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.
Originally posted by ngchunter
Originally posted by luxordelphi
reply to post by Phage
So yeah...mundane explanations would be the old physics and that would include Planet X.
A "Planet X" explanation is inconsistent with the data:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
There are mundane explanations that do not involve planet X nor are the issues necessarily related. For instance, the moon's eccentricity anomaly has been suggested to be caused by insufficiently understood and modeled internal dymanics of the moon itself.
Originally posted by luxordelphi
Originally posted by ngchunter
Originally posted by luxordelphi
reply to post by Phage
So yeah...mundane explanations would be the old physics and that would include Planet X.
A "Planet X" explanation is inconsistent with the data:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
There are mundane explanations that do not involve planet X nor are the issues necessarily related. For instance, the moon's eccentricity anomaly has been suggested to be caused by insufficiently understood and modeled internal dymanics of the moon itself.
I think I've covered this - see 'new physics.' Or are you referring to the hollow moon thing?
I'm not a fan myself but don't want to take anything away from your beliefs.
The moon used to be a dead planet so I'm guessing that would come under the 'new physics' as well.
Originally posted by dcmb1409
Finally, it is concluded that the extra-acceleration might be of cosmological origin,provided that the relative radial particle-body motion is accounted in addition to that due to the cosmological expansion only.
Originally posted by CherubBaby
reply to post by dcmb1409
So what does all that mean ?
I mean I thought I was hard to understand.
Is there maybe a translater available
I am sure I am the only one that is in need..
Thanks for the, What was that again?edit on 23-11-2011 by CherubBaby because: (no reason given)
Laskar's work showed that the Earth's orbit (as well as the orbits of all the inner planets) is chaotic and that an error as small as 15 metres in measuring the position of the Earth today would make it impossible to predict where the Earth would be in its orbit in just over 100 million years' time.
Originally posted by luxordelphi
It isn't 'new physics' if you're talking about the moon suddenly developing a liquid, molten or hollow core. I'd say that as far as truding on without hesitation: that would end at the point where the question of how did this happen was asked. How did the moon suddenly develop a liquid core?
Apollo astronauts may be garnering another prize from their exploits of more than 3 decades ago. They left seismometers across the face of the moon to probe its interior, but no one had been able to paint a clear picture from the data the sensors collected. Now, two independent groups have reanalyzed the Apollo data using modern but very different techniques, and both teams say they have detected lunar seismologists' prime target: a core of iron that is still molten 4.5 billion years after the moon's formation
You are just rehashing everything and putting things into words that sound less startling than mine. It isn't 'new physics' if you're talking about incorrect data. It isn't 'new physics' if you're talking about the moon suddenly developing a liquid, molten or hollow core.
Originally posted by luxordelphi
Coupled with the other anomalies previously discussed there are a lot of things to explain. Historically, Planet X has never been a scary proposition. When Uranus was discovered because it was looked for (the Planet X of that day) it wasn't frightening. Neptune's discovery didn't give anyone nightmares. Pluto was also looked for and discovered and no one hid under the bed. Now it's like this time honored tradition - looking for Planet X to explain orbital anomalies - has become a terrifying solution. It's nuts. Better to alter the speed of light then to look for Planet X - nuts!!
Originally posted by ColAngus
Originally posted by luxordelphi
Coupled with the other anomalies previously discussed there are a lot of things to explain. Historically, Planet X has never been a scary proposition. When Uranus was discovered because it was looked for (the Planet X of that day) it wasn't frightening. Neptune's discovery didn't give anyone nightmares. Pluto was also looked for and discovered and no one hid under the bed. Now it's like this time honored tradition - looking for Planet X to explain orbital anomalies - has become a terrifying solution. It's nuts. Better to alter the speed of light then to look for Planet X - nuts!!
It has to be scary because why else would they be chemtrailing to hide it?
Last one, I swear.
Originally posted by CherubBaby
So the answer is to keep dumping jet trails into the air and block our view to the sky so we can't witness any anomalies or changes in the obserevable sky.which leaves us to once again have to believe what they tell us as far as what is taking or not taking place in the heavens above...
Originally posted by CherubBaby
We can talk all day and night about tone and who said what and what proves who etc. Today at this time and at this point in history the fact that matters to me is no one has explained why the anomaly with the moon exists. Until it is explained absoloutely and positively and can be PROVEN, my opinions and beliefs are just as credible as anyone elses and vice versa. At this point, at best it is a DRAW. Anyone who says differently has an agenda that they need to push.