Our Suns Binary and Spiritual Second Sun (Coverup)

You’ve got me digging down the rabbit hole... a reply to: purplemer

originally posted by: CynConcepts
Edit add: more specifically, The watershed in this process is generally taken to be the formation of the first Grand Lodge in London in 1717.

I'm 100% aware of this date which is why I previously mentioned it, but thanks for reminding me anyway.

No ritual exists from Operative Masonry, only Speculative, and as I said earlier we use the oldest one in the country, it hasn't seen major changes since the early 1800's and pretty much reads word for word from that time.

Sirius is not mentioned, the Blazing Star is simply explained, this isn't up for debate.

originally posted by: KKLOCO
Pikes reputation is unprecedented. He was a venerated Freemason. I’d believe what he says over what current mason practices are. This is 150 years ago.

That's nice. Pretty much every Scottish Rite Degree he authored has be changed wholesale since his time, those degrees evolve with the times to incorporate contemporaneous teaching examples. But you'd know this if you were actually a Scottish Rite Mason, which you're not, so you don't.

originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: Gothmog

Sirius B is approximately 8.6 light years away. Basically making it impossible for it to be any form of binary with Sol.

Why there are examples of binary stars at interstellar distances. WHy cant ours be one?

Not 8.6 light years between them
Look , you have to have a strong enough gravitational force to keep objects orbiting each other .
The above makes y9our entire thread supposition false.
It is SCIENCE and MATH
Now , use your reasoning skills.

originally posted by: cenpuppie
a reply to: Gothmog

ETA - a star as massive as Sirius B comes anywhere CLOSE to this solar system and it ends there.

Im still trying to figure out how our solar system still has planets after Sirius sweeps through.

I need the math on that.

Actually , there would be none.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Sirius is not mentioned, the Blazing Star is simply explained, this isn't up for debate.

Sorry AM, one of the most prominent members in your societies history, mentions multiple times that Sirius, was in fact the original meaning behind the Blazing Star.

This is very much up for debate.

The Masons doctrine has been watered down. What your lodge is currently teaching really isn’t applicable here. What the original foundations were, very much is.

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: Gothmog

Sirius B is approximately 8.6 light years away. Basically making it impossible for it to be any form of binary with Sol.

Why there are examples of binary stars at interstellar distances. WHy cant ours be one?

Not 8.6 light years between them

This is the elephant in the room no one is speaking of. Everyone just blissfully ignoring this fact that destroys the entire premise.... *sigh Embracing ignorance...

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: Gothmog

Sirius B is approximately 8.6 light years away. Basically making it impossible for it to be any form of binary with Sol.

Why there are examples of binary stars at interstellar distances. WHy cant ours be one?

Not 8.6 light years between them

I recall a mention in the last page or two that the OP has Dyslexia. Maybe, and I'm being serious here, not a prick, MAYBE the OP also has equal trouble comprehending math as well?

So do you also happen to have Dyscalculia, Purple? That would explain a LOT where simple math says you're flat wrong and you refuse to acknowledge it.

a reply to: Blarneystoner


Its not an elephant.

If the companion acted like a planet orbiting our sun, and the orbit periodicity was close to the precession periodicity, then standard calculations would put our binary counterpart somewhere between 848.5 AU and 1515 AU depending on its mass and eccentricity. For detailed calculations under this scenario, please download the PDF Document below.

While the solar system speed is difficult to measure (the question is always “compared to what?”), astrophysicist Reg Cahill of Australia has suggested that the solar system is moving in excess of 430km/s, relative to the cosmic microwave background (CMB), and this opens the possibility that our solar system might be orbiting anyone of a number of local stars, but more than likely one of the larger masses that lies not too far inclined to the plane of the solar system. Such a scenario might seem improbable given our current understanding of gravity and visible star distances, however there are compelling theories, such as MOND theory, and there is unusual evidentiary information, such as the data from Voyager 1 and 2 or the anomalous acceleration of the Pioneer 10 and 11 spacecraft that make this scenario attractive to investigation

binaryresearchinstitute.com...

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: KKLOCO
Pikes reputation is unprecedented. He was a venerated Freemason. I’d believe what he says over what current mason practices are. This is 150 years ago.

That's nice. Pretty much every Scottish Rite Degree he authored has be changed wholesale since his time, those degrees evolve with the times to incorporate contemporaneous teaching examples.

Would the evolution not include higher degrees? Information that used to be taught at the 33rd level, is now being disseminated at the 34, 35? Degrees that are now secret. As you’ve put it, it appears there is a changing of the guard.

Just like everything else on this planet, Freemasonry has become commercialized. This was not the case 100 years ago.

Think about this, if you’re originally a secret society, that through time becomes not so secret, what are your options?

1. Try to maintain the secrecy (which would be impossible throughout the last 75 years of technological advancement)

2. Commercialize it. Make it attainable for many. Profit off the front end.

3. Dwindle their numbers to maintain secrecy

I’m open to other suggestions. These 3 seem the most logical. Look where Freemasonry is today.

a reply to: Gothmog

Look , you have to have a strong enough gravitational force to keep objects orbiting each other . The above makes y9our entire thread supposition false. It is SCIENCE and MATH Now , use your reasoning skills.

Ok imagine three suns within a light year (one of which is a white dwarf and the other much larger than your sun and tell me thats not going to have an effect.



There is evidence this has happened before.

Ie the earth cycles

the sheer edge to our solar system

the declination of the out planets

the strange orbit of sedna

i could go on :-)

a reply to: Blarneystoner

This is the elephant in the room no one is speaking of. Everyone just blissfully ignoring this fact that destroys the entire premise.... *sigh Embracing ignorance..

No not at all. There is evidence that systems can move increbly fast. If you think about each system has to move 4 lights in about 5000 years. I did the maths earlier. It is possible. Plus there is evidence.

Here is an exract from a paper on the speed these things can reach.

There has been a great observational study done recently by Hernandez et al. (see: arxiv.org...). They have looked at wide binary stars and found that when they are separated by 7000AU or more, so that their accelerations decrease below 2*10^-10 m/s^2, then their behaviour becomes non-Newtonian, in that their orbital speeds are so large that the centrifugal (inertial) forces separating them should be greater than the gravitational pull inwards from the mass that we can see, so they should zoom off to infinity. A similar behaviour is seen in galaxy rotation curves, which deviate from Newtonian behaviour below this same acceleration

binaryresearchinstitute.com...

originally posted by: Rob808
You’ve got me digging down the rabbit hole... a reply to: purplemer

Great another rabbit digging. Thats just what we need.

originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: Gothmog

Look , you have to have a strong enough gravitational force to keep objects orbiting each other . The above makes y9our entire thread supposition false. It is SCIENCE and MATH Now , use your reasoning skills.

Ok imagine three suns within a light year (one of which is a white dwarf and the other much larger than your sun and tell me thats not going to have an effect.



There is evidence this has happened before.

Ie the earth cycles

the sheer edge to our solar system

the declination of the out planets

the strange orbit of sedna

i could go on :-)

Ok imagine three suns within a light year (one of which is a white dwarf and the other much larger than your sun and tell me thats not going to have an effect.

Still not enough.
Look at the supermassive black hole at the center of the galaxy.
That is the only object that can influence over light years.

There is evidence this has happened before.

Do elucidate.
But not with Sitchin induced fantasy.

the declination of the out planets

In what respect ?

the strange orbit of sedna

Explain how Sedna is an effect of Sirius as a "binary" star.

i could go on

Only if you use science.
Otherwise....

a reply to: Phage

omg your newtonian maths breaks down. Time for you to re equate.

There has been a great observational study done recently by Hernandez et al. (see: arxiv.org...). They have looked at wide binary stars and found that when they are separated by 7000AU or more, so that their accelerations decrease below 2*10^-10 m/s^2, then their behaviour becomes non-Newtonian, in that their orbital speeds are so large that the centrifugal (inertial) forces separating them should be greater than the gravitational pull inwards from the mass that we can see, so they should zoom off to infinity. A similar behaviour is seen in galaxy rotation curves, which deviate from Newtonian behaviour below this same acceleration

binaryresearchinstitute.com...

a reply to: Phage

You wanted numbers and calculations. Here is a paper. If you cannot fault this paper you will need to check your own belief system. For this model works better than the one you approve.

1 Overview One of the exercises herein was to show that a moving solar system model, without any local dynamical inputs, was able to predict the annual rate of change in the precession observable better than Simon Newcomb’s model over

binaryresearchinstitute.com...

a reply to: purplemer

But wait can't i just invoke a magical non-detectable form of matter to balance my equations?

Now i know how Einstein felt when he was made aware of red-shift.

God damn useless cosmological constant.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: vethumanbeing

The shark is 350 million years old and never evolved.

There are very many species of shark. All have undergone evolution.

No they have not and you are assuming they have. I take it you are a Darwinist. There is no evidence of shark mutation as it is and has always been a creature constructed almost entirely of cartilage. Only the teeth exist after death; and they remain the same shape and material structure whether 350 million years old or 2 years old.

originally posted by: Rob808
You’ve got me digging down the rabbit hole... a reply to: purplemer

This is another example of someone somewhere keeping the human distracted from the truth (chasing Alice chasing the white rabbit). You must know anything hidden or secret is a big red flag to where the manipulation is coming from. Nasa, the scientific community, occult organizations. This planet was created for the pleasure of someone somewhere to experience being initially an apelike creature to mine gold and gemstones then expanded more to the point of a Disneyesque experience. It evolved into providing the experience of borrowing the form of a lion or a maple leaf or a cloud just to see what its like. Do you see the Attraction. This world; not only in mineral wealth has become very valuable as a Mr. Toads Wild Ride experience (all over the known Universes) for what it offers to other beings that are not physical. This is a TSI world that those not in body can experience (and most life forms are not physical). It is valuable to those that initially exploited it. There is a war happening right now over the destiny of this planet.

originally posted by: purplemer
Many have questioned why the great year was so important to the ancients. They used the great year to measure a great event and they knew that the destiny of man was controlled by the stars and one star in particular. Sirius the Dog Star. Both the dog star and the great year follow the same orbit 24k years. This is the real reason for the earth wobble.

In ancient cultures with no apparent connection have universally associated the blazing Sirius with either a wolf or a dog. In ancient China, the star was identified as a heavenly wolf. In ancient Chaldea (present day Iraq) the star was known as the "Dog Star that Leads". In Assyria and Akkadia, it was said to be the "Dog of the Sun”. Several indigenous tribes of North America referred to the star in canine terms: the Seri and Tohono O’odham tribes of the southwest describe the Sirius as a “dog that follows mountain sheep”, while the Cherokee paired Sirius with Antares as a dog-star guardian of the “Path of Souls”. The Skidi tribe of Nebraska knew it as the “Wolf Star”, while further north, the Alaskan Inuit of the Bering Strait called it “Moon Dog”.

www.ancient-origins.net...

Just a note: most here are aware that ancient-origins is a pretty unreliable site. For instance, the Chaldeans didn't call Sirius "dog star that leads"... that constellation was called "The Arrow" s3.amazonaws.com... ellations_of_ancient_Egypt.pdf&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=AKIAIWOWYYGZ2Y53UL3A%2F20191231%2Fus-east-1%2Fs3%2Faws4_request&X-Amz -Date=20191231T064723Z&X-Amz-Expires=3600&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Signature=1c4f7f48e9a6cb3c9a5d193a03381b22f20cae6e9db8bcf67bbd470a5602e6cd

In Egypt, Sirius wasn't associated with a canine but with the god of the Nile.

No holiday involving Isis, Nepthys, or Anubis was celebrated using the appearance of Sirius. You can check out the ancient Egyptian feast days and calendar here: ancientegyptonline.co.uk...