Nibiru bah but..

Jesus was hung on the Cross. Meaning he was hung on the crossing of Nibiru or Wormwood.

It could mean there is a hidden planet crossing into our solar system.

Or it could mean the planet is crossing/dipping into a galactic plane where there is a-lot of space debris.

Either way something is heading our way, or we are heading towards it, or both.

Just my thoughts.


edited to add: Jesus may also be the sun, the constellations his disciples, and the cross which the sun is hung on maybe a point in which Nibiru/wormwood passes. Meaning the sun and wormwood cross close together, hence the Crossing and the Jesus related cross.

[edit on 30-4-2010 by Quickfix]

reply to post by Essan


call it whatever you want bucko

i'm just going by the name astronomy magazine, newsweek, and the new york times called it when it was first spotted
www.the-rabbits-hole.com...

reply to post by vermonster


Nothing has been spotted and Lucus over at the rabbits hole is a misrepresenting fraud.

Originally posted by stereologist
The claim was that "if Zecharia Sitchin is wrong about Nibiru, then why does NASA always go back to his work?"

That appears to be a large misrepresentation of the truth. NASA did not go back or even consider Sitchin. In fact it was Sitchin that curried favor from astronomers looking for a new planet in the solar system.

Harrington in the video dies in 1993 before it becomes apparent that his search and estimates of a new planet were based on measurement error.

There is no NASA connection. It was Sitchin looking for some sort of scientific support for ideas that are lame and do not match scientific principles.

You are spreading nonsense, or as you say disinfo, here.

Usage of gold in aerospace
Usage of gold in aerospace

According to Zecharia Sitchin, the principle that NASA uses to apply gold particles in components of the Shuttle and in the visor of the astronaut's helmet, was the same principle of the Anunnaki mining mission. Gold particles can protect against solar radiation. In large scale they even could be spread in the atmosphere of a planet, under the "greenhouse effect", to prevent the action of solar radiation.
NASA deny the existence of Nibiru, but ironically the technical used to spread gold particles in aerospace equipment, corroborates the statements of Zecharia Sitchin, about the mining mission of the Anunnaki, 450.000 years ago...

from a poster named Occy Annonymous

and I find that interesting that it could lead to helping out our atmosphere if it ever decides to collapse.

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by vermonster

 

Nothing has been spotted and Lucus over at the rabbits hole is a misrepresenting fraud.

Kind of like Mainstream Science for the past 50 years????

Originally posted by dragnet53

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by vermonster

 

Nothing has been spotted and Lucus over at the rabbits hole is a misrepresenting fraud.

Kind of like Mainstream Science for the past 50 years????

If you think mainstream science has done nothing for the past 50 years you should stop using that computer right now.

reply to post by dragnet53


Sitchin can make all the idiotic claims he wants. It doesn't mean that NASA is listened to a wacko. Gold has many interesting properties. That's why it is used, not because of some dolt who writes gibberish.

reply to post by dragnet53


No. Mainstream science does not cherry pick and misrepresent like that fraud Lucus.

reply to post by stereologist


Like the pot calling the kettle black.
Change your name to Generalogist.

mclinking

reply to post by mclinking


Do you have anything to say other than attack me? I didn't think so.

When you go to the rabbits hole you should think instead of taking that cesspool hook line and sinker. Check the claims. They fail time after time after time.

Originally posted by stereologist


When you go to the rabbits hole you should think instead of taking that cesspool hook line and sinker. Check the claims. They fail time after time after time.

got any proof to back that claim up mister I-show-up-on-every-nibiru-thread-to-bash-bash-bash-with-nothing-but-namecalling-and-NO-facts-and-I-registered-20-days-ago?

reply to post by vermonster


After you take remedial math consider some of these issues:

1. The Norway spiral was a failed rocket launch
2. No planet sized object can be within 320AU of the sun
3. Petroglyph spirals are not associated with death

reply to post by Quickfix



Or he was hung on a cross because that was the method the Romans used at the time.

Why are you guys attacking stereologist? Sure he comes off as arrogant, but he's asking and raising valid points. He is trying to prevent people from ingesting false claims at face value. I find that admirable to be honest. You can disagree with him all you want, but at the end of the day he is the one that is trying to show you all that these Nibru videos are nothing more than conmen preying on you for your wallet.

Seriously, beyond the Infared telescope find in 83 (which I don't know much about), has there been one solid piece of Nibru evidence? 1? All I have seen are the same guys making the same claims on different videos with nothing of substance. Only their interpretations of pinecones and spirals while they hold Sitchen in the highest of regards. I would love for there to be some truth within the dwarf star theory, but I don't see anything remotely close to solid. Sadly, I see free enterprise.

I think if there were any substance to the Nibru theory to begin with; the theory wouldn't have to constatly change month after month to suit the latest debunked claim. Haven't you all noticed that in 3 years it has changed more than 6 times? First it was an asteroid, then it was a planet, then it's where the Annunaki live............ Which is it? All I'm saying is that when a theory has a different flavor of the month, it tends to be as valuable as the paper it's written on. Things which hold truth tend to be unwaivering. They don't change rapidly to keep people intested. They don't have to.

[edit on 5-5-2010 by spinalremain]

reply to post by spinalremain


Thanks spinalremain. I apologize for being arrogant, but I do try to make my posts short and succinct.

The IRAS 1983 event is fairly simple. A satellite was launched to look around the heavens in the infrared. The atmosphere absorbs too much infrared to get a good view. Lots and lots of objects were recorded. Because this type of viewing was new it was not clear what the images represented. Were the objects close or far? The cataloged objects were studied. A few newspapers reported the work incorrectly. instead of reporting that the objects might be anything from a new planet in our solar system to a distant galaxy they reported a new planet. Who would have thought that a newspaper would make a mistake? Anyways the object in question turned out to be a new type of galaxy. Previously these galaxies had appeared as smudges on photographic plates.

The con men reporting on IRAS always seem to mention the mistaken newspaper account and not the published scientific study. Image that? They purposely lie to us - people like Lucus.

An interesting story about changing the dates comes from the tales of a guy named Miller.
Millerism - wikipedia
In short, Miller predicted the second coming in October 1844. It didn't happen. He predicted April, June, July of 1845. Nothing.

reply to post by stereologist


Thanks for the IRAS data.

Yeah I'm familiar with the Millerites and that's exactly my point. The red flag (BS meter or whatever you like to call it) has to be raised when you see an outlandish type theory change and change and change. That is the problem in itself you see. The ones making the claims cannot simply put forth a premise and stop there. They have to keep feeding you more info in proposed truths so that you have something to buy. Who wants to buy an empty idea? At the core of the phenomenon, they are expected to bring us more and more supposed research to keep the buyer interested. It's no different with Nibru exept that there are many many ppl selling their ideas and false truths. When one is scientifically debunked a new flavor of the month comes out. It's just so obvious that i cannot understand the faithful acceptance. Beause that's all it is at this point, faith.

Do any of you really think that NASA or any Power That Be, would tell us about a potential global catastrophy from an impending space event, if they had evidence of it?

The odds would appear rather slim, when considering everything else.

reply to post by shasta9600


You base this speculation on what?

Are you saying that all astronomers everywhere from professional to amateur are keeping this a secret?

And how do you compute the odds? What what is this vague "considering everything else" mean?

reply to post by shasta9600


I definitely don't think they would tell us, but the point is that you don't always need their disclosure to dismiss an issue. The fact that NASA or Gov. wouldn't tell us of the impending doom is not suffice to say that there is impending doom. There needs to be data or evidence to back it up. So far, there is none for Nibru.

I wouldn't alarm the public either if I were in their shoes. What's the point? All it will do is create anarchy. Morally, sure it's not quite right, but imagine if we all knew we were going to die? The SWHTF immediately! That wouldn't be pretty. We already have ppl here thinking that every pinecone reference anywhere is an esoteric pineal gland reference. That's scary enough. Sometimes a pinecone is a pinecone. Sometimes there are only 9 planets and 1 sun in a solar system. Sometimes the ancient's epic tales are just that; tales, fables and stories.

It sure does make for great reading, speculation and entertainment. I just find it disgusting that people profit from it while they sell it as fact. That David Wilcock guy actually states that there's a machine thatcan teleport you to Mars. And he received this info from a biker guy he met at Denny's lol. Could there be any less credible evidence.

[edit on 5-5-2010 by spinalremain]

[edit on 5-5-2010 by spinalremain]

When talking about the Norway Spiral, why does Lucas show pictures of concentric ring petroglyphs?? Does he not realize that a spiral is different from rings sharing a center? This is the type of stuff that shows that he is grasping for correlations. One has absolutely nothing to do with the other, but he slyly says "heres another spiral" then quickly moves to the next frame. If you think it's a spiral and have no time to look at it then I guess it's a spiral glyph huh? Remarkable