New Sign Of NIBIRU

Originally posted by FermiFlux
So lets take this nearest star that we can actually see, and say it moves at the speed of the fastest thing we've ever seen in the univers; 160,000mph.
It's roughly 70x4= 280 years to get here. THAT IS THE NEAREST STAR WE CAN SEE EVERYNIGHT WE LOOK UP.

So if there is a HUGE planet, supposedly 8x bigger than jupiter, meant to be entering in OUR solar system in less than 2 YEARS time, then we 100% would have seen it by now.

[edit on 5-7-2010 by FermiFlux]

Sorry but I have to point out that stars are alot brighter than planets.
The rest of your post is splendid though

For those that are new to this false claim of Nibiru there is the often stated claim of a telescope at the South Pole. Yes it is there, but it's a radio telescope, not an optical device.

here is something interesting......a planet 300 times farther from its host star than our earth is from our sun.......

www.sciencedaily.com...



to bad they dont tell us where they found this at.......

reply to post by JTpirate


That's the same thing that the OP mentioned.

Originally posted by xspinx
reply to post by virgom129

 

It is SUPPOSED to be huge, we do not know that yet. And i believe that the planet has a huge speed, which in a collision with Earth will be more devastating than a slow planet hitting Earth.

if Nibiru is going as fast as you think it is, then over the course of it's 3000+ year orbit it would leave the suns gravity and shoot off into space.

There is a basic misunderstanding in the solar system shown by many of the posts. The solar system has a number of objects from a sun, to planets, to comets and other smaller objects such as Eris and Pluto. All of these objects, and remember all, tug at each other with gravity. The motions seen in the planets are due to the gravitational effects between all of the parts of the solar system. If all of the other objects were removed from the solar system, then the earth's orbit would be slightly different. If Neptune were removed, then all of the planets would move slightly differently. If an asteroid were removed, then objects in the solar system would move slightly differently. The difference with the asteroid is that the differences would be so small that today's tools could not measure the difference.

A new planet is different. Add a new planet into the solar system and the motions of the planets would be measurably different. If there were an unknown planet that would occasionally swing into the orbits of the known planets, then its presence would have a measurable effect. The planets would not orbit as they do.

The movements of the planets tell us that no planet sized object can enter the orbits of the known planets.

Originally posted by FermiFlux
[Look, first it was said this planet would be here in 2007 and visible by 2003. Somehow the date was changed to 2012.

Some also said it would appear in 1998, 1999, 2000, 2003 and 2005....and someone here said it would be visible in 2009, and then changed it to 2010

I wonder what the next date will be, after 2012, lol

Originally posted by virgom129
Nice but what does this have to do with NIBIRU??

I'm now officially past the stage of considering NIBIRU/Planet X stuff...

If a huge star/planet was going to impact Earth in 2012 we would be seeing it by now and feeling it's effects...

um actually MSM has stated this year is an unusual year for high magnitude earthquakes and volcanic activity.

Originally posted by stereologist
For those that are new to this false claim of Nibiru there is the often stated claim of a telescope at the South Pole. Yes it is there, but it's a radio telescope, not an optical device.

LOL

Many astronomical objects are not only observable in visible light but also emit radiation at radio wavelengths. Besides observing energetic objects such as pulsars and quasars, radio telescopes are able to "image" most astronomical objects such as galaxies, nebulae, and even radio emissions from planets.

from Wikipedia on Radio Telescopes.

fail on your part!

Originally posted by dragnet53
LOL

Many astronomical objects are not only observable in visible light but also emit radiation at radio wavelengths. Besides observing energetic objects such as pulsars and quasars, radio telescopes are able to "image" most astronomical objects such as galaxies, nebulae, and even radio emissions from planets.

from Wikipedia on Radio Telescopes.

fail on your part!

That's great and all, but a rocky planet like mars or pluto at the edge of the solar system would be hard or even impossible to see with a radio telescope. It's not at all the ideal planet hunter, so why would they put one at the south pole if they were hunting for "Nibiru?" It makes no sense.

[edit on 6-7-2010 by ngchunter]

reply to post by dragnet53


Wow. You knew that too! That's good. Not please tell us how a radio telescope is set up to see the hoax you so adamantly support.

Notice everyone how dragnet53 did not provide a link to my post
Stereologist's Post
This was obviously done so that dragnet could lie about what I had posted.

For those that are new to this false claim of Nibiru there is the often stated claim of a telescope at the South Pole. Yes it is there, but it's a radio telescope, not an optical device.

I provided an informative post so that people would understand what is being discussed.

Sorry dragnet53, but you have failed - AGAIN!

The real issue is that any telescope in the southern hemisphere would long ago have seen an incoming planet. Yes, the entire southern hemisphere can see something headed at the South Pole.

Unknown planet - a whopping failure of a claim.

reply to post by stereologist


sure and ATS is a government front message board here to debunk anything that is not considered MSM. I am starting to believe other people's sayings on this. I noticed so many just stay in one thread all day long too.

reply to post by ngchunter


Actually the real threats ARE NOT listed publicly. You are merely provided the impression of transparency regarding these things, I am sorry to say.

reply to post by TheDebunkMachine


It is only your own personal assumptions and perceptions that judge me as using 'tactics'. You are respectfully entitled to your opinion. It does not affect the situation whatsover.

What 'human' can judge what is and is not physically impossible in a world of illusions and false perceptions. These things are not for all to 'see'. Not yet. Peace.


[edit on 7-7-2010 by benedict9]

reply to post by hippomchippo


I would never expect anybody to go on my word alone regarding this matter. Truth must be realised, not told. However there are messengers sharing what they feel is right to share in the interest of conditioning and spiritual preparation for the coming changes. And just to further clarify, it is a passage to occur, it will not crash into the Earth. It will not signify the 'end of the world' and there will be many remaining in the aftermath. Death is the greatest illusion of all. There is NOTHING to fear, but fear itself.

Many understandably do not actively seek out such related knowledge, and as I have stated, these are not comfortable truths for many to WANT to seek out. I accept this, as this is not a conversion, it is a revelation. Peace.



[edit on 7-7-2010 by benedict9]