The whole Planet X theory

Sitchin's credentials are actually nonexistant. He's a journalist (not a linguist) and has a degree in economics. His translations are so ridiculously bad that people who KNOW the languages and translate them professionally scoff at him.
www.skepdic.com... " target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow"> www.skepdic.com...

Byrd, there is a big difference between real scientists which try to eliminate Sitchins theory and sceptics which just use personal attacks to make somebody look stupid.

Just look at the site, that is not professional, that site is set up by children, children which attack Sitchin personally, not the theory itself, and I hate that kind of children.

Maybe we need some other sites for refrence

www.world-mysteries.com...

xfacts.com...

google cache: 216.239.57.104...:RwFmFHEkFuwJ:www.facadenovel.com/sitchinerrors.htm+Zecharia+Sitchin+wrong&hl=en&start=6&ie=UTF-8

Originally posted by MrRadicalEd
google cache: 216.239.57.104...:RwFmFHEkFuwJ:www.facadenovel.com/sitchinerrors.htm+Zecharia+Sitchin+wrong&hl=en&start=6&ie=UTF-8

Thank you. I'd been hunting for that one. I knew some legitimate Hebrew scholars and Sumerian scholars had been dealing with the claims and was familair (but couldn't find) the references on the solar seals.

Originally posted by LeenBekkemaa
www.skepdic.com... " target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow"> www.skepdic.com...

Byrd, there is a big difference between real scientists which try to eliminate Sitchins theory and sceptics which just use personal attacks to make somebody look stupid.

Just look at the site, that is not professional, that site is set up by children, children which attack Sitchin personally, not the theory itself, and I hate that kind of children.

You're not familiar with it? It's one of the most famous skeptical resources on the net, with good research and good references. Now, I grant it doesn't have pretty pictures that take forever to load, but it's a well respected research site.

And here's the Hebrew scholar who challenges Sitchin's work.
www.alienresistance.org...

And it's the scientists (astronomers, archaeologists, linguists) who are slamming Sitchin's work.

[Edited on 20-11-2003 by Byrd]

This study focuses on the fact that, though elohim is
morphologically plural (its "shape" or grammatical form is plural), the meaning of the word is almost always singular (one god) in the Hebrew Bible. This is the case over 2500 times.

That kind of information is the problem with sites like this
216.239.57.104...:RwFmFHEkFuwJ:www.facadenovel.com/sitchinerrors.htm+Zecharia+Sitchin+wrong&hl=en&start=6&ie=UTF-8

Elohim does always mean multiple Gods, they twist it totally the other direction.

Byrd, all those sites are again attacking Sitchin himself, and his interpretation, that doesn't change the fact that it still means "planet of the crossing" that the Sumerians still believed that they came from it, it just means that they don't agree with the interpretation.

You didn't answer my questions by the way.

* why do all the universities etc. don't attack the information which the sumerians themselves, but just the astronomical aspect of it????

How can anybody don't take Nibiru seriously as being the place were the Gods came from according to the Sumerians... while the whole attack of the theory is based on the astronomical knowledge and not on the tablets themselves

I would like to add that this site isn't "attacking Zecharia Sitchin. Its just an information page.

perhaps the respectable scientific institutions do not even acknowledge the findings by Sitchin. Maybe we should start calling some universities to find out.

well, here are some sites that debunk heiser :
www.rense.com...
erikparker.com...

I do get the feeling that those tablets do give that information, but that Sitchin is somewhat the only one which tries to put it into connection...

I don't see arguments against the texts about the beings from Nibiru itself, only arguments against the excistense of Nibiru, that astronomy doesn't see Nibiru, not that the Sumerians didn't say that Nibiru was there...

Originally posted by LeenBekkemaa
I do get the feeling that those tablets do give that information, but that Sitchin is somewhat the only one which tries to put it into connection...

1) You/he keep saying there's "12 planets." He doesn't list them, by the way, and no dictionary lists the names of the "12 planets" and no tablet mentions them.

But you like his idea, so of course he's credible.

2) He talks about the "base 12" number system. There is no such thing, and you can see the lie for yourself by just looking at the Sumerian numbers.

But you like his idea, so of course he's credible.

3) He states Nibiru is a planet, when in the Enumma Elish (the source) it very clearly isn't.

But you like his idea, so of course he's credible.

4) In fact, you can read the words of the Enumma Elish (the source) for yourself. So we ask you "where does it say that Nibiru is a planet?" You can't point that out.

But you like his idea, so of course he's credible.

5) The seals and other material were interpreted by people who (unlike Sitchen) can read what the Sumerians wrote on them.

But you like his idea, so of course he's credible.

6) People who (unlike Sitchin) have dug in the ruins of the Sumerian cities and who have cleaned and handled millions of Sumerian artifacts (which Sitchin hasn't done) say the seal isn't a representation of planets.

But you like his idea, so of course he's credible.

I don't see arguments against the texts about the beings from Nibiru itself, only arguments against the excistense of Nibiru, that astronomy doesn't see Nibiru, not that the Sumerians didn't say that Nibiru was there...

You've been shown the links to the original texts. In fact, you gave ME a link to an extensive library of the texts. Did you actually READ them?

Nibu is mentioned (the city). Nibiru is never mentioned outside of being a Throne Name of Marduk. You can actually read every one of those texts and find it out for yourself.

But original research and reading sources seems to be something that people are often unwilling to do. I see lots who fall victim (as I once did) to "But you like his idea, so of course he's credible."

Velikovsky's errors (when finally pointed out to me and when I went on a lot of research to check) taught me to avoid that trap. Maybe you'll have your own Velikovsky epiphany soon.

here is a quite interesting picture of a sumerian sylinder seal, it clearly depicts saturn if i am correct.
mars-earth.com...

here are some documents stored by nasa about planet x, or the 10'th planet if you will.
adsabs.harvard.edu...

Originally posted by darkspace
here are some documents stored by nasa about planet x, or the 10'th planet if you will.
adsabs.harvard.edu...

Great Links darkspace!

some more scientific info on planet x :
www.holistic-education.org...
www.bushcountry.org...
www.paranoiamagazine.com...
this one is not exactly science, but still some interresting "facts" : www.newprophecy.net...
here's a quite interresting article with links about the theory : www.sc0rp10n.plus.com...
this is what they are telling kids : www.kidsread.net...
what was said in 1983 : www.science-frontiers.com...
comet or planet x? who knows : www.space.com...
more info. useful? you decide : users.pgen.net...
class action law-suit over planetX-hox? : www.cyberspaceorbit.com...
some interresting facts over the planetX-conspiracy :
www.halexandria.org...
someone has obviously done some research here : www.detailshere.com...
maybe some clues here : www.unknowncountry.com...
astronomy.swin.edu.au...
www.world-mysteries.com...
www.the7thfire.com...
www.goldenthreadmagazine.com...://www.cybertime.net/~ajgood/phenom.html
well, i guess thats enough for tonight.

Darkspace you are tha man
Very very good sites

I still think it's weird, all those sites, and they depic it like it's a real planet... while it could just as well be synonymous to something else.... just like the Dogontribe and the "tenth moon". But nobody seems to think that way, just the way as Sitchin has said them to go, with his interpretation, while it could also be different...

well, that might be be because there are some freekin good evidence that points to the existence to another planet and possible another "dead" twin sun in our solarsystem. the cometshowers and asteroids orbits have telltell signs that there is something "big" out there influencing them and influencing the sun as well. the magnetic properties of earth and of the sun is also telling a wierd tale that something might actually be out there. the astronomers and sciencists are still not sure why the sun is having an magnetic poleshift every 11 year or so. but one posibility is that there is an unknown gravitational entity of "iron" tugging on the sun and on the other bodies in the solar system.
we have also had some wierd weather-patterns in the last two decades or more. this could also be the work of some gravitational "force". there were talks about a possible dead twin sun in the vicinity of our solarsystem as early as this year. and then we have the voyager? wich is supposed to be on the solarsystems edge. according nasa, it seems to be speeding up instead of slowing down. why is that? could it be some other gravitational body is helping it on its way? it just might be that way, since the sun and all other "big" bodies is too far away to have any influence.
well,any thoughts??

Originally posted by Malkavin

Originally posted by CPYKOmega
LMAO sorry this has nothing to do with the post


but I loooooooove your AVATAR!!!!!!!

Thanks =) I like it too, heh heh. I read somewhere also, last night actually, that Nibiru was suppost to return sometime within the next few years? Or did I read that wrong.

dude your right, acutally planet X has nothing to do with religuous belief, i saw it on unscrewed with martin sargeant i thought it was crazy but i looked into it, it appears its a planet that circles thise solarsystem and others at a very fast rate and in about a year or so it will pass earth leaving behind catastrophic debris that will force ppl to move inland of the east and west coasts of the continents apparently 9 miles into the coasts, everything will be floodded and debris will fall out of the sky. so prepare your selves

But what if it is synonymous to something else, and not really a planet...

Originally posted by LeenBekkemaa
But what if it is synonymous to something else, and not really a planet...

like perhaps an planetsized supermassive "spacestation".
either way it has to be huge to to have such a gravitational effect.
by the way, i have been watching some of jason martells lectures on the subject. and if the theories is right, then "planet x"'s orbit is where the asteroidbelt is.
if you do some research on the subject then you see what i mean. i using sitchins names here : according to the myth, some 4.5 billion years ago an rouge planet (nibiru?) crashed into the planet tiamat(orbited where the asteroidbelt is), breaking it up in several parts. 2 parts were pushed into a new orbit creating the earth and the moon. the "pangea"(half a planet) theory and other theories(moon creation) mention this possibility. as for the asteroidbelt, there is not enough mass in the asteroids orbiting there to make an planet. so some mass is missing. well, at least there are some valid point there. i don't want to elaborate too much(i am not that good at writing down my thoughts) on this. ask some spesific questions if you want to.
you can watch one of the lectures that explains this here (includes slides):xfacts.com...