Science News..........."If Planet X exists........."

a reply to: Melbourne_Militia

There are also theories it may be our suns binary twin that never ignited.


Imagine that? igniting another star that far out....it could make some of the outer planets habitable.......

Hmm.. I wonder how that would effect our ecosystem..

a reply to: Bedlam

I didn't fall for the nibiru theory I actually don't believe it myself. You can spare me on what the archeologists think, because I already know. What they don't know is if some previous advanced civilization existed in the very distant past. Think about it, how many cities could be at the bottom of our oceans? But anyways all I was trying to get across is that if your gonna tell someone Nibiru doesn't exist, then you should relay why. Not just say this is stupid and doesn't exist. If everyone just accepted what people say is fact. Then science would be a joke. Hell, scientists, astronomers, etc. prove themselves wrong all the time. Now to address you're question, I work in a technical field. Pretty bold statement to say people in certain fields aren't intelligent.

originally posted by: amicktd
You can spare me on what the archeologists think, because I already know. What they don't know is if some previous advanced civilization existed in the very distant past. Think about it, how many cities could be at the bottom of our oceans?

If they are there, there wasn't any connection to the period when we had written history. And there still wouldn't be any tales of Nibiru coming through a few million years ago. So either way, Sitchin is wrong.

There are many things out there that can only be viewed in Infrared. There is a very interesting object that exists that can be viewed on Google Sky, in infrared.

I am on my iPhone now, but I'll try to locate the thread that I posted the coordinates for it in. Anyone have issues with scrolling down a quote in a thread when posting on a cell?

Anyway, I'll find them. Otherwise I have them saved on Google Earth. Others have focused on it. It's larger than anything on Google Sky within that vicinity. ~$heopleNation

originally posted by: SheopleNation
There are many things out there that can only be viewed in Infrared. There is a very interesting object that exists that can be viewed on Google Sky, in infrared.

It can be viewed with my telescope too. In infrared.
h.dropcanvas.com...

I am on my iPhone now, but I'll try to locate the thread that I posted the coordinates for it in.

Here, let me help you out.
09h 47m 57.406s +13° 16′ 43.56″
Tell me, what does this have to do with "planet X" exactly?

originally posted by: SheopleNation
There are many things out there that can only be viewed in Infrared. There is a very interesting object that exists that can be viewed on Google Sky, in infrared.

While this is true, only things that are far from our sun can "only" be seen from earth with infrared.

Anything planet-sized-or-larger object relatively close to the Sun (say as far as the known planets in the solar system) would reflect visible light from the Sun, and would be able to be seen with a visible light telescope, or with our naked eyes if large enough and/or close enough.

a reply to: ngchunter

Like I said, give me the opportunity to provide the links tomorrow cause on the phone it's much more difficult. Can't get on my PC until tomorrow.

It has everything to do with what possibly exists out there, you certainly do not decide what should be included in the discussion, or what does not.

This is a free forum, and you do not dictate anything towards its members. As far as your condescending fake offer to help, I respectively decline cause I never asked for it.

I own a very nice telescope, but I wonder if you in fact do cause not every object is illuminated by Sun Light at certain times, and at other times never. ~$heopleNation

a reply to: Box of Rain

Wrong, at certain times many objects could be blocked out of view by orbiting Planets and Moons. Also, what direction a possible object could be in relation to planet Earth also plays its part.

I know assuming that we have all the answers feels and sounds real good, but there is no straight line within our Solar System. Objects can come from every direction, under or from side to side and in every direction possible.

Some minds have trouble comprehending the reality of that fact, so it's nothing personal. ~$heopleNation

It's a safe assumption undiscovered minor planets like Sedna exist. I assume "Planet X" means something far larger. There is no real reason a major planet, even something on the order of a brown dwarf, could not be lurking far beyond what we can detect. It is clear that the solar system is surrounded by a halo of icy bodies, but beyond that is simply the unknown. Being part of the solar system requires only that an object be bound by the Sun's gravity, and a very far away planet could be one that was drifting by and got locked into an orbit, perhaps an orphan, or one that was stripped away from a passing star. We're not real sure at what point the solar system ends and interstellar space begins.

originally posted by: SheopleNation

I own a very nice telescope, but I wonder if you in fact do cause not every object is illuminated by Sun Light at certain times, and at other times never. ~$heopleNation

Not at night, of course.

Gas giants close to a star are the easiest to detect. The sample is biased by what we are currently able to find. a reply to: amicktd

WHAAAAAAAAAAAAT? a reply to: JimNasium

If we are surrounded by a Dyson sphere, how can we see the rest of the universe? You do know a Dyson sphere encloses the host star, don't you? And wouldn't it be rather chilly to live on, being so far out? a reply to: Melbourne_Militia

a reply to: Cloudbuster

Impossible. Without sunlight there's no chance humanoid species would develop.

a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

My answer out of topic? Only on first sight.

Planet X exists. And I believe that on the moon there is evidence of its existence, just like there is evidence of the existence of our creators and all the knowledge they have left us. (If they had left it on earth it would long be gone or fallen in the wrong hands.)
And of all people -and so many others- Elon Musk must know that, otherwise I must conclude that the man himself is from another world. One sentence in an interview with him took my attention: ‘Mars is only 150 times further than the moon’. That makes me think that for him going to the moon is peanuts. So why didn’t NASA, the biggest customer of Musk eliminated the manned moon landings for so long. Because of their small budget? No. Because the moon is a place to avoid. If not, NASA’s budget would have been sky high for more than forty years . Interview with Musk: aeon.co...

From www.evawaseerst.be...
There are many people that have achieved exceptional goals. Most of them have put all their life to perform one great achievement. But there are some we admire -without putting them on a pedestal- for the many different gifts they seem to have whereby they put the whole world in motion. How they are doing that? An enigma to us almost as great as that about the moon (we exaggerate).
Elon Musk is gifted in many ways, multifunctional, brave, hard for himself and for his workforce, emotional sometimes, a billionaire, but most important he seems to have a genuine humble personality. And for sure, he's a man. Although we are stubborn in our concept that women -generally spoken- are superior to men in some way (you have to read our site to comprehend).
Elon Musk is a superman. He knows the future lies in space. He knows we have to colonize space. But about our moon he doesn't talk much. Why not? We don't know, but we know his greatest client is NASA and NASA doesn't like the moon to be colonized. To Elon Musk (and NASA) our moon is just good enough to create a moon base, by doing so we can explore Mars and space in general. According to him (and to NASA with a little reservation) we must soon colonize Mars. In fact, that's what we conclude when we read many interviews with the man.
You become a mystery to us mister Musk if we read that you apparently don't see the need to colonize the moon, not even just a little bit. Believe us or not but all problems about lunar habitats could be solved according to many scholars and then we even don't mention the moon tunnels.
And when you said Mars is only 150 times further then our moon -every two years Earth and Mars reach their closest point- we even thought for a second that with your Tesla racing car you must have lost contact with the idea of distance.
ONLY 150 times? Is that your way of saying that reaching the moon must be -what all insiders probably know- just a piece of cake?
No further comment.

a reply to: SheopleNation

I know assuming that we have all the answers feels and sounds real good, but there is no straight line within our Solar System. Objects can come from every direction, under or from side to side and in every direction possible.

And every possible direction you just mentioned one could draw a straight line on a 3d map.

So how are there no straight lines within our Solar system?

And Why is Box of Rain wrong?

They certainly are correct because light reflects of everything except theoretical black holes, so if something was heading our way and was inside our system depending on how close and how large the object is you could see it with your naked eye.

a reply to: Parthin

It's not biased. It's based on what has been discovered so far. As someone already pointed out the ones further from the sun are harder to detect, because of a many different reasons. So yes, they are more likely to find more planets in general close to their star. Which is probably why they have detected more Jovian planets in the "hot zone" than the "cold zone". But, based on all the currently detected planets in our galaxy were the odd balls so far.

originally posted by: SheopleNation
a reply to: ngchunter

Like I said, give me the opportunity to provide the links tomorrow cause on the phone it's much more difficult. Can't get on my PC until tomorrow.

It has everything to do with what possibly exists out there, you certainly do not decide what should be included in the discussion, or what does not.

This is a free forum, and you do not dictate anything towards its members. As far as your condescending fake offer to help, I respectively decline cause I never asked for it.

It wasn't a fake offer to help, I gave you the coordinates of the most common "object" from Google sky's infrared layer that people fixate on, the very same object in your avatar. It's CW Leonis, a carbon star many light years away in the constellation Leo.
rationalwiki.org...
I don't recall saying anything about solar illumination, so if you could please quote specifically where I talked about that and what it is exactly you're responding to I would appreciate that.

I own a very nice telescope, but I wonder if you in fact do cause not every object is illuminated by Sun Light at certain times, and at other times never. ~$heopleNation

Oh so now I'm lying about owning a very nice telescope myself as well? I guess you realize you're pretty well cornered if I can show that I can image that object on Google sky's infrared layer you have there in your avatar; by showing that it doesn't display a detectable amount of parallax over months to my telescope I can show that it isn't in our solar system and has nothing to do with "planet X." I don't need to "dictate the discussion" in order to prove it's completely unrelated to the discussion and off-topic. The facts speak for themselves, and yes it's a fact that I have a very nice telescope. Here's me with my very nice telescope last weekend at Chiefland Astronomy Village:

Here's one of the photos I took at Chiefland Astronomy Village last weekend:

Lots more of my astrophotography can be found on the astrophotography thread:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
So yes, I do have a very nice telescope, and I DID capture an image of the same object in your avatar, an object people fixate on in the infrared layer of google sky, CW Leonis.

a reply to: Bedlam

I don't disagree with you on that as I have already stated.

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
This subtitle gave me a laugh given how many on here vowed that Planet X did not exist.

Obviously not conclusive proof, but some now think it is possible. Of course the most astute and successful non-conformist scientists have never made pronouncements with absolutes, as what we know and what we think we know in science changes almost daily.

Are we being prepped for some other announcement?

Could an unseen planet, a Planet X, be holding the orbits of all these far-out bodies in place?

“The idea’s not crazy,” says David Jewitt, a planetary scientist at the University of California, Los Angeles. “But I think the evidence is slim.” The trail of bread crumbs leading to an undiscovered planet is sparse: just 12 chunks of ice lead the way. But it’s enough to get some researchers wondering about a ninth (or 10th, depending on your attitude regarding Pluto) planet roaming the outer solar system and how it might have arrived there.

A distant Planet may lurk far beyond Neptune

So we've gone from an idea that was considered crazy to a chance that is slim. Interesting. Maybe I won't have to change my name afterall...........

This is not really what you want it to be. The study looked at about TWELVE objects who have irregularities in their orbits. Of those, ALL BUT TWO OR THREE can *probably be explained by Neptune." So of the THOUSANDS of objects we know of and can calculate orbits for...a whopping two or three may have at some point in time experienced forces of which we are completely unaware, leaving them in strange orbits. Either that or it is for some reason more logical to believe that in spite of THOUSANDS OF YEARS of observations there are yet "one or even two" large planets beyond Pluto that we do not know about. Sorry, but logic says there is no "Planet X." Niburu ain't coming, guys...