Interesting planetary alignment on Dec 21, 2012

reply to post by KhufuKeplerTriangle


The Rattlesnake Prophecy is a modern hoax. It is not old. Relying on the internet as a source leaves one open to finding all sorts of silly stories. There are many hoaxes floating on the internet.

Little of what was stated had any truth to it.
1. Venus does not form that shape
2. Quakes are not caused by alignments
3. Fast physical pole changes have not happened
4. Magnetic changes do cause extinctions

The last great alignment was 5-5-00. That event was one of the major claims of disaster for 2000. About all people recall today is the computer issue. The hoaxes surrounding the 5, 5, double naught day were similar to the 2012 hoaxes. It was all doom and gloom and it was all nonsense. It was such utter nonsense that few recall it ever being suggested. The same will likely be true a few years after 2012 passes. By 2020 there will be some other just as ridiculous claim and the 2012 claims will be rotting in the garbage pile of historical nonsense.

Originally posted by InhaleExhale

Originally posted by KhufuKeplerTriangle

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by KhufuKeplerTriangle

 

The Moon often passes in front of the Earth. So what?

Could this cause quakes when an object passes in front of the Sun? That can be tested and has. Quakes are not caused by such events.

And of course, anything that does affect the magnetic poles or the physical poles will cause catastrophic and sudden climate change, nothing like the "CO2" nonsense going on.

No evidence for that. First, no sudden change in the physical poles has ever happened. Magnetic reverals are not correlated with extinctions.

That is because, of all the planets in the sky, only Venus has a path that forms a near perfect pentacle or star around the sun. That's why you see that symbol sometimes with a star around the sun cross circle.

Venus forms no such path. The path in the sky appears to be a small parabola like arch.

BTW have you heard of the Cherokee Rattlesnake prophecies?

Can you provide a source. All I have ever found were hoaxes promoting this claim. As far as I can tell the rattlesnake prophecy is a modern invention. I haven't been able to locate anything showing it to be otherwise.

Your dissection and breakup of my post did very little to improve it.
I don't need to defend my ideas in a thread already rife with supposition.
Please google the rattlesnake prophecies yourself.

"Venus has a path that forms a near perfect pentacle or star around the sun."

I think you have misinterpreted some info about Venus's orbit. I assume you mean orbit when you say path.

How is it even remotely possible unless Venus is a giant spaceship that can change directions how can it possible make a the shape of a pentagram on its path around the sun?

I know what he means. You see Venus orbits the sun 8 times for every 5 earth years. If you were to look down at the solar system over the course of time you would see that Venus and earth pass each other at 5 equally spaced points around the sun forming a pentagon and tracing a pentagram.

reply to post by IndieA

I know what he means. You see Venus orbits the sun 8 times for every 5 earth years. If you were to look down at the solar system over the course of time you would see that Venus and earth pass each other at 5 equally spaced points around the sun forming a pentagon and tracing a pentagram.

Although this is essentially correct it really is rather meaningless in terms of the solar system or life on Earth. It is a construction which looks pretty, and at best is a reminder that the orbits of the Earth and Venus are in a 5 to 8 ratio.

The notion that there is a geometrical pattern or basis for the structure of the universe goes back to at least Kepler. He tried to construct a pattern using Platonic solids and polygons. His idea never worked, because it did not reflect the structure of the universe or how it works.
en.wikipedia.org...

Still today we see geometric constructions based on issues that are not relevant to the way in which our universe operates. Despite Newton having worked out the basis for gravity and a mathematical description of the manner in which objects affect each other there is still a fringe element that harks back to an older idea that there is an underlying geometric pattern to the universe such as pentagons.

reply to post by IndieA


There were just 3 different [significant] alignments in the last 2 weeks. Planetary alignments are mostly mysterious because we don't understand gravity, almost at all. Only that it exists and we have a function to describe its basic and constant exertion on other objects of mass.

There's a possibility of wave/resonance with gravitational fields, which may apply to alignments.

Originally posted by InhaleExhale

Originally posted by Blarneystoner
Man....

All the guessing and false information in this thread is making my head hurt.

The ONLY significant solar event that actually occurs on Dec. 21st, 2012 is the transit of Venus across the face of the sun.

That's it!! Period!

edit on 16-10-2012 by Blarneystoner because: (no reason given)

All the false info in just this one post makes my head hurt.

Venus Transit was in June 2012.

Yes it was June.

And Yes the pentagram and pentacle reference Venus, OMFG stupeeeeeeeeeeeeeeszzzzzzzzzzzz XD

Just so YOU UNDERSTAND CLEARLY, shapes like pentacles don't occur in nature.
Venus performs what is called a PRECESSING PENTAGRAM.
However, it's used to mathematically describe in a fixed image what Venus actually does, which is a lot more complicated. The actual path as seen from Earth resembles a Golden Flower with only 5 petals.

en.wikipedia.org...:Venus_pentagram.png



See for yourself.



and stop calling people stupid only >>>>>I

reply to post by Soloro

There were just 3 different [significant] alignments in the last 2 weeks. Planetary alignments are mostly mysterious because we don't understand gravity, almost at all. Only that it exists and we have a function to describe its basic and constant exertion on other objects of mass.

There's a possibility of wave/resonance with gravitational fields, which may apply to alignments.

Gravity is well understood. It's effects are predicted with great accuracy.

There is no wave/resonance with gravitational fields. If alignments caused any such thing then it would be easily detected today.

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Soloro

 

There were just 3 different [significant] alignments in the last 2 weeks. Planetary alignments are mostly mysterious because we don't understand gravity, almost at all. Only that it exists and we have a function to describe its basic and constant exertion on other objects of mass.

There's a possibility of wave/resonance with gravitational fields, which may apply to alignments.

Gravity is well understood. It's effects are predicted with great accuracy.

There is no wave/resonance with gravitational fields. If alignments caused any such thing then it would be easily detected today.

There is no wave/resonance with gravitational fields?

Then what was LIGO built for?

Laser Interferometor Gravitational-Wave Observatory




...and while we know a great deal about gravity and are able to predict the effects with accuracy, it's far from being "well understood."

reply to post by Blarneystoner

There is no wave/resonance with gravitational fields?

Then what was LIGO built for?

Misrepresenting what others post is a typical problem.

LIGO was built to look for gravity waves. They have never been detected. They certainly do not occur from alignments. Some theories predict that gravity should be wave like.

From the website you referenced:

When large masses move suddenly, some of this space-time curvature ripples outward, spreading in much the way ripples do the surface of an agitated pond. Imagine two neutron stars orbiting each other. A neutron star is the burned-out core often left behind after a star explodes. It is an incredibly dense object that can carry as much mass as a star like our sun, in a sphere only a few miles wide. When two such dense objects orbit each other, space-time is stirred by their motion, and gravitational energy ripples throughout the universe.

Nothing in our solar system is large enough or changing direction fast enough to create the situations that can be detected.

Notice clearly that there is no discussion of resonances. The statement was not waves, but rather wave/resonances.

Alignments have nothing to do with gravity waves. Waves are created by accelerating masses, not aligning masses. There is no greater than the sum of the forces effect. There is no resonance.

Let's look at the original post to see where this began.

There's a possibility of wave/resonance with gravitational fields, which may apply to alignments.

Clearly, this is wrong. The LIGO site does not discuss alignments. It does not discuss resonances.

reply to post by stereologist


I don't agree with your statements on gravity waves and such being undetectable.
Gravity Weapons from as early as WWII:

www.signallake.com...

Einstein’s Antigravity
By Tim Ventura, January 1st, 2005
with revision by John Dering

Part 1. Nick Cook’s Mysterious Discovery
During the course of researching his best-selling book, “The Hunt for Zero Point”, Nick
Cook stumbled upon World War II era evidence for a secret Nazi Weapon that came to be
known as the “Nazi Bell” device. This device was constructed by a scientific team reporting
to SS General Hans Kammler under a veil of secrecy even deeper than that of the Nazi
nuclear research.

While Cook’s research yielded little
information about the specific design or
application of the Nazi Bell device, his
sources indicated that it apparently was able
create a variety of startling effects on nearby
objects. It has been speculated that the Bell
device was designed to use high-speed
counter-rotating components filled with
specialized materials and energized by
electromagnetic energy to induce “torsion”
effects and thus control gravity and other
significant effects.

John Dering, a physicist specializing advanced directed energy, nonlinear electrodynamics
and new energy sources has further reported on a “Rhine Valley” facility and device. He
believes this to have been an actual wartime prototype deployment of a successor to the
Nazi Bell experiments, which were carried out in the Wenceslas Mine research lab in
occupied Poland. While the Bell experiment was focused on developing a radical new
propulsion technology, the little-known Rhine Valley experiment may have been a last-ditch
attempt to weaponize the Bell’s dangerous side effect for use against Allied forces.

Dering speculates that the German WW-II research was
intended to create a powerful propulsion effect by engineering
application of Einstein’s Unified Field Theory (UFT)
equations. Within the 1929 version of the Einstein UFT
equations a linkage is found between the “vector magnetic
potential” and Torsion. Put simply, in the Unified Field
Theory the effects of curved space-time (resulting from a
massive body, like the earth) can locally offset by creating
Torsion. Thus electromagnetic interactions are harnessed to
induce torsion, which in turn can then null out gravitation.

You wanna call it disinfo just because it has the word "NAZI" in it?

THE HUTCHISON EFFECT ( I studied this and concluded WTC could have fallen this way, except we know that there WAS heat at the site ), electromagnetic sublimation

www.signallake.com...

Part III. An Accidental Replication?

The connection between the Nazi Bell & Rhine Valley experiments and the Allied
Philadelphia Experiment of World War II may quite possibly come from a very unexpected
source – a Canadian inventor by the name of John Hutchison.

Hutchison is a rather unique character – he collects and tinkers
with a variety of electronic gadgets at a small apartment that
he’s converted into a laboratory in Vancouver, BC. In addition
to a collection of Tesla Coils and Van De Graaf generators, he
also has several RF-amplifiers and an assortment of surplus
Naval electronics equipment that he’s purchased from auctions
at the nearby shipyards.

What makes Hutchison unique is that
he has an eye for putting things together, and has been able to
produce some rather spectacular effects simply through
adjusting his equipment correctly.

So the above post states clearly, average idiots aren't cut out for gravity science any more than the average buffoon could handle working a missile silo. It takes a sensitive mind, and one open to the idea of change (in resonance too!).

PLEASE READ:

Experimental Evidence
A number of experiments have demonstrated antigravity effects.
The most notable of these, because of it's rigor and level of detail, is the Roschin & Godin device [1], itself a modified version of the Searl SEG machine [2].
It consists of sets of rapidly rotating magnets that have shown to significantly reduce the weight of the whole apparatus.
The self rotating magnets have to be slowed down to prevent a runaway situation occurring which would cause the device to fly into the air were it not for the fact that the centrifugal forces would damage the device.
Also, electromagnetic and temperature anomalies have been observed when the device is in operation.

Another example of rotating magnetic fields producing anti-gravitational effects is the Hamel device [3]. It consists of two counter rotating wheels of magnets stacked three levels high.

www.esotericscience.com... last bit from there

is this what will happen?

reply to post by KhufuKeplerTriangle


The fact is that gravity waves have never ever been detected. LIGO has not detected gravity waves and is the most sensitive detector to date.

So now the evidence relies on a fringe author with questionable material. Why build a number of detectors if gravity waves have already been detected?

gravity.wikia.com...

Although gravitational radiation has not yet been directly detected, it has been indirectly shown to exist. This was the basis for the 1993 Nobel Prize in Physics, awarded for measurements of the Hulse-Taylor binary system.

You might want to read down a ways to the part on gravitational wave detectors.

The Hutchinson Effect you refer to does not exist. The experiments have never worked when other unbiased observers take a look. Others have also claimed this as their own including the nucleonic effect. The 9/11 crowd has also grabbed onto this nonsense to explain their daft ideas.

So the above post states clearly, average idiots aren't cut out for gravity science any more than the average buffoon could handle working a missile silo. It takes a sensitive mind, and one open to the idea of change (in resonance too!).

There are plenty of wackos out there. They post nonsense and pretend that the rest of the world is too ignorant. What they are actually doing is trying to hide the fact that they are conning people. There are lots of fakes out there trying to get money from people for free energy and cheap free energy and levitation and all the rest of the junk they sell.

No one has ever demonstrated antigravity. There are conmen out there claiming to have done this, but they are charlatans. Here there are claims from a single source: Rex research. They aren't the only ones pushing horse pucky on the gullible.

reply to post by tinhattribunal


Where is the Sun in the image? Is it the yellow dot?

By choosing a point well out from the center of the solar system you have constructed an image of little value in showing anything other than the projection from that point.

As I have stated before:

First, the JPL orbital diagram is not accurate enough to show true alignments. They even state this on their site:

Note: Make sure you have Java enabled on your browser to see the applet. This applet is provided as a 3D orbit visualization tool. The applet was implemented using 2-body methods, and hence should not be used for determining accurate long-term trajectories (over several years or decades) or planetary encounter circumstances. For accurate long-term ephemerides, please instead use our Horizons system.

Second, alignemnts happen all the time. Everything is always aligned with something (especially when representing a 3D plane onto a 2D graph or image). In other words, the Earth is always in alignment with the Sun (we orbit around the Sun); the Moon is always in alignment with the Earth (the moon orbits around the Earth). The Earth, Moon and Sun are not always in direct alignment (if they were we would not have moon phases). The same goes for any of the space borne bodies within the solar system.

-saige-

reply to post by stereologist


Ya well... I wasn't agreeing with the planetary allignment nonsense... I merely took exception to your statement regarding Gravitational waves and resonance.

~ In 1993, Russell Hulse and Joe Taylor were awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics for this work, which was the first indirect evidence for gravitational waves.
Source

~ Researchers have spotted visible-light evidence for one of astronomy's most elusive targets - gravitational waves - in the orbit of a pair of dead stars.
Source

~ Forty years after Einstein’s work on gravitational waves, relativity theorists like H. Bondi proved that gravitational radiation was physically observable, that gravitational waves carry energy, and that a system that emits gravitational waves should lose energy.
Source

~ Fortunately, the Hulse-Taylor Pulsar (PSR 1913+16) provides firm evidence of a binary system actually emitting gravitational waves!
Source

I posted the question; "why was LIGO built" assuming that you were familiar with the evidence already proving the existence of Gravitational waves. If that eveidence didn't exist, I highly doubt that the LIGO project would have been undertaken.

Honestly dude... I'm gonna go with Einstein on this one... lol.... don't take offense but his credibility holds more weight with me than your's does.

reply to post by Blarneystoner


I mentioned all of the items you did.

What I disagreed with is the issue of alignments causing waves or any sort of resonance.

I posted the question; "why was LIGO built" assuming that you were familiar with the evidence already proving the existence of Gravitational waves. If that eveidence didn't exist, I highly doubt that the LIGO project would have been undertaken.

I am well aware that there is indirect evidence for gravitational waves. That does not mean that gravitational waves have been detected. The existence of the waves is inferred.

Honestly dude... I'm gonna go with Einstein on this one... lol.... don't take offense but his credibility holds more weight with me than your's does.

There is a big difference between indirect evidence and direct evidence. Learn the difference.

reply to post by jimmyx


Try to get them to give up their stock of booze and wine.

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Blarneystoner

 

I mentioned all of the items you did.

What I disagreed with is the issue of alignments causing waves or any sort of resonance.

I posted the question; "why was LIGO built" assuming that you were familiar with the evidence already proving the existence of Gravitational waves. If that eveidence didn't exist, I highly doubt that the LIGO project would have been undertaken.

I am well aware that there is indirect evidence for gravitational waves. That does not mean that gravitational waves have been detected. The existence of the waves is inferred.

Honestly dude... I'm gonna go with Einstein on this one... lol.... don't take offense but his credibility holds more weight with me than your's does.

There is a big difference between indirect evidence and direct evidence. Learn the difference.

I'm well aware of the difference... I'm sure you're aware that there is no direct evidence of gravity itself.

Originally posted by tinhattribunal



is this what will happen?

Yes, that is very close to what JPL shows. Thanks for posting that.