Leaked images of Nibiru orbited by Planet X taken by South Pole Station Telescope

Originally posted by Bigwhammy
reply to post by undo

 

so the official myan end of time is this december?
or are the months off?

possibly but i can't say for sure. we are currently in mayan 2012 AD, if not even later.

this is the data on it (repost for the rest of the readers)

According to the Encyclopaedia Britannica, Dionysius set the year of Christ's birth as the 753rd year since the founding of Rome. However, this was an impossibility, since the Gospels record Jesus' birth as occurring during the reign of Herod the Great, and thus He could not have been born later than the 750th year from the founding of Rome (15th edition, Vol. 4, p. 580, "Chronology").

Herod's death was recorded by Jewish historian Flavius Josephus and would have fallen in 4 B.C. Therefore, according to the adjusted calculations, Christ's birth took place some four years before the traditional date. Counting forward from 4 B.C. for 2,000 years (one year has to be added because there was no year 0) yields 1996 as the true 2,000th calendar year after Christ's birth. This might prove disappointing to the celebrants of the January 1, 2000, date, but they shouldn't worry too much, since the tide of tradition has usually overwhelmed the facts of history.

www.ucgstp.org...

[edit on 24-2-2008 by undo]

An exoplanet that cylicly enters our solar sytem every 26000 years, and is half the size of Sol? Bwahaha. I'm still a little confused; if this is the 10th planet (roman numeral X, right?), it must be in orbit around Sol, no? Or is it cruising in from some other galaxy? This thread is confusing. I thought planet x was supposed to be the firthest planet out from the sun, and it was deduced (through bad math) from the wobbling orbits of the outer planets? I can't see how it can exist within our solar sytem, and not be detected. I can appreciate the difficulty in detecting small moons, orbiting distant planets, but I don't understand how doppler shifting could miss something that big, even if it's right on the fringe. Even if this is an exoplanet thats hurtling towards us at the speed of light, the distance between the planets would still give us a very slim chance of anything getting hit.It seems some of you have not the faintest idea of the odds were dealing with, not just with a planet headed our way from another galaxy, but the distances involved between our solar system planets. If you take an orange to be the Sun, a grain of sand for the Earth, and the rest of the planets their respective sized spheres, we would line them over a 6 mile stretch. That is the relative sizes and distances of the planets in our solar system. Now were going to fire a lemon (half the size of the orange!) at that 6 mile stretch... you think anything is going to get hit???

It's not likely. And that's pretty much just a planar view. You then have to up the odds another dimension!

reply to post by undo



Wait a minute though.. I thought the whole thing was astronomical. All the planets are supposed to align in 2012. I thought that was part of the myan thing too.

Those images are suns dog. Also call mock suns and Perhelia. It something to do with ice crystals in the cloulds. It when the light of the sun is bent threw ice crystal in cloulds. It only happen during sunset and sunrise. Sometimes midday. They always on the left and right of the sun itself. Never belone or above.

Originally posted by Bigwhammy
reply to post by undo

 

Wait a minute though.. I thought the whole thing was astronomical. All the planets are supposed to align in 2012. I thought that was part of the myan thing too.

not sure. they'd need to correct for the 4 years, i think. it could be that 2012 (2016 mayan time) is the real end date, i'm just saying that if our solstice count is inaccurate by 4 years, that correction would need to be made to match the mayan end date. like i said before:
you need "X" amount of solstices till the end of time on the mayan calendar. if you have a discrepancy of 4 years worth of solstices, your data won't match theirs.

i hope i'm not making an idiot outta myself on this. we assume our calendars reflect the actual date, but they don't.

reply to post by undo


This what I mean...

Our galaxy has a centre which all the stars take millions of years to revolve around, and it is located in the starriest part of the Milky Way, as seen from Earth. On four occasions within the 25,800-year cycle our galactic centre aligns with the sunrise of a solstice or equinox. The last time it occurred was on a fall equinox 6,450 years ago, approximately the dawn of Old World civilisations. On Dec 21, 2012, which is a winter solstice (Northern Hemisphere) this centre will align with our sun once more. Jenkins presents a mass of astrological, monumental and mythological evidence to show the importance of this event for the Maya, and how their calendar runs out on this day for a reason.

source

Originally posted by Bigwhammy
reply to post by undo

 

This what I mean...

Our galaxy has a centre which all the stars take millions of years to revolve around, and it is located in the starriest part of the Milky Way, as seen from Earth. On four occasions within the 25,800-year cycle our galactic centre aligns with the sunrise of a solstice or equinox. The last time it occurred was on a fall equinox 6,450 years ago, approximately the dawn of Old World civilisations. On Dec 21, 2012, which is a winter solstice (Northern Hemisphere) this centre will align with our sun once more. Jenkins presents a mass of astrological, monumental and mythological evidence to show the importance of this event for the Maya, and how their calendar runs out on this day for a reason.

source

yeah, i realize what you're saying, but who was the one that assumed it ran out on our date of 2012? if they are basing it on our solstice count, our solstice count is incorrect. if they are basing it on mayan solstice count, wouldn't it have to agree with ours for them to be talking about the same year? let's say our solstice count leads to a date with several events in the sky. no problem. HOWEVER, if their solstice count preceeds it by 4 years, and the world ends, those events would never transpire in the sky.

tell me i'm not crazy . lol

[edit on 24-2-2008 by undo]

The Oort Cloud is 50,000 AU from our sun. Based on an approximate average of the orbital velocities of the planets in our solar system, 60,000 mph, it would take over 10,000 years to reach our sun. That's one way. What would be bringing it back? Also, if traveling nearly light speed, at 1800 years one way it would be 900 times further out than the diameter of our solar system. Again, what would bring it back? The math doesn't add up.

reply to post by undo


ok you're not crazy

I completely understand what you mean... but somebody would be making a big noise about it with all the prophecies and what not, don't you think?

My guess is they've corrected for it in the 2012 date already because they're going by the planets anyway the gregorain date was arbitrary. They looked at the astronomical date and just gave the corresponding gregorian. Make sense?

Originally posted by Bigwhammy
reply to post by undo

 

ok you're not crazy

I completely understand what you mean... but somebody would be making a big noise about it with all the prophecies and what not, don't you think?

My guess is they've corrected for it in the 2012 date already because they're going by the planets anyway the gregorain date was arbitrary. They looked at the astronomical date and just gave the corresponding gregorian. Make sense?

so we would have to assume the same astronomical
date for us as for them.
what is our astronomical date? what's it based on?
how do mayan solstices fit into this because that's how they kept time, is it not?

My guess is they've corrected for it in the 2012 date

how do you account for 4 years of missing time if you don't know it's missing?

[edit on 24-2-2008 by undo]

reply to post by undo


It is my understanding that is one of things that is so amazing about the myans is that there dates are correct astonomically.

The "astronomical" dating system refers to an alternative method of numbering years. It includes the year "0" and eliminates the need for any prefixes or suffixes by attributing the arithmetic sign to the date. Thus, the astronomical date for 2000 CE is simply +2000 or 2000. The astronomical year 0 corresponds to the year 1 BCE, while the astronomical year -1 corresponds to 2 BCE. In general, any given year "n BCE" becomes "-(n-1)" in the astronomical year numbering system. Historians should take care to note the numerical difference of one year between "BCE" dates and astronomical dates.

NASA dating convemtions

I think I guessed correctly, the gregorian date 2012 is arbitrary. The Myans had the planets lining up at a certain date that corresponds to 2012.

reply to post by Terrapop


Good find Terrapop! Starred and Flagged!

However, what is extremely far fetched is this...

Another fact many people do not know about, is that Planet X is an inhabited planet. The US government knows this, and are infact in contact with them because this is not just a catastrophic event for us, it is for them as well.
From the description of the vid.

Now how does the author know that this so called Planet X is inhabited? He also claims that the US government is in contact with the inhabitants!! Now this is beyond belief!

A plausible scenario that has been ruined by such bizarre unsubstantiated statements that puts it in the category of pure 'zeta talk'!

And so I ain't heading for them hills just yet!

Here's more, but is it the same scenario?

Is it possible we live in a binary solar system with two suns? According to NASA, over 80% of all solar systems have multiple suns and the historical accounts contained in The Kolbrin Bible, suggest it could be Sol's unborn twin. A destructive brown dwarf larger than the planet Jupiter, and known to the ancients as the Destroyer. yowusa.com...

Cheers!



[edit on 24-2-2008 by mikesingh]

Most of these Nibiru pictures can be debunked as lens flare and lens ghosting. The ones in the OP video look a little more real than the sun images in the 2nd post.

I've been skeptical about Nibiru, and I'll keep a neutral stance on it until somebody can prove to me it's there, or not there.

The astronomical year 0 corresponds to the year 1 BCE

Err but 1 BCE would be 4 BCE.
it doesn't correspond correctly, in other words.

Originally posted by cormac mac airt
The Oort Cloud is 50,000 AU from our sun. Based on an approximate average of the orbital velocities of the planets in our solar system, 60,000 mph, it would take over 10,000 years to reach our sun. That's one way. What would be bringing it back? Also, if traveling nearly light speed, at 1800 years one way it would be 900 times further out than the diameter of our solar system. Again, what would bring it back? The math doesn't add up.

Exactly. My description was just based around some random planet, ejected from some random galaxy, happening across our solar system. The fact that they also cite this "planet" as having an eliptical orbit (it's been here before, right?) means that it is caught in somethings gravitational field. You calculated the approx circum in years, now imagine how huge the gravitational field would have to be to keep this thing in orbit! Surely we could detect that? Perhaps it's some type of gravity we don't know about? Or maybes it's aliens with a rocket-planet? Aliens that like driving around in circles and messing with people.

reply to post by undo


You're right. But your assuming theyhave to start at some point and calculate. They're not.

I think none of that matters.

1.The Myan calendar ends when the planets line up.
2. astronomers know that will happen dec 21 2012

no conversion necessary

make sense?

Originally posted by Bigwhammy
reply to post by undo

 

You're right. But your assuming theyhave to start at some point and calculate. They're not.

I think none of that matters.

1.The Myan calendar ends when the planets line up.
2. astronomers know that will happen dec 21 2012

no conversion necessary

make sense?

Yes, actually, it does. (bet you're relieved lol)
But doesn't the long count have anything to do with that?
They aren't saying the planets line up at the end of the long count?
And if the end of the long count is X amount of solstices, wouldn't
it be necessary for the same amount of solstices to occur on our
calendar, thereby giving the date?
Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

Originally posted by Bigwhammy
reply to post by undo

 

You're right. But your assuming theyhave to start at some point and calculate. They're not.

I think none of that matters.

1.The Myan calendar ends when the planets line up.
2. astronomers know that will happen dec 21 2012

no conversion necessary

make sense?

Perhaps they used the planets lining up as a natural break in calander cycles. Once the lining up was close, they would start calculations on the next cycle.