slight flaw in stichins theory

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by Enlil
X is not nonsense. It has been proven mathmatically. It exists, plain and simple, no room for debate.

Why? Because of the gravitational anomolies? But they don't have to be caused by a planet. And if it exists, where the heck is it?

No, because of Pluto's orbit. No one would have even started looking for it until it was determined that there is something outside of Pluto affecting its orbit. Keep in mind that Pluto was not discovered until 1930 (74 years ago) and we have not even sent a satellite there yet. Ref here for some info on Pluto. As stated, in order for Pluto to have the orbit that it does, it has been proven mathematically that there is another body affecting it.

As for where it is....in the sky of the southern hemisphere if I recall correctly. We know it exists, we are scanning the sky for it

Now, since we know it exists via mathmatical proof, how do we find it, what is it, and does it support life.

If its so far away that it can't be seen and is on such an eccentric orbit that its that far away then even if it does exist it simply can't rationally be thought to support life of any kind. Life need liquids, life needs chemical reactions, metabolism and other things to start off with and a hyper frozen immpossibly cold planet in deep space can't reasonably be supposed to have life. One could pretend that it has life, but any speculation in that area would be, well, pretending.

I agree. I don't feel that Nibiru supports life as we know it. Reference the link above for the temps on Pluto. Pretty damn cold.

How do we find it: Simply scan the sky where we expect it to be and wait.

Astronomers, professional and amateur, along with astrophysicists and cosmologists would be very interested in finding it, its been looked for, its never been found, it simply can't be said to exist.

It hasn't been found yet because it is so far out. We know it is there and we are looking. It will be seen eventually but it may take another 20 (est. on my part) years or so. BTW, it is on its way back towards us which increases our chances of finding it.

What is it: based on the last article I read, scientists think it is gaseous and smaller than Jupiter (if I recall correctly)

To be this hard to find it has to be dramatically smaller than jupiter, and probably so small that it can't be any kind of gasesous planet.

I may have been wrong about size and composition, Going from memory here.

In support of the above, I reference an article I read in the newpaper probably around '97. It stated what I just paraphrased above and that astronomers were looking for it. This was in a local paper with a large distribution BTW, not the Weekly World News

And since then not a single scrap of evidence or photograph has ever come up suggesting that there is another whole planet in the solar system. Sedna would probably be the closest thing.

Pluto was proven mathematically before it was actually seen. It was not seen until 1930. Why is it so hard to believe that another planet exists and it is taking us a while to spot it????

Now, as for Sitchin...that guy is onto something.

Why? I am moderately unfamiliar with his work, I have only heard some stuff, and all of it was lunacy, but I assume that thats because its not direct.

I highly recommend you read The Twelth Planet. It is a facinating read dealing with many ancient mythologies, religion, UFO theories, etc. It is not an easy read though as it outlines many ancient cultures and figures.

And if you're going to believe that a reptillian race exsists why would you ignore possibility of adaptability

The reptilian race theory sounds a little to much like the tv show V for me to beleive in it.

3600 years ago is 1600 bc, so it should've been noted. Plus, i think sitchin says the ancients knew about, so they''ve had to have seen it, but why can't any telescopes, including big ones like hubble, find it?

If you look at the records of 1600 bc you wont find very good records, half of what happened during that time we dont understand becuase it was prior to AD and recorded history was pretty hit or miss.

Interesting, but thats not quite how plate tectonics work.

Actually in a nut shell its a pretty good laymans description of how tectonics work. Granted im not factoring in continetal drifts, the lava which the plates float on, etc but stil in a nut shell tectonics is nothing more then the planet settling just like a pile of dirt in your front yard.

Why? I am moderately unfamiliar with his work, I have only heard some stuff, and all of it was lunacy, but I assume that thats because its not direct.

You say lunacy but think about what is the norm for modern day religions and beleifs, God rose his hands and there it all was, he then made adam and eve and they begat and so and so forth until we have modern day. Or you have the evolution theory which doesnt sound to far fetched to me but why do we not still see humans coming out of the woods?

Both theories have holes the size of mack trucks in them but both are concidered rational. However if a person suggests that perhaps an outside force influenced or introduced something that in the end created us its lunacy? I remember as a kid in middle school a teacher was discussing some indian beleifs in sun gods and thier practices of worship. At the same time several of my class mates where giggling and saying "how stupid could these indians be? there is now way there is any sun gods and these stories are so far fetched who would beleive them" In my head i was thinking these people giggling are also the same people who beleive in adam and eve and god creating the world in 7 days, to me that sounds pretty far fetched too. To me its even concievable that an asteroid carrying a viral infection or bacteria crashed here and modern life is the result of mutations caused by this infection. Either way you cut it a few million years ago so rapid mutations happened in a pretty short time and then slowed down to allmost a screaching halt, therfore something must have interviened be it atmosphere changes , new bacteria introduced, alien intervention, or a bored god.

Some call it evolution i call it mutation........


However back to the subject at hand the fact that a planet with such an orbit that has been suggested would be a chunk of nothing but ice for the majority of its existence therby making the devlopment of life litterally impossible. If one where to beleive in stichins theories one would have to question this fact. If stichin is even close to correct then planet X could not be the source of aliens nor any form of life. It is however concievable that life did exist on a planet that is now the asteroid belt , planet X then collided with it destroying the life on it breaking it up and send a chunk of it into another orbit which formed earth, or perhaps earth did exist and a chunk of that planet hit here bringing new bacteria or viral infection which influenced earths devlopment. However no matter how you look at it if stichins theory had any truth to it life would have to have been on the planet where the asteroid belt is not on planet X. Who knows , we can speculate and guess as much as we want i guess.........

Originally posted by minniescar
Ive been reading stichins work and a slight flaw in it has occurred to me. If planet X has such a long orbit and goes so far out away from the sun then it lacks a heat source for litterally a couple of thousand years. Any form of life on a planet with such an orbit would go beyond an ice age without the heat of the sun wouldnt it? Granted its concievable a form of life could go dormant in a sort of hibernation state and possibly survive but i would find it hard to beleive that any form of life would devlop in an atmosphere that has such a drastic change. When planet X approaches and leaves our orbit it would have a similiar enviroment. However once it decends out of our orbit it would grow colder and colder until it was completely frozen also it would be pitch black. It would be the equivilent of going from the desert to an iceberg. What am i missing or has no one questioned this?

i am unsure about this planet x thing , tho if you read the sitchen translations he claims that the beings visit us to mine gold for them for thermal protection

he claims that the beings visit us to mine gold for them for thermal protection

It appears that the planet X-ers are Cybermen! *ominous music here*

Originally posted by Youngin
Nygdan, hubble is owned by NASA as far as i know, and you can't seriously tell me that NASA are the most honest organisation on Earth.

the most? No. But you can't seriously be saying that every amateur and professional astronomer in the entire planet is part of a conspiracy either.

no i dont think so, use logic man, far out.

How was that babble logical? If nasa discovered another planet in our solar system they most certainly would announce it just like sedna was announced. And if this planet is so far away that it can't be seen that it must be a long ways off from hitting earth, so why wouldn't they announce that our great great grandchildren might have to worry about it? And if no one's ever been able to spot planet x, what makes you say its going to hit earth?

enlil:
No, because of Pluto's orbit

That would be the gravitational anomolies that i was talking about. it hasn't been proven mathematically that another -planet- is affecting its orbit and I don't think that very many professional astronomers think that it is a planet any more.

enlil
We know it exists, we are scanning the sky for it

Who is 'we'?

Why is it so hard to believe that another planet exists and it is taking us a while to spot it????

I was reading up on some of it, and it looks like the guy who eventually found pluto was taking photos of sections of the sky on different days and comparing them. I can see why it took a long time. But now computers can detect this sort of motion much more rapidly. The existence of a 'Planet X' isn't hard to beleive as a possibility, but so far the only evidence is the strange gravitational anamolies on the orbit of neptune and uranus, which may or may not be caused by an additional planet or some other set of celestial bodies.

take a look at this website

After the discovery of Pluto, it was quickly determined that Pluto was too small to account for the discrepancies in the orbits of the other planets. The search for Planet X continued but nothing was found. Nor is it likely that it ever will be: the discrepancies vanish if the mass of Neptune determined from the Voyager 2 encounter with Neptune is used. There is no tenth planet.

this site, however, leaves the option open;

The positional measurements do not bode too well for the existence of Planet X. They do not entirely rule out the existence of a Planet X, but they do indicate that it will not be a large body

more interesting than this is the below, from the same site as the first quote

The unusual nature of the orbits of Pluto and of Triton and the similarity of bulk properties between Pluto and Triton suggest some historical connection between them. It was once thought that Pluto may have once been a satellite of Neptune's, but this now seems unlikely. A more popular idea is that Triton, like Pluto, once moved in an independent orbit around the Sun and was later captured by Neptune.

But no mention of how long ago this was supposed to have occured.

The site also has a page devoted to Planet X and seems to have some on Nemesis that looked informative when I skimmed it.

minniescar
If you look at the records of 1600 bc you wont find very good records

An entire planet that passes by and has catastrophic effects on the world inhabitants tho?

Actually in a nut shell its a pretty good laymans description of how tectonics work. Granted im not factoring in continetal drifts,.

Contintental Drift is Plate Tectonics

tectonics is nothing more then the planet settling

Plate Tectonics is driven by current and ongoing processes and is quite a bit more than a 'settling down' of the planet. Slabs of plates are pulled and pushed and rifted and collide, they aren't moving because a large chunk of the planet was quickly pulled out.

You say lunacy but think about what is the norm for modern day religions and beleifs

Exactly, lunacy.

Or you have the evolution theory which doesnt sound to far fetched to me but why do we not still see humans coming out of the woods?

Why should humans be continually re-evolving? Evolutionary theory doesn't state that there should be.

Both theories have holes the size of mack trucks in them but both are concidered rational

Since when is biblical creationism rational? And what holes in Evolutionary Theory are you talking about?

if a person suggests that perhaps an outside force influenced or introduced something that in the end created us its lunacy?

I was just saying that the sort of stuff I've heard about sitchins ideas have been from second and third hand sources and sound like they've been made up with out any real evidence or investigation of possible evidences. Perhaps sitchin himself presents actual support for his ideas, but thats a different story.

so rapid mutations happened in a pretty short time and then slowed down to allmost a screaching halt,

I don't understand, why are you saying that this is the pattern of evolutionary change? I'm not aware of it being so.

However no matter how you look at it if stichins theory had any truth to it life would have to have been on the planet where the asteroid belt is not on planet X.

I definitely agree with you on that, a planet with an orbit so eccentric that its year is 3600 earth years, well, if it did have life, it'd be nothing at all like any life anyone has ever even speculated about. I mean, the stuff would have to be solid and have no chemical reactions to start off with. So it'd have to be a way station of sorts, and even then it'd extraordinarily inhospitable.

I've read a coupld of Zecheriah Sitchen's books, and have done a bit of research on him.

Here are my inputs, take them for what they're worth:

First, Sitchen is not a great Sumerian Scholar, although he says he is. He has an undergraduate degree in economic history (which isn't even a scientific discipline), and this whole Sumerian thing is a hobby of his that he's seemed to turn into a pretty comfortable living writing his books about. None of the real scholars of Sumer and Akkad linguistics (the guys who teach this stuff on the post-graduate level and write the dictionaries, etc.) consider him anything but a con-man, and he's never contributed to any of these Sumerian dictionaries or textbooks used by scholars around the world.

Here are some links to some serious Sumerian researchers:
linguistlist.org...
www.sumerian.org...
cdli.ucla.edu...
ragz-international.com...

Second, Sitchen takes a lot of his theories and assertions from earlier frauds, especially Immanuel Velikovsky. If you're familiar with Velikovsky, he was also a non-scientist (a psychoanalyst). Even the Velikovsky Archives, a definitely pro-Velikovsky site, as pretty much admitted most of his errors. Velikovsky's science (at least as passed through him by his readings, are simply wrong, as are Velikovsky's.

But for best results, you need to look at Michael Heiser's website:

www.sitchiniswrong.com...

Here's Heiser's background, by the way:

University of Wisconsin-Madison, Ph.D., Hebrew Bible and Ancient Semitic Languages dissertation title � "The Divine Council in Second Temple Jewish Literature"

University of Wisconsin-Madison, M.A., Hebrew and Semitic Studies, 1998

University of Pennsylvania, M.A., Ancient History (Israel, Egypt), 1992

I think if you review Heiser as well as some other real scholars, you'd probably change you rmind about Enki and all the rest of the guys, as well as poor Sitchin himself.


[edit on 16-9-2004 by Off_The_Street]

The slight flaw in Stichins theory is....STICHIN. I love his Egyptian Saturn V rockets....they're the best.

Originally posted by minniescar



even as a young child i beleived the asteroid belt was likely a planet at one point in time. On the same note i beleived thier was water on mars at some point in time if not still there , the canals and the geaographical terrain of mars is extremely similiar to earth and on earth these types of formations have been made by water. Combining this in my little young mind i began to wonder if the human race hadnt previously inhabited these places and we blew up the planet that is now the asteroid belt , then somehow managed to dry up mars then we made it to earth. And of course survival was the first thing we worked on and in doing so our previously learned technology was lost and we began anew. So the stichin theory kinda caught my attention.

Yes, the asteroid belt was a planet at one point in time .. The scriptures refer to it as 'Rahab" and it is believed by some that Lucifer was Native to the planet ....

imo, his civilization caused the planet to erupt from its core thru neglect the likes we are seeing here on Earth today.... Certain elect of that civilization escaped this 'wrath of the father' and probably inhabited Mars for a spell before making their way to Earth, where they created Cro-Magnon by combining their own DNA with the DNA of Neanderthal man. Perhaps they did this out of a fear of their species becoming extinct. I doubt we will ever know for sure.
This to me would explain our own technical advancements as well as 'suicidal tendencies' where earth is concerned.

" As the mother is so too shall the daughter be ..."
Or the modern day saying
"Like father, like son."

I recall not long ago a cult in S.D. led by a guy named applewhite committed suicide while under the notion that they would 'unite' with 'god' at the tail of halle bop ... This has always intrigued me simply because halle bop is a piece of planet rahab which was the native land of Lucifer and his 'renegade' band of elohim(god of genesis)...

These people who commited suicide seem to have been privy to things we are not so privy to?
The only real question to me where they are concerned would be.
did they unite with this god? heh
For some reason I highly doubt it ...

Your theory of lost technology is supported by the tribe of honey collectors whon even though they are a primitive people speak of a 'star' where their people once resided ... They claim that star collapsed and a select few escaped that destruction only to be stranded here on Earth.

I find both topics enticing and would note that the latter group is a race of black people while the band of Elohim that Lucifer once led was a blonde haired blue eyed aryan race, or so it is claimed ...


back on topic now, heh,
imo, Planet X is a fictional world created in the mind of Stichin to support his own theory. How anyone can take it seriously is well beyond my grasp , especially in light of the author of this threads observations..

Of course it is not completely out of the question that planet X if it were real could be supported by multiple Suns, is it?
If it were real then it seems that would have to be the case ....








[edit on 4-10-2004 by ShawNee922]

Originally posted by UnlmtdPotential
his theory having holes doesn't make it false

possibilities should be questioned and explored

And if you're going to believe that a reptillian race exsists why would you ignore possibility of adaptability

Those were my thoughts exactly.

NASA was created by third reich scientist hired by the USA ....?

The same were the people who supported Hitlers attempt to bring about a 'super race' of blonde haired blue eyed humans ... Were they not?

I would not find this sort of people 'morally' obligated to reveal anything they may or may not discover to the masses...

Their agenda would not be to enlighten anyone of us but rather to disinform you at every turn of the page ...

Also, Because Pluto is being affected in some fashion by something does not prove positive that this 'something' will ever ENTER our own solar system ... Does it?
This is not a claim but is a question for somebody who would know more on the subject than myself... I just cannot put much stock into a con-man who was merely out to make a dollar.....

Oh, one more thing, I find it hard to believe in this 'reptilian' theory but I must say that whenever I am observing people I could swear that many of them have 'reptilian' characteristics, heh

one example being the blinking of the eyelids ...

~peace

I also remember the reports of 'Planet X' in my earlier days.

If Stichens theory was 100% true however it wouldn't be a theory - it would be Stichen's Law or Discovery.

I am not bashing the credability of the theory though, just to clarify.

Well quantum theory says there are qualitys in the universe that newtonian physics fail to explain...thus traditional physics must be a theory as well since it's not %100 true. Just to clarify...what isn't a theory?

[edit on 4-10-2004 by Lucid Lunacy]

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
Well quantum theory says there are qualitys in the universe that newtonian physics fail to explain...thus traditional physics must be a theory as well since it's not %100 true. Just to clarify...what isn't a theory?

[edit on 4-10-2004 by Lucid Lunacy]

Oh man, you're right on that one, I should have added the '...In my opinon..." at the start of what I wrote.

But if something can be proven should it not be called a theory?

I'd just like to throw in another log on the fire of this heated issue.

Yes, it makes perfect sense that if the Anunnaki or Reptilians originated from Nibiru/Planet X/Marduk which is on a purported 3600 year eliptical orbit in this solar system, then they would presently be quite incapacitated as a race due to the extremely cold temperatures.

The more likely scenario is that the general timeframe of when the Anunnaki-Reptilians ventured here hundreds of thousands of years ago to eventually tamper with the DNA of the native hominids, that Planet X was close by and they may have used the time it was relatively near our Sun (and habitable) for exploring it and to use it as a stopping point for Terran landings. They actually came from the fourth planet in the Zeta 2 Reticuli System.

"Tell the stupid Homo sapiens that we came from Nibiru and don't mention our true home base."

It's like when Betty Hill asked a Grey while being abducted to explain a star map that she saw onboard the alien ship and to show where Earth is in relation to their home world. The alien refused to divulge its location.

I see no reason why the Anunnaki would have been totally truthful with the early Homo sapien tribes. Especially since they were telling that information to people who they initially used as slaves to work their mines.

You have to consider the kind of spiritually retarded nature of anyone who uses slave labor in the first place.

This is in synch with the understanding of many Ufologists and governmental insiders (like Bob Lazar and Sgt. Clifford Stone): that the home world of the Greys, Reptilians and Preying Mantis' is currently (and has been all along) Zeta IV or Zeta-Prime in the Zeta 2 Reticuli System.



[edit on 4-10-2004 by Paul_Richard]

For what it's worth

Stichens works / theory is as good as Jules Vernes or L Ron Hubbards,

among many other authors

and to me It don't matter beans if he's 100% proof-positive accurate.
cause he sets your brain & mind to thinking about all the what-ifs etc

**one post noted that Stitchen is a self-proclaimed authority on sumerian antiquity and such
--> in the same vein --> Albert Einstein was merely a patent clerk but he came up with with the Relativity & Special Relativity models that give us understanding of our place in this cosmos,,,

Originally posted by Ezekial

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
Well quantum theory says there are qualitys in the universe that newtonian physics fail to explain...thus traditional physics must be a theory as well since it's not %100 true. Just to clarify...what isn't a theory?

[edit on 4-10-2004 by Lucid Lunacy]

Oh man, you're right on that one, I should have added the '...In my opinon..." at the start of what I wrote.

But if something can be proven should it not be called a theory?

Well quite simply I would argue that we havn't proven anything yet I base this of course on the tight restriction of the definition itself. Now I believe science is effective because it mirrors our oberservations more accurately then other methods. It's effecitve when you tell yourself , temporily, it's proven. At the point in our intellectual evolution where we actually have a proven science I don't think your question will even be of relevance...nor will we have a word for it ...in my opinon

The highly eccentric orbit of such a hypothetical planet does not pose a fatal flaw in Sitchin's theory. The Annunaki are supposed to possess a highly developed technology that they have shared with human beings and would have built thermally insulated cities on their planet to protect themselves from its extreme cold.

HOLD ON.....My Little thinker freinds, dont get your brain in a not!!!!!
First of all, if the "Reptilians" were from another planet do you think they would have the same biological make-up of a lizard..NO

Second the word "Reptilian" comes from an expressed description from a witness .If its not from this earth the first thing someone would do is try to make a descriptive connection between it and something that we would be familiar with. You surly cant say that just because it might look like a lizard it must lay eggs or has no body tempature.
\
Third...dont be ingnorant and say that there is a whole in a science or scientific theory unless you have studied it in its entirety. Rather than speculating from a box lets try thinking outside the box for a minute. If the Annunaki were flying around the galaxy 500k years ago then is it possable that there technology is able to sustain life on that p;anet regardless of the elipticle orbit. Maybe they were advanced enough before the elipticle orbit to know about the collision that would knock it off of orbit and they were able to create underground or a inerplanet enviorment that would protect them. Heres another one, If they are multidemensional who says tempature affects them at all. So before you judge a mans life work trying opening your mind and see that not everything is limited by our self inflicted boundries.......example "o its cold they couldnt live"
WOW you have to be kidding...I dont even think someone that makes that statement could even read any of Sitchins work.
Please open you minds...not everything is what it seems

Sitchinswrong website is garbage.He addresses almost nothingand cherry picks what he will argue. Sitchin created an entire following of curious thinkers and that guy wants to bit off of Sitchins crowd. I have no respect for someone who will use Sitchin as a stepping stone. If you are a scientist make your claim, but dont base everything you have off of just trying to oppose someone elses theories and use there name to get your theories out. I also see that in the world we live in the truth is always hidden and ridiculed so the more anti sitchin websites pop up the more I know they are afraid of us knowing the truth......
THERE ISNT MUCH TIME TRUTH SEEKERS........SALVATION THROUGH KNOWLEDGE

IF THIS NIBIRU PLANET IS REAL IT WOULD OF SHOWED UP 3600 YEARS(SUPPOSED PLANET ORBIT) AGO RIGHT???? THEN WHY IS THERE NO ACCOUNT IN HISTORY FOR ANY PLANET COMING CLOSE TO EARTH OR ANYTHING DOOMING HAPPENING AROUND 1588 BC WHICH IS LAST TIME THE PLANET WOULD HAVE PASSED BY EARTH.....PEOPLE SHOULD DO THERE RESEARCH ON THERE OWN PLANETS HISTORY BEFORE THEY ACCEPT SOMEONE CLAIMS