Study links periodic mass extinctions to "Planet X"

originally posted by: sosruko
a reply to: Krazysh0t

First rule, always object.. Visible object.. otherwise its theoretics.. The line isnt that hard to see.

Yet you ignored the point I brought up about Neptune being discovered FIRST with mathematics (and you continue to ignore the fact that others have also pointed this out to you). I guess if it conflicts with your world view, you are just free to pretend it was never said.

PS: The idea in the OP is a hypothesis and not a theory, so discussing the legitimacy of theories is a red herring anyways.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: sosruko
a reply to: Krazysh0t

First rule, always object.. Visible object.. otherwise its theoretics.. The line isnt that hard to see.

Yet you ignored the point I brought up about Neptune being discovered FIRST with mathematics (and you continue to ignore the fact that others have also pointed this out to you). I guess if it conflicts with your world view, you are just free to pretend it was never said.

And Pluto.

*whistles innocently

a reply to: TerryDon79

Yes yes. And Pluto.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: TerryDon79

Yes yes. And Pluto.

But apart from these 2 celestial bodies being hypothesised about before actually being found, science has never had an idea about anything else before it was found.

/sarcasm

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: TerryDon79

Yes yes. And Pluto.

But apart from these 2 celestial bodies being hypothesised about before actually being found, science has never had an idea about anything else before it was found.

/sarcasm

Oh Oh! I got another! Black holes were theorized first before actual discovery.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: TerryDon79

Yes yes. And Pluto.

But apart from these 2 celestial bodies being hypothesised about before actually being found, science has never had an idea about anything else before it was found.

/sarcasm

Oh Oh! I got another! Black holes were theorized first before actual discovery.

And Quasars

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Then we agree on disagree.. However buy the book strongly recommended

a reply to: sosruko

So I guess you're not going to tell us why you think the hypothesis is wrong/flawed?

a reply to: sosruko

What book? Still not acknowledging that you were wrong about Neptune (and other celestial bodies being discovered with math before laying eyes on them) huh?

a reply to: sosruko

We don't have to visually see the object. We can see the other objects being effected by it. So we know it has to be there.

Also, from the article...

At the time there were three explanations proposed to explain the regular comet showers: Planet X, the existence of a sister star to the sun, and vertical oscillations of the sun as it orbits the galaxy. The last two ideas have subsequently been ruled out as inconsistent with the paleontological record. Only Planet X remained as a viable theory, and it is now gaining renewed attention.

Do you get that? ONLY Planet X remains as a viable theory... We don't have to see it to figure that out.

If I hear a loud BANG, and see the person standing next to me suddenly have a large hole appear in their head with blood, brains and bone fragments coming flying out of the hole, I don't need to visually see a man standing there with a gun pointed in our general direction to figure out what just happened.

To follow your logic, rather than find some kind of escape route or barrier to hide behind, I should stop and look around to confirm that there actually is a madman shooting his gun at people, and probably be the next one to get shot in the process...

originally posted by: 0bserver1
a reply to: Zaphod58
I always find it hard to understand why they can find planetary bodies from other stars better then in our own solar system.

It's just speculation to say that some planet X is trowing rocks at us..

That is simple deduction honestly.

The planets in other systems pass between us and their sun, so we see a dip in the stars light.

The outlying planets in our system are in the empty black of space, there is no way to see them yet.

Think of a big fire at night, if you are far away you could see people walking between it and yourself, but if you were right next to the fire, you couldnt see someone far away at all.

Another intelligent thread that had good potential derailed by trolls and those who just cant stop themselves from feeding them.

Please don't contribute anything to this thread unless you have an I.Q. higher than 62.

Don't like the theory? Disprove it!

Science - Not the art of proving things, but the art of disproving them.

a reply to: canDarian

Yeah that might be a bit of a stretch.

I know of two mass extinctions-the Permian about 250 million years ago and the Dino disaster about 65 million years ago. Both have their own explanations-the former being increased carbon dioxide levels and the Permian oceans chemical imbalance, and the latter being a large asteroid that crashed into chixulub in the Yutucan Peninsula.

If this planet X reaps so much devastation every 27 million years then how is it that the oldest molluscs such as the Nautilus survived for hundred of millions of years? How did amphibians manage to survive hundreds of millions of years without succumbing the the peril that is Planet X?

Extinction has many variables-I doubt that a single planet billions of miles away has anything to do with what happens closer to home.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Agreed, it possibly plays well with the lesser dryas north American comet impact theory of 12800 BC.

originally posted by: Thecakeisalie
a reply to: canDarian

Yeah that might be a bit of a stretch.

I know of two mass extinctions-the Permian about 250 million years ago and the Dino disaster about 65 million years ago. Both have their own explanations-the former being increased carbon dioxide levels and the Permian oceans chemical imbalance, and the latter being large asteroid that crashed into chixulub in the Yutucan Peninsula.

If this planet X reaps so much devastation every 27 million years then how is it that the oldest molluscs such as the Nautilus surviv.....

Who's to say that this rock wasn't due to planetwhatever?

a reply to: MidKnight

The article suggests that Planet X goes close enough to the Kuiper belt to move asteroids/comets towards us. The math doesn't add up.

Estimated orbit of Planet X = 200au-1300au from the sun.
Kuiper belt = 30au-50au from the sun.

Difference of 150au from the sun MINIMUM.

1au is 92,955,807.3 miles (distance from Earth to sun)

150au is 13,943,371,095 miles.

That's where my problem is.

originally posted by: MidKnight
Another intelligent thread that had good potential derailed by trolls and those who just cant stop themselves from feeding them.

Please don't contribute anything to this thread unless you have an I.Q. higher than 62.

Don't like the theory? Disprove it!

Science - Not the art of proving things, but the art of disproving them.

God must look like good, with your standpoint.. Cant disprove the Christian faith can we, but i know how to look at the southern cross for reference in the real world..

The main problem with science today, is probably the American Institutions which reallllly needs a remake.. Its about 3 Universities that actually has international credibility, the rest.. well.. Nice sideshow fillers..

a reply to: sosruko

Still ignoring the requests to tell us why it's a bad hypothesis?

I'll ask again.

Why do you disagree with what is stated in the article?

a reply to: canDarian

This is interesting. So there are regular mass extinction cycles every 27M years? If true, there are only a few things that work on such vast time periods...

This may be unrelated, since I'm not sure what form of man or what type of societies existed that would be able to figure out a 27MY cycle, but, ancient man seems to have been obsessed with watching the sky, to the point of allocating a large amount of time (a valuable resource that, in those days, could only supposedly be used mainly for survival purposes) toward it.

However,if a 27 MY cycle was not feasible for ancient man to keep track of or even notice as a cyclicle event, there could have been shorter and less devastating but still cataclysmic cyclicle events they were watching for... Some of the underground habitations discovered have been absolutely enormous, covering miles and miles of networked tunnel systems. Something like that could help you survive a continuous bombardment of space objects lasting months or years.

Am I remembering correctly or has there been talk of an undiscovered, or unexplored tunnel system under the pyramids and sphinx? And something in the Bible about the 7 years of famine, and possibly unfusione pyramids as a storehouse to prepare for such an event?

Anyway, back to this 27MY cycle... I too would like to know when the last event in this cycle occured. And why do I have a feeling that they are gonna tell us it was... about 27 million years ago...?

Someone mentioned confusion about planet x and its supposed 10ky orbit and how it could relate to a 27MY cycle on Earth. Well, it could be that every 2,700 orbits, the Earth just happens to be aligned just right with the incoming debris to take a direct hit. Or, if the orbit of PX is tilted or otherwise irregular, such as with a high eccentricity, it could be that only approximately every 2,700 orbits, that is when it passes through a dense cluster of comets, or it passes through them at other times as well, but every 2,700 orbits, it comes at such an angle to fling them toward the inner solar system, and the rest of the time, it just flings them in some other direction.

Maybe we only take a direct hit every 27M, but at more regular cycles we catch a glancing blow, and That could be the cycle the ancients were watching for... Even if,during some passes, no real damage was done, a spectacular sight in the heavens as the huge mass of objects passed by could have also been important to them. If they blocked out the sun, maybe that could be where we get the 3 days of darkness mentioned by some cultures back then. However, that would not really account for the 3 days of daylight mentioned by cultures on the opposite side of the planet...

a reply to: TerryDon79

No object is visible..