercolobus is actually Barnard's star which is almost 6 LY away. Nemesis is a hypothetical dwarf star used to explain a periodicity of mass extinctions. This periodicity does not actually exist, so the need for Nemesis has disappeared. Tyche is a hypothetical planet that is used to explain the orbits of long-period comets. It would exist 25,000 AU away and never come any closer.

Let's skip ahead to type. All of these objects would be quite visible, but at the same time are quite different. So, how can it be comparable to all of them when they are not comparable to each other. Furthermore, comparing it to a hot Jupiter shows this person has no knowledge of astronomy as hot Jupiters exist extremely close to their parent star (they also don't have other planets orbiting them). So if this has a lon-period orbit it is completely impossible for it to be a hot Jupiter.

I'm running out of characters so I will just point out that its inclination is different from Elenin's, but has the exact same perihelion and perigree. How?

This is only two pages of that report and I have used five thousand characters pointing out its faults. Do you really think the rest of it is any more accurate?



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by saige45

Originally posted by NeoVain
 

Come on, no one knows what gravity is, no one can explain it, and u know it. His theory is at least as plausible as anyone else i have seen, which are also unverifiable. That does not mean anything about the nibiru facts provided, in fact it enhances their probability to be true, under that theory.

Okay. Fine, I can agree with that. Gravity is still a theory (a widely supported theory, but a theory nonetheless).

Let us first start by declaring the basis of the theory you presented as a source.

Thesis: Everything in the universe is attracted via Magnetism.
Definition of Magnetism:

Magnetism is a property of materials that respond at an atomic or subatomic level to an applied magnetic field. Ferromagnetism is the strongest and most familiar type of magnetism. It is responsible for the behavior of permanent magnets, which produce their own persistent magnetic fields, as well as the materials that are attracted to them. However, all materials are influenced to a greater or lesser degree by the presence of a magnetic field. Some are attracted to a magnetic field (paramagnetism); others are repulsed by a magnetic field (diamagnetism); others have a much more complex relationship with an applied magnetic field. Substances that are negligibly affected by magnetic fields are known as non-magnetic substances. They include copper, aluminium, gases, and plastic.


Source

So by the definition of Magnetism we see that *all* materials are influenced to a greater or lesser degree by the presence of a magnetic field. We also know that if a magnetic field is applied to two objects of differentiating degrees of influence that the attraction (or repulsion) of said objects will manifest itself in a constant as defined by the degree of influence as applied from the magnetic field. In other words, a plastic spoon (which is negligibly affected by a magnetic field) will move at a constant rate towards the applied magnetic field based upon the degree of influence that said magnetic field has over it. At the same time, a iron bar, will exhibit the same behaviour based upon the degree of influence. With me so far. Simple expirement, take a rare-earth magnet, a plastic spoon, an iron bar and a rock from your back yard. Attempt to pick up the spoon, iron bar and rock with the magnet. Now attempt to pick up the spoon, iron bar and magnet with the rock from your backyard. Which ones were attracted?

Now using the same articles that you have at your disposal. Drop them on the ground and measure which one lands first? Did they all land at the same time?

The magnet does not affect the spoon but the spoon falls at the same rate and hits the ground at the same time as the magnet. How about the rock, was the rock able to attract the spoon? (Not that it would matter, but the rock and magnet both come from the earth.) Ok, so maybe since they are only a piece of the earth they have lost their magnetic attractiveness. How about the iron bar, we know that the magnet can attract a reaction from that, how about that rock of yours? No? Again, this is interesting. Ok so maybe since the magnet is a compressed form of rock and the rock is not so compressed, maybe we need to make the rock smaller, or better yet, lets split that magnet in half and repeat our expirement. I'll bet, you get the same results.

Undeniable proof of gravity? Perhaps, perhaps not. But enough proof that magnetism is not the primary source of attraction in the universe (or at least on Earth).

Originally posted by NeoVain
 

Out of those 2 alternatives, id say alternative A is more probable, based on the current data. That is what bothers me. Thank you for you input, i hope for you continued support in debunking this.

And you shall have my continued support.


-saige-
edit on 1-9-2011 by saige45 because: (no reason given)
edit on 1-9-2011 by saige45 because: (no reason given)
edit on 1-9-2011 by saige45 because: (no reason given)


I didn´t start this thread to discuss some other persons theory of magnetism, lets try to stay on track please. What is interesting about that document is not his theory of gravity, since we both know no one can explain gravity anyway, arguing about that amounts to nothing and distracts from the topic at hand. What is interesting is where he got all those other facts from. For example, lets look at and discuss the pioneer anomaly or the saturn tilt. These are both claimed to be results of influence by nibiru. Can we find other reasonable explanations?



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Monkeygod333
Thank you for posting this. When you look at it like that its either, as you said, a VERY elaborate hoax or something interesting is indeed coming this way. I'll come back to S&F.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



Thank you for seeing what i see.



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by NeoVain
 


I've never actually read this entire thing before and I still haven't. The first few pages alone prove that it is just another ELE-tard throwing out their two cents and repeating the same mistakes they all make. I'll skip the only gravity thing since that has been argued on more than enough threads. So, I'll start with page 2.


Well at least this first part clearly shows which side of the fence you are standing on. What you cannot deny however, is that this "ELE-tard" clearly have done his/her/their research, and know ALOT about both astronomy/math/space history and science. Alot more than the average joe, wouldn´t you say? And if so, why use this knowledge and skills to try to subvert the select few that actually bothers to read that entire document, into believing something that is a hoax? what would the point be exactly? There is clearly no monetary incentive, not even any personal recognition to be had since he seem pretty anonymous.

Why?

This "Why" would certainly be easier to answer if the entire document was NOT false, or even at least only parts of it, but was done by one of the "insiders" and later leaked in some way.

As for the rest of your info, i thank you for some further info into some of the matters, got sources as well? I wouldn´t say any of the info you supplied debunked anything though, but rather clarified some claims (if true). How about the saturn tilt and the pioneer anomaly, the venus scarring/push, etc. There are alot of sources for his claims in that document.





new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join