Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Nebula or Nibiru (May 28 2012)

page: 6
19
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 28 2012 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by Char-Lee
 


We know because even a single pass would cause havoc with the orbits of the known planets. Here is a good model of what would happen if Nibiru actually existed.



There are many mysteries about our solar system, I feel it would be just plain silly for us to believe we KNOW of any changes to the system in the very distant past where it had been effected by a large object.




posted on May, 28 2012 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by PlanetXisHERE
 



When it comes to science, as you are suggesting, the best way to learn is to have an open mind. And yes, as you suggest but many here seem to disagree with, we have much to learn.

After all, is hasn't even yet been 200 years since the industrial revolution - and we know it all now?

Science is advanced by examining anomalies, observations that don't fit into pre-existing theories, like the 188 day earthquake cycle - completely unable to be explained by what we previously knew of earthquakes or plate tectonics, but easily explained by the 188 day alignment with a new heavy mass object in our solar system.

The 188 day cycle was a failure as we all saw. It explained nothing. One of the biggest failures of course is that large quakes are NOT caused by gravitational influences of other bodies.


Not to mention all the other earth changes - here is a list of a multitude of recent sinkholes - about 3 standard deviations from what you would expect from normal, and the sinking of a Caribbean island:

Where were you when I created a thread asking why people thought sinkholes were related to events of 2012? They are not. Sinkholes are common. Been happening forever.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 02:29 PM
link   
reply to post by PlanetXisHERE
 



Please enlighten me as to why the 188 day theory is bunk.

There weren't major 7.0+ earthquakes close to 188 days apart?

7.0 + earthquakes are not rare?

A difference of 188 has mathematically changed?

The last prediction was for March 22nd, and there was the 7.9 as reported by many stations by downgraded by the minions the USGS on March 20th, I think that is a pretty close prediction when scientists have been saying for year earthquakes are impossible to predict, even though some foreshocks/quakes have predicted some earthquakes many foreshocks have preceded no activity and many large quakes had no foreshocks.

There was a thread on this and that thread showed that the quakes were not 188 days apart except for a short range. Later quakes did not occur as claimed. It failed.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 02:32 PM
link   
To All those that are afraid

I would just like to say, do you know what a 100 years is in the scheme of thousands? IF there were some hazard approaching either from our governments or space or nature itself, if it were a simple 50-100 years off your expectation it would not be in your life time.

Why not: get a couple weeks to a month food and water stored and then forget about it as far as fear goes.

I see people on TV families hiding in ugly bunkers, taking their kids from school to home school them and leaving the beautiful parts of life behind in case there is a catastrophe! Their children look scared and stressed. I say better a few good years then prolong life in misery for many more.

My Grand Mother lived through the great depression, while she was alive her whole life all we heard was the end was coming, being around her was being scared. Every problem in the government or the world and it was time...they stored food and waited for the end and died....not much fun! We all die, why not live while we are alive? They were living in fear right up to death!

Change happens, in my life we went from black and white TV to what you have now! Change can be a struggle and come from really heavy conflict, and YET change it is good much of the time in the end! Even the great earth changes have beget wonderful beauty.

If you are a believer in past societies having knowledge of change, then for there to be records they must have lived through it. The most reasonable supposition, is that huge changes were local to them and not as huge as we would think. We know meteors have hit this planet, but we live in a shooting gallery and this planet is still here! Look at how many times the moon has been hit, it is still there!

If you are a Christian, trust in your God to make things right...be prepared but don't rely on yourselves. or live in fear!

Those that listen to people who "channel' and otherwise claim superior knowledge. Please first be sure they have never been wrong, for if they were real they would NEVER be wrong. they would not need to revise and they would make no money from the information being passed on.

Personally I think if there are those who believe what they are saying and not just lying for fame or money, they may be fooled, like I was as a teen by the Ojia board, it gave me and my sister all kinds of prophecy about our futures, all were lies. This was an "entity" entirely believable, who told us when he died and how and when angry threw the board across the room. Was it real or an unknown operation of our own little understood minds? Either way it was all untrue and thank god we realized it quickly and did not base decisions on its prophecy.

We are all dying, we all should live while we are alive and make our families experience joy not fear!



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Char-Lee
 



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

Not stupid, but not possible. Celestial mechanics has shown that you cannot have a planet with a highly eccentric orbit that has a regular orbit. The problem is that there is a transfer of momentum as the planet swings by the Sun. That causes the orbit to be irregular.


Also we must keep in mind all the experts out there regularly caught by surprise when an object skims by our planet or sun and they were unaware that it was incoming.

There are small objects such as comets. No scientists are surprised to see a new comet. Smaller rocks whizzing by our planet is normal.


All those who get scared and all those who regularly yell Fear Mongering, make the information impossible to be shared since clearly the herd needs to be kept from stampeding!

That's false. If there were a planet sized object we'd detect it long before it came close. The reason people say don't worry about an incoming planet is simple - it isn't there.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 02:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Char-Lee
 



I think he is saying that a planet or a system with planets could be hidden BY a nebula (dust clouds) or hidden purposely by a deliberately concentrated false nebula.

So where is this nebula that is nearby and hiding stars? Where is it?



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Havick007
 




It may not always emit light but be reflective, similar to Jupiter but relatively closer.

But what if this object was between us and the sun? This object being much closer to the sun though.

What happens with the Moon comes between the Earth the sun?

All we see is dark black circle because there is no reflective light or emission from the Moon. So then if there were an object between us the Sun.. a big if, but still worth considering.

The object would appear as a dark circle near the sun, smaller relative to us due to the distance.

Good idea, but it doesn't work out. If the object were close to the Sun then it would orbit very quickly as does Mercury and we would detect it as it would reflect light as it went around the Sun as does Mercury. If it passed in front of the Sun we'd detect it. It's mass would affect the motion of Mercury and we'd detect it. You can't hide something next to the Sun.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 02:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Char-Lee
 



Yes that can happen, new things CAN be found. Take a look at 1998 WW31.Discovery date 18 November 1998

There are lots and lots of objects out. None of these being found are planet sized. The Kuiper belt has been surveyed. No planet sized objects. Several objects were out there like Sedna, but these are small compared to the Moon.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Char-Lee
 



In actuality scientists have used the name Planet X, Tyche and Nibiru while contemplating and looking for an unknown planet it should not be so scary to everyone

Scientists don't use Nibiru.

A scientist used Tyche to indicate a hypothetical planet based on a particular line of reasoning.

Planet X was based on a particular line of reasoning.

Scientists use the names in clear purposeful ways, not the general vague way used by some posters.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 02:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Char-Lee
 



There are many ancient societies that were able to predict the arrival of known comets, even though their passages were a long long time between. it is not impossible that an ancient society also is able to have a record of a larger object that does pass us and causes some problems like sea level rise and earthquakes.

Care to provide an example of an ancient society knowing that a particular comet was cyclical? I don't believe that is true.

On top of that NO ancient society saw an unknown planet pass by.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Char-Lee
 



Why would we KNOW any new planet would NEVER enter the orbits of known planets? There are long term bodies previously unknown surely they can come in any size. it could explain the rubble which may be destroyed planet or planets in our neighborhood.

Celestial mechanics makes it impossible for a planet to have a regular orbit that is highly eccentric.

What rubble are you talking about?



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Char-Lee
 



Remote yes not impossible as some say.

Scientists have clearly been honest with us by saying that it is a big place ...space... that they often do not see things even when they are close to us because they did not look at that tiny spot in the sky. It takes a long time to "see" everything and they will not, probably ever, be aware of everything even when objectst get close and are incoming, let alone things passing us by at fantastic speeds.

It's getting to be pretty much impossible for the Sun to have a brown dwarf companion.

Your claim about not looking at a tiny spot in the sky is wrong. Whole sky surveys are being done and have been done that would pick up objects regardless of where they are in the sky. The reason that objects are missed that are close is they they are tiny. A recent fly by was by an object 26m across. If an object is moving by fast it definitely gets seen. It leaves a long streak. Objects that are moving slowly are harder to pick out against the background stars.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 02:59 PM
link   


not that your an idiot...but I could be wrong...
reply to post by kerazeesicko
 


I think it should be written:
'not that YOU'RE an idiot...but I could be wrong...'
Just kind of thought that misspelling knocked your argument back down to the foundations of your credibility.

...but I could be wrong



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by bjarneorn
 



It was re-classified, because it does not follow the same orbital plane as the other planets in the solar system. It is therefore deduced, that there is other aspects that affect it's orbit, that it is only "partially" a part of this solarsystem.

Wrong. It was reclassified because it does not clear its orbit of other objects. Mercury does not lie in the same orbital plane either. Our Moon does not lie in the plane of the ecliptic either. Comets are often out of the ecliptic.


Didn't "Pluto" use to be planet X? If I recall correctly, and correct me if I'm wrong ... planet X comes from the early 20's, 30's when they only had some information about the outer planets, and were only starting to see them. Then when pluto on it's orbit, moved closer to the sun it was acknowledged ... at least, that is how I remember it.

Check out this history of the discovery of Pluto and how it was realized that Pluto was not large enough to the sought after planet X.
en.wikipedia.org...



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Char-Lee

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by Char-Lee
 


We know because even a single pass would cause havoc with the orbits of the known planets. Here is a good model of what would happen if Nibiru actually existed.




There are many mysteries about our solar system, I feel it would be just plain silly for us to believe we KNOW of any changes to the system in the very distant past where it had been effected by a large object.


But we DO know.

Try to understand, you can't just have a large body Earth sized and up, come cruising through our solar system and NOT have it affect planetary orbits. It WILL affect them.
If it's a large enough object (Jupiter sized and bigger), then not only will it drastically alter the orbits of our planets, it can fling them OUT of the solar system, or suck them in to itself.

The orbits of the planets are not like a rubber band. They don't get stretched to something else, only to snap back to their original orbits. Orbital Mechanics does not work that way.

If you are proposing that all the inner planets had eccentric orbits before, then along came Niburu and changed their orbits to what they are now, I can't argue that......BUT, and I HIGHLY STRESS THIS: that had to of happened BILLIONS of years ago, and not again since.

Why? Well, if it happened only 3,600 years ago, that's not enough time for life to have developed on Earth. 55,000 years ago is not enough time. The fossil history of our planet shows that life got started quite a long time ago.

There are some mysteries in our solar system, sure.

Orbital Mechanics is NOT one of them however.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 03:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Human_Alien

Is this a nebula or Nibiru?





I couldn't watch the video, and was about to just move on from this thread when I saw the pictures beneath it.

If the only choice is either nebula or Nibiru, then by default it MUST be a nebula, since there is no Nibiru. In this case, however, there is other criterion to identify it. It is most certainly a nebula, and to be precise a nebula of the class known as "planetary nebulae". I don't know precisely which one, and don't have the resources at the moment to search it out to identify it precisely, but it looks a lot like the Owl Nebula.

Planets are not "lumpy" like that once they reach a radius where hydrostatic equilibrium takes over. In other words, if it were a planet and more than about 450 miles in radius, it will be round or an oblate spheroid, not lumpy, chunky, and lopsided like the ball of gas in the photos.

Don't worry about this Nibiru. If it existed and were close enough and big enough to gravitationally interact with Earth by the 21 Dec deadline, you wouldn't need any kind of equipment at all to see it beyond your eyes. Jupiter isn't that big or close, and there there is no problem whatsoever seeing it with the naked eye. You just don't "hide" something that big and that close, as if it were accidentally left behind in Mars' closet.

.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Char-Lee
 



Yes that can happen, new things CAN be found. Take a look at 1998 WW31.Discovery date 18 November 1998

There are lots and lots of objects out. None of these being found are planet sized. The Kuiper belt has been surveyed. No planet sized objects. Several objects were out there like Sedna, but these are small compared to the Moon.

they are always finding new things and some with extreme orbits like Sedna, which is pretty bright but it was not found for a very long while..
They have found planets with no sun...
Scientists may have discovered planets without a solar system
www.scientificamerican.com...



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by PluPerfect
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


It's a rather simple answer...."Nibiru" is fiction.


We, the lay-person, who don't have the equipment or knowledge of the cosmos to decipher between a nebulae from a rogue planet


Even a lay-person can do the research, and find the differences......and, with the financial wherewithal, buy their own personal telescope, and take some classes at Univ. or local College on Astronomy....or, read up about it at the local library, for free. Alternatively, short of buying one's own (admittedly not a cheap hobby) telescope, one could seek out a local-area astronomy club of amateur enthusiasts, who might be willing to lend their own personal knowledge and experience to a lay-person, when asked.


And, the definition of a 'nebula". Most who have even the most vague understanding of the Cosmos don't need to look up the definition (because there is no similarity to a nebula and a "rogue" planet), but here's the definition anyway, for anyone else (I presume the definition of "planet" is not necessary?):

Types of Nebulae


Originally, the word "nebula" referred to almost any extended astronomical object (other than planets and comets). The etymological root of "nebula" means "cloud".


And skipping in the "Intro":


More strictly speaking, the word "nebula" should be reserved for gas and dust clouds and not for groups of stars.



Therefore, it is rather obvious that the term "nebula" can never be applied to a planet, of any sort......whether fictional (like "Nibiru") or real......

Space.com

I'd feel better IF Nibiru can only be described as a planetary body, as opposed to this cloud/nebula we are now entering- while other funky noodles get lathered in gravy...

Funky noodle me on the Pacific Coast, East of Japan 311.
Personally, this fluffy cloud/something real seems to me a more pressing issue in conjunction with radiation than Nibiru/Nemesis, ATM.

Thanks for interesting thread.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 03:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Char-Lee
 



In actuality scientists have used the name Planet X, Tyche and Nibiru while contemplating and looking for an unknown planet it should not be so scary to everyone

Scientists don't use Nibiru.

A scientist used Tyche to indicate a hypothetical planet based on a particular line of reasoning.

Planet X was based on a particular line of reasoning.

Scientists use the names in clear purposeful ways, not the general vague way used by some posters.


Actually I read a Harvard study by two scientists who did in fact use all three names. i will look for it.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Char-Lee
 



Remote yes not impossible as some say.

Scientists have clearly been honest with us by saying that it is a big place ...space... that they often do not see things even when they are close to us because they did not look at that tiny spot in the sky. It takes a long time to "see" everything and they will not, probably ever, be aware of everything even when objectst get close and are incoming, let alone things passing us by at fantastic speeds.

It's getting to be pretty much impossible for the Sun to have a brown dwarf companion.

Your claim about not looking at a tiny spot in the sky is wrong. Whole sky surveys are being done and have been done that would pick up objects regardless of where they are in the sky. The reason that objects are missed that are close is they they are tiny. A recent fly by was by an object 26m across. If an object is moving by fast it definitely gets seen. It leaves a long streak. Objects that are moving slowly are harder to pick out against the background stars.

Take a look at a list and dates of found new objects...they are still finding things and yes some near and some far from us.





new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join


Help ATS Recover with your Donation.
read more: Help ATS Recover With Your Contribution