Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Nebula or Nibiru (May 28 2012)

page: 17
19
<< 14  15  16    18  19 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 31 2012 @ 10:32 PM
link   
reply to post by MamaJ
 


I've got a wee personal philosphy for ATS that bears repeating:

If you've got sparkles, angels, or both in your avatar, there's a splenid chance you believe in a lot more nonsense than I do.

All that said, have a safe trip to Florida. For me, the Sunshine State is barely above Mexico on my wish list of places to visit. And Human_Alien is only a small part of that bias.




posted on May, 31 2012 @ 10:42 PM
link   
reply to post by ColAngus
 


LOL!!!
!!


If you've got sparkles, angels, or both in your avatar, there's a splenid chance you believe in a lot more nonsense than I do.


(AND....I know the word, meant there (^ ^ ^) was "splendid"......still, I "got it"!!

Perfect, and so funny....THANKS!! IT (^^^) is what makes ATS "Worth It"!!!!




posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 07:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcalibur254
 


I was aware of the 2090 date which is why I was saying Sitchin was not saying it was coming in 1000 years from now. I did not realize he had such a fuzzy return for his fictional planet which he claimed is every 3600 years.



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 07:17 AM
link   
reply to post by MamaJ
 



There is no proof.... Simple as that.

The ones who truly care need to get outta the house and live a little.

The ones who dont should care less to argue about opinions... I mean come on already!!!

And the ones on the fence without proof either way are the ones who have strong reasoning skills.

A little research always helps but even then you go off someones words whom you dont even know you can trust.

The Universe is filled with possibilites and anyone who denys this has his head buried deep in a sandbox!! But hey, who am I to judge. If it feels good, go with it!! Lol!!!

The ones on the fence are those that have little reasoning skills.

It is rather obvious from a number of positions that Nibiru is fiction.
1. archaeological evidence
2. geophysical evidence
3. astronomical evidence

To sit and do nothing is not reasoning. Reasoning requires an active mind.



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Char-Lee
 


Planets don't explode. The pieces could not reach escape velocity. As your link points out there isn't enough mass out there to form a planet.

Get a handle on some basics before chasing after lost causes.


I am just glad there are people out there who are incredibly well trained in science such as yourself and still have time to be on ATS all the time telling everyone the things they need to know.

Personally with all I have learned in life, I have thrown out the word IMPOSSIBLE I don't believe its should exist.



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by ColAngus
Gotta love the argument, "We just don't know! We can't prove Nibiru doesn't exist!"

Whatever. Can we prove there are no planets made of gummi bears? How do we know?!?!?

Some folks spent too much time as Dungeon Masters in their parents' basement growing up.



Come on they found a cloud of beer in space....who knows! More and more often as our tools grow, the best scientists are struck by awe of the "unbelievable" things they have found. Things they would have previously laughed at and said "impossible'!

researchnews.osu.edu...



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 01:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Char-Lee
 


Planets don't explode because they do not create energy through fusion or fission. It would take an incredible amount of energy for a planet to overcome its own gravity.

Impossible is a good word. There are lots of impossible ideas. It is impossible for people to suddenly grow wings and fly. It is impossible for a bucket of water to suddenly becomes a bucket of gold. Just because some things are impossible doesn't mean that very unlikely issues are impossible.



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 02:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Char-Lee
 


The cloud is not of beer which includes water, alcohol, and a number of complex carbohydrates. A number of complex molecules have been found in space including alcohols and water. Even more complex materials occur on comets. The question of course is what sorts of complex organic molecules do exist.



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Char-Lee
 


Planets don't explode because they do not create energy through fusion or fission. It would take an incredible amount of energy for a planet to overcome its own gravity.

Impossible is a good word. There are lots of impossible ideas. It is impossible for people to suddenly grow wings and fly. It is impossible for a bucket of water to suddenly becomes a bucket of gold. Just because some things are impossible doesn't mean that very unlikely issues are impossible.


I disagree wholeheartedly! I feel sorry for people who think they KNOW something cannot be. How scary life must be for them as we continue to find the "IMPOSSIBLE" is indeed possible!

Do you know how many science articles start like this, especially now in our time?

FOUR years ago, a particle accelerator in France detected six particles that should not exist (see Ghost in the atom). They are called tetraneutrons: four neutrons that are bound together in a way that defies the laws of physics.
"
www.newscientist.com...



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Char-Lee
 



I disagree wholeheartedly! I feel sorry for people who think they KNOW something cannot be. How scary life must be for them as we continue to find the "IMPOSSIBLE" is indeed possible!

Do you know how many science articles start like this, especially now in our time?

FOUR years ago, a particle accelerator in France detected six particles that should not exist (see Ghost in the atom). They are called tetraneutrons: four neutrons that are bound together in a way that defies the laws of physics.

You are confusing the improbable with the impossible.

You did not quote this part.

Of course, their finding could have been an accident: four neutrons might just have arrived in the same place at the same time by coincidence. But that's ridiculously improbable.

Not as improbable as tetraneutrons, some might say, because in the standard model of particle physics tetraneutrons simply can't exist.


Nor di you quote this part.

Established theory does allow the tetraneutron to exist - though only as a ridiculously short-lived particle. "

So the experiment is in dispute. An observation was made that was surprising. The question is what did happen.

What we do know is that the experiment was not replicated.
en.wikipedia.org...

The example you chose is not impossible, is improbable, and has not been confirmed.



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 02:51 PM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 

Do you understand the implications of the new particle science finds? Someday you may realize that everything is indeed possible.

Hum who would have thought it...


"Free-floating planets have been predicted to exist for quite some time and just last year, in May 2011, several orphan worlds were finally detected. But now, the latest research concludes there could be 100,000 times more free-floating planets in the Milky Way than stars.'

Read more: www.universetoday.com...


With estimates up to 100,000 nomad planets for every star in the galaxy, there could be literally quadrillions of wandering worlds out there, ranging in size from Pluto-sized to even larger than Jupiter.

Read more: www.universetoday.com...

“Theoretical calculations say that probably the lowest-mass nomad planet that can form by that process is something around the mass of Jupiter,”

Of course, without a sun of their own to supply heat and energy one might assume such worlds would be cold and inhospitable to life. But, as the researchers point out, that may not always be the case. A nomad planet’s internal heat could supply the necessary energy to fuel the emergence of life… or at least keep it going.

Read more: www.universetoday.com...



edit on 3-6-2012 by Char-Lee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Char-Lee
 

But a rogue (starless) planet, crashing through the solar system wouldn't exactly fit your description (or Sitchin's), would it?

The possibility of something that passes us on a regular route and perturbs our planetary system is not a stupid idea.

Nope, not even close. In fact it's the opposite.

From your source:

And by the way, these latest findings certainly do not lend any credence to the theory of a wandering planet named Nibiru.

www.universetoday.com...
edit on 6/3/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Char-Lee
 

But a rogue (starless) planet, crashing through the solar system wouldn't exactly fit your description (or Sitchin's), would it?

The possibility of something that passes us on a regular route and perturbs our planetary system is not a stupid idea.

Nope, not even close. In fact it's the opposite.

From your source:

And by the way, these latest findings certainly do not lend any credence to the theory of a wandering planet named Nibiru.

www.universetoday.com...
edit on 6/3/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)


I don't personally have a description of Sitchin's planet, and I have not read his work. I simply believe that the plausibility of a complete solar system or a single planet passing near us in a regular orbit is not an impossible supposition. In fact it could account for a lot of things the planet has experienced in the past.

I don't understand those who completely discount this possibility at this time. Beyond that I don't understand their need to try to make people with seeking minds feel stupid and constantly put... them... down along with their ideas.

Maybe some have left religions as we have learned more, maybe some are looking for answers and grabbing onto possible directions for their lost beliefs. Not everyone who has unconventional beliefs are idiots, and who knows which ones will be proven right in the future.

Why not explore the possibilities together instead of the head long rush to call people stupid and make them feel small... not meaning you personally.



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 03:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Char-Lee
 


The cloud is not of beer which includes water, alcohol, and a number of complex carbohydrates. A number of complex molecules have been found in space including alcohols and water. Even more complex materials occur on comets. The question of course is what sorts of complex organic molecules do exist.



Nit picking...



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 03:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Char-Lee
 





In fact it could account for a lot of things the planet has experienced in the past.


Such as...

Name one thing that science or physics as we know it could not possibly explain.

And if you say it has something to do with aliens, I swear to god...



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 03:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


"And by the way, these latest findings certainly do not lend any credence to the theory of a wandering planet named Nibiru.

And yet their article seems to do exactly that."

BTW... what do you have against the possibility of non earth entities? And/OR their possible former interactions with this planet and its early inhabitants? Clearly Mars and other planets are proving to have been quite different then once believed, are you still so sure there are NO aliens?
edit on 3-6-2012 by Char-Lee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Flowmaster05
reply to post by Char-Lee
 





In fact it could account for a lot of things the planet has experienced in the past.


Such as...

Name one thing that science or physics as we know it could not possibly explain.

And if you say it has something to do with aliens, I swear to god...


I am not sure what you mean. I did not say "things science or physics cannot explain", just as a passing system may also explain past disruptions of the planet. Personally I don't think science is dismissing this possibility as many here are doing.



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 03:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Char-Lee
 



Do you understand the implications of the new particle science finds? Someday you may realize that everything is indeed possible.

Step1 is to replicate the data. Has not been done.


"Free-floating planets have been predicted to exist for quite some time and just last year, in May 2011, several orphan worlds were finally detected. But now, the latest research concludes there could be 100,000 times more free-floating planets in the Milky Way than stars.'

I am well aware of that. Nibiru according to the fiction of Sitchin is not a rogue planet.


With estimates up to 100,000 nomad planets for every star in the galaxy, there could be literally quadrillions of wandering worlds out there, ranging in size from Pluto-sized to even larger than Jupiter.

Doesn't matter. According to Sitchin Nibiru is not a rogue planet.



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 03:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Char-Lee
 

No. It doesn't.

As far as a Nibiru-type wandering world in our solar system right now the answer is no. There is no evidence or scientific basis whatsoever for such a planet. If it was out there and heading towards Earth for a December 21, 2012 meetup, we would have seen it or its effects by now.
www.universetoday.com...


I don't personally have a description of Sitchin's planet, and I have not read his work. I simply believe that the plausibility of a complete solar system or a single planet passing near us in a regular orbit is not an impossible supposition.
Then why bring up nomad planets? They do not orbit anything.

edit on 6/3/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Char-Lee
 



I simply believe that the plausibility of a complete solar system or a single planet passing near us in a regular orbit is not an impossible supposition. In fact it could account for a lot of things the planet has experienced in the past.

Her you talk of a regular orbit and yet you put in a link to an article about rogue planets. You are all over the place on this one. Either it has a regular orbit or it doesn't.

What you miss is that celestial mechanics tells us that a regular orbit is not possible with a planet sized mass that swings by us and has a highly eccentric orbit. There is a transfer of momentum when passing the Sun that transfers energy and made the orbit irregular.


I don't understand those who completely discount this possibility at this time. Beyond that I don't understand their need to try to make people with seeking minds feel stupid and constantly put... them... down along with their ideas.

All I am trying to do is tell you why this can't be so. There is a transfer of momentum between the Sun and Earth that shifts the Earth 15cm a year away from the Sun. Our orbit is nearly circular. A great change happens as the orbit is more and more eccentric.


Not everyone who has unconventional beliefs are idiots, and who knows which ones will be proven right in the future.

Using your logic those things proven right in the future will be proven wrong again in a more distant future. Sorry, doesn't work like that. We do predict and do observe that the Moon recedes from the Earth and the Earth from the Sun.


Why not explore the possibilities together instead of the head long rush to call people stupid and make them feel small... not meaning you personally.

Why follow or explore things known to be dead ends? That makes no sense.





new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 14  15  16    18  19 >>

log in

join