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.

 

Nebula or Nibiru (May 28 2012)

page: 8
19
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 28 2012 @ 08:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by PluPerfect
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


This is also completely wrong:


No one knows jack squat about astronomy.



I'd suggest taking some time to actually study the science of Astronomy, and get involved in order to better comprehend it.



Guaranteed that in 100 years, science will have had it all wrong.




posted on May, 28 2012 @ 08:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


Quantum physics has no bearing on celestial mechanics. Quantum mechanics, as the name implies, pertains to the quantum level. This is otherwise known as the subatomic level. Everything above this level, including celestial mechanics, still adheres to Newtonian physics.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by PluPerfect
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


This is not scientifically accurate.....such a "belief" is factually incorrect:


....... believe it a rogue star like (I believe) Jupiter actually is.
.......... It's a planet and a star. Just like (I believe) Jupiter is.


Jupiter is most certainly not a star!

And, there is no such thing as a "rogue star" within our Galaxy, another galaxy, or other group of stars. The sole (astronomy) definition of a "rogue star" is when a star happens to exit a galaxy or other star cluster and "go it alone" in inter-galactic space. Based on our (the Earth's, and Solar System's) current location within our "Milky Way" Galaxy, any such "rogue" that may or may not exist outside the Galaxy would be hundreds, if not thousands of light-years away, at minimum.....certainly would be no influence on Earth in my, or your, or anyone else alive today lifetimes!

Back to Jupiter.....by no stretch of any definition can it be considered a "star". Any first-level Astronomy student could affirm this fact.....heck, even a grade-school science class curriculum worth its salt will as well.

There is a well-defined minimum mass required to define the smallest of stars....this can be easily researched, by utilizing an Internet connection, a computer and a keyboard, and an Internet Search Engine utility, such as 'Google' or 'Bing', etc..........




Whatever.

They once thought all planets needed a star until they found orphan planets.

Believe what you want and get stuck in your ideologies. This is how NOT to progress.

Jupiter is closer to a star than a planet. The only thing we use to define a planet is its orbit around a star.
There are star system where they DO orbit around one another. Pleiades comes to mind.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 08:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Char-Lee
 



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

1. Sedna is not planet sized and it does not enter the orbit of the known planets
2. Planets without suns have been ejected from their systems - one mechanism is a system with more than 3 objects and 1 has a highly eccentric orbit



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 08:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Char-Lee
 



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

If this study exists you will see that the real scientists do not use the names interchangeably.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 08:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Char-Lee
 



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.

The objects are small. Larger objects such as Pluto or Sedna or Eris are small compared top our Moon and quite a ways off.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 08:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Char-Lee
 



Sedna's exceptionally long and elongated orbit, taking approximately 11,400 years to complete, and distant point of closest approach to the Sun, at 76 AU, have led to much speculation as to its origin.
en.wikipedia.org...
We find new things and then we change what we believe is possible as we have to add this new information.
I find it very odd when people use the word "impossible" after all we have seen become possible.

Again, listen to the qualification.
1. Sedna is not close to planet sized - it is a small fraction of our Moon.
2. Sedna does not enter the orbits of the known planets

Of course the unusual orbit of Sedna is of interest. But it does not violate anything I stated.

Not sure what you're missing here.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 08:58 PM
link   
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.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 08:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 




There are star system where they DO orbit around one another. Pleiades comes to mind.

How would you know that? Who told you, an astronomer or a quantum physicist?

Do you reject science only on an as needed basis?



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 09:07 PM
link   
reply to post by LoveisanArt
 



I find it very interesting and amazing what this guy is finding and figuring out.. debunkers are debunkers.. always will be rational small mind people trying to understand the universe and everything in it with a judgmental point of view.. thats fine.

There are the gullible that grasp onto every nitwit tale no matter how ridiculous and say quite incorrectly they are being open minded. No they are being close minded. They are rejecting evidence that makes the wacko story what it is.


Hiding rogue in Nebulas is pretty genious.. but what would the occupants of this space-vessel be hiding from (presuming you have an open mind that is) ??

That's the silliest thing I've heard in a while.


If its humans and Earth they hiding from that is very strange to even think about; humans are dumb, have no-great technology, not even an advantage when it coems to space technology.. The collective human mind is very ignorant and blind.. so why hide ?? If it would be these beings who have manipulated the beings of planet Earth for eons.. its pretty pathetic and weak to hide around in the cosmos playing cat and mouse against our un-developed technology.. Maybe its something on Earth that they can not conform too ? THe enviroment is too alien to them, they cant be here for long, also the Sun could be a threat to their health... so many wonders, so many ideas... I hate being in the dark about the truth.. time will tell i suppose

The tell tale lines of a close mind. Instead of admitting personal lack of knowledge in something people pretend that others do not know as well. Humans are smart and have been smart for a long time. They built pyramids and roads and sailed across oceans with basic methods. Today we image distant celestial objects and let people across the globe pretend it is a nearby planet.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 09:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 



You're right but that's due to all the rumors and confusion the past several decades.
Planet X is the modern name for the ancient planet called Nibiru.
But it's believe it a rogue star like (I believe) Jupiter actually is.
So it sounds like its a bit of both. It's a planet and a star. Just like (I believe) Jupiter is.

Obviously no one knows but on the other hand, sure seems a lot of people 'know' it's not out there though. Interesting paradox, huh?

Planet X is NOT to be confused with Nibiru. Nibiru is a name Sitchin gave to a planet with impossible properties. Jupiter is not a rogue star. It is too small. You might believe Jupiter is a star in some fairy tale version of the universe, but not in the one we live in.

We know Planet X doe snot exist due to the Voyager flyby of Neptune in 1987. We know Nibiru is not real since Sitchin gave it impossible properties. These 2 instances of nonexistence have no bearing on other possible objects far out in the solar system.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 09:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 



No one knows jack squat about astronomy. Science only THINKS they do! Just ask a quantum physicist!

You realize that makes no sense at all. Science knows a lot about many subjects such as celestial mechanics. What I hear is that you don't know much. You state that in your posts and then suggest no else does. That is a bad inference.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 09:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 



Guaranteed that in 100 years, science will have had it all wrong.

Care to give us an example of science getting it all wrong?



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 09:26 PM
link   
So when is supposed to hit now?



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 09:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 



They once thought all planets needed a star until they found orphan planets.

Again very very wrong.

It is well known that objects can be captured and ejected from systems of objects bound by gravity. of course these objects exist. We used this method to send 4 spaceships out of the solar system.


Believe what you want and get stuck in your ideologies. This is how NOT to progress.

When people argue falsehoods instead of learning how things actually work they get mired in the doldrums of a closed mind.


Jupiter is closer to a star than a planet. The only thing we use to define a planet is its orbit around a star.
There are star system where they DO orbit around one another. Pleiades comes to mind.

There are lots of star clusters. Checked out M-13 again the other night. As stunning as I remember it. Jupiter is quite small compared to a star. It is more of a planet than a star. It would require some 60x its current mass to become a weenie star. At 13x it might squeak over into the realm of a puny brown dwarf. it is not a star or star like.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 09:29 PM
link   
There is film of a meeting of top freemasons and one looks just like Sitchen. He covers his face when he realizes the camera is on him. My point is that this whole Nibiru thing could have been all myth and fable planted in the public consciousness for some reason to manipulate. It's a very far-fetched myth and no real archeologist believes it, just Sitchen (who is now deceased, I believe). Could have been a big lie in advance of Project Blue Beam. It's possible.

Mayans say the world is not going to end in 2012. Ask a Mayan.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 09:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Human_Alien
 



Guaranteed that in 100 years, science will have had it all wrong.

Care to give us an example of science getting it all wrong?


Yes. Gravity is now suspected to be much faster than the speed of light. Just one example. There are many other examples on this website:

metaresearch.org...

And in fact the first paragraph completely contradicts many of your statements that our scientists and astronomers have everything under control:

"Something has gone wrong in the field of astronomy. Many widely held beliefs fly in the face of observational evidence. Theories go through such contortions to resolve inconsistencies that the ideas can no longer be explained in simple language. Alternative ideas are often rejected out of hand simply because they challenge the status quo. The result... many of today's theories are unnecessarily complex."

And this is coming from actual scientists who are recognized in the field of astronomy, not opinions of anonymous posters who for all we know could be overzealous 15 yr olds.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 09:55 PM
link   
i jus wanna say i did watch the hole video unlike most and i will say danny puts up a very intriguing argument on wutevr is out in space that does seem to be being covered wether it "nibriu","giant spaceship"ect, ect, very compelling stuff.S&F



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 10:02 PM
link   
Jupiter is a gas giant, a type of planet, and due to it's size and mass, it is much more related to a planet than a star. It would take many, many Jupiter sized masses to achieve critical mass in order to start and maintain fusion.

Planet X was a name given by Percival Lowell as a designation for a theoretical planet existing beyond Neptune. He would have LAUGHED at the idea of Niburu if he were alive today. The name itself has no more significance than the name "John Doe" or "Jane Doe" that we use for unidentified people.

Saying that astronomers do not know "squat" about astronomy is an attack by you, on people that ARE very informed on this subject, because:

a) You don't understand it yourself, so you attack it.
b) You are not hearing what you want to hear, so you attack it.

Progress is made through the Scientific Method. Not through Mysticism, Cultism, and Flights Of Fancy. Deal with it.

Quantum Mechanics is NOT Celestial Mechanics.

You can believe whatever you want, but that does not make it true, make it factual, or real.

If believing these things make you feel special, well that's just sad. Knowledge is power, but incorrect knowledge is just fallacy.



posted on May, 28 2012 @ 10:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by PlanetXisHERE

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Human_Alien
 



Guaranteed that in 100 years, science will have had it all wrong.

Care to give us an example of science getting it all wrong?


Yes. Gravity is now suspected to be much faster than the speed of light. Just one example. There are many other examples on this website:

metaresearch.org...

And in fact the first paragraph completely contradicts many of your statements that our scientists and astronomers have everything under control:

"Something has gone wrong in the field of astronomy. Many widely held beliefs fly in the face of observational evidence. Theories go through such contortions to resolve inconsistencies that the ideas can no longer be explained in simple language. Alternative ideas are often rejected out of hand simply because they challenge the status quo. The result... many of today's theories are unnecessarily complex."

And this is coming from actual scientists who are recognized in the field of astronomy, not opinions of anonymous posters who for all we know could be overzealous 15 yr olds.



You keep quoting Metaresearch.org,

You do realize that they are only theoretical ideas, and ONLY that listed on that site, don't you?

Quoting something from them does not prove established things wrong. It only shows that there may (or may not) be an alternate theory. So using it as your bible is not going to help you very much. Most of the things listed there are highly theoretical, some to the point that they can't even be proven.



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join