Nibiru / Planet X orbit doesn't make sense!

perhaps since it's orbit is so long and it hasn't come near for a long time it's the light that appeared in the sky at Jesus' birth

Muaddib, I only said that the anomalies in uranus' orbit do not exist. This rules out a Planet X that is very large or close. It however does not rule out a very distant (like Sedna) Planet X that never comes close enough to influence the orbits. It doesn't rule out a brown dwarf at a lightyear away affecting the outer Oort cloud. That are real possibilities, but we have yet to find proof.

Amantine, is not the first time that NASA changes its mind over and over again. That report from 1992 was probably a response from the 1988 and earlier reports of NASA scientists that were reporting those anomalies. Years after 1992 scientists from NASA and others reported again the anomalies. NASA cannot deny it anymore because there are many amateur scientists and other agencies around the world. Maybe the 1992 report was an honest mistake, there have been more reports than the 1992 that "there are anomalies that keep influencing the outer planets."

One report from 1992 saying there are no anomalies does not destroy the dozens of reports, that came after and before the 1992 one, not only from NASA but other agencies from around the world that "there are anomalies"

How many times has NASA changed its mind that there was/there was not water on Mars?

Amantine, the proponent of that report is no other than E. Myles Standish Jr. He has been known to have set out only to debunk this theory of a major planet X. His own theory bases on the assumption that there is only a "planetoid" but there is no big object in the outskirts of our solar system, but as the recent discoveries have proven he was wrong about there not being a large object.

He also says on his own report that "there are anomalies" but he says they can be easily explained within the framework of the presently solar system and he attributes these anomalies to possible errors in the data.

What to me looks a bit strange is that the data now seems to indicate the effects seem to have diminished in the outer planets, but now the inner planets and the sun are reacting to something as the current data is indicating.

I am not completly sure what it means but it is a bit strange.

The ancients spoke of something big that seems to pass by close to the Earth once in a while. Many ancient texts talk about this object, even the bible mentions it, it is called in the bible as Wormwood.

Maybe some of you are familiar with father Malachi Martin.

"Father Malachi Brendan Martin, Roman Catholic priest, widely renowned theologian and best-selling author of 16 books, died in New York City on Tuesday, July 27, 1999, following a stroke.

Father Martin was born in Kerry, Ireland on July 23. 1921. He was educated at Belvedere College, and entered the Society of Jesus in 1939. He studied at the National University where he took a bachelor's degree in Semitic languages and Oriental history with parallel studies in Assyriology at Trinity College. He held degrees in Philosophy, Theology, Semitic Languages, Archeology and Oriental History from the University of Louvain, Belgium. He was ordained to the priesthood on the Feast of the Assumption, August 15, 1954.

Father Martin did parallel studies at Hebrew University, Jerusalem, and at Oxford University, specializing in intertestamentary studies and knowledge of Jesus as transmitted in Hebrew and Arabic manuscripts. Additional subjects of intense study for him during his formal education included rational psychology, experimental psychology, physics and anthropology."

Excerpt taken from
www.christianstudycenter.com...

In one interview done to the father in 1997, the last one before he died, he explained the sudden interest of the Vatican for building a large observatory in the States because of the knowledge of Vatican officials that something, that would affect us all, would be making its approach in 5-10 years, which would put it in the 2002-2007 year time frame.

Here is the interview of father Malachi Martin.
members.aol.com...


I am not 100% certain, but all of this seems to add up.
Zecharia Sitchin's translations of ancient Sumerian, we have at least one father who was a linguist among other studies he has done, and who studied ancient texts, the apparent diminishing of the anomalies which were discovered in years past at the same time that we have the inner planets and the sun now acting up to something. The Arctic ice has melted more than 40% since 1979 or so, and the melting has accelerated in recent years.
The Vatican's sudden interest in building a big observatory in the United States, we have now more scientists than ever in the South Pole and the ancient texts indicate this Nibiru/Wormwood approaches from the south. Anything approaching from the south or the north poles would not be seen anywhere else in the planet, but you will see the effects of that something in the solar system.

I am not certain and i admit i could be mistaken, but all of this is too much of a coincidence imo.

[Edited on 28-3-2004 by Muaddib]

I could not find any papers on Arxiv about any anomalies in the orbits of the different planets. Nor could I find any reference to anomolies in the orbits of Uranus and Neptune on any university site. An anomaly in the orbits of those planets would be very interesting and universities would be conducting research to find out what causes it. As you have said, amateur astronomers would be able to find such anomalies. Even your 'almighty' NASA can't stop that information
.
All evidence for a Planet X are some references in ancient texts, which we all ofcourse know for their great scientific value. The bible mentions it once and the Sumerian texts only if we accept the highly controversial Sitchin translations. On the other hand we have powerfull telescopes, able to detect the tiny Sedna, and deep space probes that both have found no evidence of Planet X.

What do you trust more, ancient texts or modern science?

Throughout the years science has been corroborating many of the concepts that have been known by the ancients and by those that have studied the knowledge of the past.

You want scientific proof and there is.

"Oct. 7, 1999 � Two teams of researchers have proposed the existence of an unseen planet or a failed star circling the sun at a distance of more than 2 trillion miles, far beyond the orbits of the nine known planets. The theory, which seeks to explain patterns in comets� paths, has been put forward in research accepted for publication in two separate journals."

"No telescope has yet detected this object. But on the basis of its gravitational effect, John B. Murray, a planetary scientist at Britain�s Open University, speculates that the object could be a planet larger than Jupiter, the biggest of the solar system�s known planets. Murray puts the object�s orbit at 32,000 AU, or 2.98 trillion miles from the sun. His proposal appears in the Oct. 11 issue of the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society."


Excerpts taken from.
www.msnbc.com...

----Here is a more recent take.

"Here's the problem: Scientists can't figure out how Sedna, which is about three-fourths as big as Pluto, came to have such a strange orbit around the sun. Sedna's path is highly elliptic. It ranges from 76 astronomical units, or AU, when it is closest to the sun to 1,000 AU when it is farthest. One AU is the distance from Earth to the sun, about 93 million miles or 150 million kilometers.

How on Earth could anything get into an orbit like that," wonders astronomer Brian Marsden. He suggests another sort of Earth might have had something to do with putting Sedna on its current, odd course."

"Several astronomers not involved in the discovery support the idea that Sedna was lured outward by a star. But others don't buy that explanation.

"I don't really like that," said Marsden, who heads the Minor Planet Center in Cambridge, Mass., where newfound solar system bodies are cataloged.

Marsden favors an object closer in, a "planetary object," he told Space.com, perhaps at between 400 and 1,000 AU.

"Perhaps there's more than one planet out there," Marsden said. "Who knows? But let's suppose it is something of an Earth mass, maybe even a few Earth masses. A close approach could throw this object [Sedna] from something more circular into something more eccentric."


Excerpts taken from
msnbc.msn.com...


Watch the video at this site.

xfacts.com...

As for why is it that no University is "officially" posting this information?

The concept of there being more planets in our solar system has always been a big taboo for science in general. In the past even if several scientists have reached the same conclusion, that there seems to be other planets in our solar system, this information has always taken longer to reach the "official title" and to be presented to the public.

When some of these scientists in the past have come forward with this information, even against the present doctrine of thought, they have been ridiculed to the extreme of losing their jobs. Now that information which used to be ridiculed is being presented as being real.

For years agnostics and those that have studied the past, ancient civilizations and have seen a common trend to what has been happenning to Earth have said that there have been "sudden Earth changes in the past."

The theory that extreme climatic changes take hundreds of years or even thousands of years was viewed "officially by science" as the only explanation for extreme climatic changes. Now after years of study it has been demonstrated that these changes can occur within our lifetime and in as much as 10 years or less.

For years those people that have studied the ancient texts and have a small knowledge of what the ancients knew have said there are more planets in the solar system, but science has adamantly said that is not true until a couple years ago.

Everyday science keeps concurring with the information that scholars in these fields have and those that study what the ancients knew.

Originally posted by MuaddibThe concept of there being more planets in our solar system has always been a big taboo for science in general.

Not true. In fact, there have been a lot of papers and discussion at academic conferences about this. As mathematical modeling became better, the consensus is that if there are still more planets beyond Pluto (more than the 3 they know of, including Sedna) that they are very very far away and don't influence the solar system as we know it.

And remember, Pluto and Sedna are SO small that they are debating whether or not they're planets.

In the past even if several scientists have reached the same conclusion, that there seems to be other planets in our solar system, this information has always taken longer to reach the "official title" and to be presented to the public.

Simply because the news is more interested in Michael Jackson or the latest doings of some sports or entertainment star than they are in reporting on science.

When some of these scientists in the past have come forward with this information, even against the present doctrine of thought, they have been ridiculed to the extreme of losing their jobs.

Not true. Do a little investigating (as some of us here have done.) We've found that the "scientists" often never worked for that company/university or were not real scientists OR were in other departments and those in the departments were often still working at the same job. Among academics (and I can speak on this from experience) it's perfectly normal to have wild differences of opinion. Nobody gets fired for that.

For years agnostics and those that have studied the past, ancient civilizations and have seen a common trend to what has been happenning to Earth have said that there have been "sudden Earth changes in the past."

I believe you mean either anthropologists or archaeologists (one of our subfields.)

I'm an anthropologist (yes, really, a graduate student anthropologist and as the other moderators can confirm, I go to conferences and give papers on anthropological issues.)

No, there haven't been any "sudden changes" in Earth. Yes, we have good written records/histories that go back around 4,000 years and other records before that.

* there haven't been any global disasters (other than the Ice Ages and those were hardly disasters or sudden) since the asteroid that wiped out most of the dinosaurs.
* There's no record of some planet/whatever showing up suddenly and causing changes.

For years those people that have studied the ancient texts and have a small knowledge of what the ancients knew have said there are more planets in the solar system, but science has adamantly said that is not true until a couple years ago.

No, what we say is "Stichin and his cohorts CAN'T READ SUMERIAN. Nor can these wild theorists read and translate ancient Egyptian." The ancients knew of the visible planets -- and only those. Uranus was too dim and looked too much like a fixed star... they never knew of planets beyond Saturn.

This has been proven time and time again by lists of planet names, by ancient astronomical charts, by ancient astronomical observatories.

The "more than nine planets" people are lying.

Everyday science keeps concurring with the information that scholars in these fields have and those that study what the ancients knew.

Which is that:
* the ancients were limited by their technology.
* we know more about the world than they did.
* there are a lot of frauds who want to sell books and make their living on their wild theories and they are hoping that you are too stupid to go look at the real information because once you do, you know what frauds they are.

Not true. In fact, there have been a lot of papers and discussion at academic conferences about this. As mathematical modeling became better, the consensus is that if there are still more planets beyond Pluto (more than the 3 they know of, including Sedna) that they are very very far away and don't influence the solar system as we know it.

Yes, but for years scientists that have put forth these theories were laughed at until recent years.

And remember, Pluto and Sedna are SO small that they are debating whether or not they're planets.

There are scientists that think there are bigger planets or a brown dwarf that could be causing the strange orbit of Sedna.

Simply because the news is more interested in Michael Jackson or the latest doings of some sports or entertainment star than they are in reporting on science..

Now there is something we agree on, but this is just part of the problem. It "normally" takes years for a discovery to make it to the media, or even "officially" to the internet.

(Muaddib)When some of these scientists in the past have come forward with this information, even against the present doctrine of thought, they have been ridiculed to the extreme of losing their jobs.

Not true. Do a little investigating (as some of us here have done.)

You mean the same investigating you did that gave you the conclusion the Vedic scriptures are a hoax? Good job, you should appear in the national news as the man who found the 5,000 plus year conspiracy of Hinduism.

(You make ad hominem attacks at me and I will respond the same way. You can be a moderator, but when you start insulting instead of just showing proof you lose all my respect.)

We've found that the "scientists" often never worked for that company/university or were not real scientists OR were in other departments and those in the departments were often still working at the same job. Among academics (and I can speak on this from experience) it's perfectly normal to have wild differences of opinion. Nobody gets fired for that.

Yes there are many fakes in all walks of life, if anyone I have posted about is such a fake show the proof. I do not agree with everything Sitchin says but there have been recent discoveries of science which have corroborated at least some of the things he had said.

Mark Hazlewood and Nancy liedeman (or whatever her last name) on the other hand did a disservice to the planet x theory. Those two are real scammers and back when they were crying to the top of their voice that it would pass by in 2003 i was one of the people that spoke against them, that there was no proof for the 2003 passing of any planets.

We do not know the exact time or if it will really get that close, but father Malachi Martin believed that something was approaching, althou he didn't know exactly when it would happen ( i posted information on his biography, if you are really a researcher then read his bio, do your research and listen to his interview.)

(Muaddib) For years agnostics and those that have studied the past, ancient civilizations and have seen a common trend to what has been happenning to Earth have said that there have been "sudden Earth changes in the past."

I believe you mean either anthropologists or archaeologists (one of our subfields.)

Some were in those fields but a large bulk of these people are what people consider agnostics and new agers.

I'm an anthropologist (yes, really, a graduate student anthropologist and as the other moderators can confirm, I go to conferences and give papers on anthropological issues.)

Congratulations, but as i can see even you make mistakes. (the Vedic scriptures exist and they speak of increadible technologies) Does having a degree makes you right in everything?

I have a degree too, it might not be in anthropology but my degree is in computers and electronics engineering. I am a member of the National Vocational Honor Society. I appeared in the 2002-2003 National Dean's List. I graduated with Highest Academic Honors and recieved Dintinguished Scholastic Achievement awards.

I have been a Mapper in South Florida, I have done legal descriptions and drawn maps of private, (I have revised properties of people like Gloria Stephan, and Sylvester Stallone's mansion in Miami-Dade county, which was sold this year) governmental and military properties that are valued from 1 million to the multimillion dollars.

I was also in the military in aircrew/aw before all that, i have done my share of studies and have probably more experience than you in construction. None of this makes me any better than another man or woman.

And i can tell you one thing, i know that Ed Leedskalnin
(the man who built Coral Castle in South FLorida with no degrees of any kind) and Nichola Tesla were a lot better than me. They both achieved things and contributed more to society than i will probably ever achieve or contribute. And they were mostly laughed at and died in poverty.

A degree means nothing if you don't use it together with respect and honor, and you haven't shown either.

No, there haven't been any "sudden changes" in Earth. Yes, we have good written records/histories that go back around 4,000 years and other records before that.

"Sudden climate transitions during the Quaternary

by Jonathan Adams (1.), Mark Maslin (2.) & Ellen Thomas (3.)


(1.) MS 6335, Environmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37831, USA

(2.) Environmental Change Research Centre, Department of Geography, University College London, 26 Bedford Way, London, WC1H 0AP, UK

(3.) Center for the Study of Global Change, Department of Geology and Geophysics, Yale University, PO Box 208109, New Haven, Connecticut 06520-8109, USA and Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Wesleyan University, 265 Church Street, Middletown CT 06459-0139, USA.

Abstract
The time span of the past few million years has been punctuated by many rapid climate transitions, most of them on time scales of centuries to decades or even less."

Excerpt taken from.
www.esd.ornl.gov...

"Accordingly, the spotlight in climate research is shifting from gradual to rapid change. In 2002 the National Academy of Sciences issued a report concluding that human activities could trigger abrupt change. Last year the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, included a session at which Robert Gagosian, director of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts, urged policymakers to consider the implications of possible abrupt climate change within two decades."

"The threat that has riveted their attention is this: Global warming, rather than causing gradual, centuries-spanning change, may be pushing the climate to a tipping point. Growing evidence suggests the ocean-atmosphere system that controls the world's climate can lurch from one state to another in less than a decade�like a canoe that's gradually tilted until suddenly it flips over. Scientists don't know how close the system is to a critical threshold. But abrupt climate change may well occur in the not-too-distant future. If it does, the need to rapidly adapt may overwhelm many societies�thereby upsetting the geopolitical balance of power."

"Scientists aren't sure what caused the warming that triggered such collapses in the remote past. (Clearly it wasn't humans and their factories.) But the data from Arctic ice and other sources suggest the atmospheric changes that preceded earlier collapses were dismayingly similar to today's global warming. As the Ice Age began drawing to a close about 13,000 years ago, for example, temperatures in Greenland rose to levels near those of recent decades. Then they abruptly plunged as the conveyor apparently shut down, ushering in the "Younger Dryas" period, a 1,300-year reversion to ice-age conditions. (A dryas is an Arctic flower that flourished in Europe at the time.)"

Excerpts not in order taken from
www.fortune.com...

To see the whole report now at that site you have to be a subscriber, but you can find the full report here also.

www.paxhumana.info...

* there haven't been any global disasters (other than the Ice Ages and those were hardly disasters or sudden) since the asteroid that wiped out most of the dinosaurs.

Refer to the link above.

* There's no record of some planet/whatever showing up suddenly and causing changes.

There is proof that shows there is a high possibility for such a planet, as for whether or not it will pass close to Earth, that's what "some of us" are trying to find out throught research and not by "bah, hogwash, i know its not true because i have a degree and that's the end of it."

(Muaddib) For years those people that have studied the ancient texts and have a small knowledge of what the ancients knew have said there are more planets in the solar system, but science has adamantly said that is not true until a couple years ago.

No, what we say is "Stichin and his cohorts CAN'T READ SUMERIAN. Nor can these wild theorists read and translate ancient Egyptian." The ancients knew of the visible planets -- and only those. Uranus was too dim and looked too much like a fixed star... they never knew of planets beyond Saturn.

If you can read Sumerian or Egyptian then post your own translation and post the degrees that shows that you can read these languages. In the meanwhile it is possible for a person to learn a language, even ancient language and don't have a degree. Eu falo portuguese y Espa�ol tambien and I don't have a degree in languages. I can also read both languages, portuguese i can't write that good, but Spanish I can write it perfectly. The point is you don't need a degree to learn a language.

And as to the "Nor can these wild theorists read and translate ancient Egyptian" You have shown me that you did not even look at the link i provided to the translation of the Abydos. That woman clearly stated in that link that she believes those are superimposed hieroglyphics, but i was using her translation to the rest of the hieroglyphics to make a point.

Don't hide behind your degree and think you know it all.

I knew an Archeologist by the name of Paul Pettennude, he had a phd in Archeology. He was a good man but he would swear back in 1995 that we had surveyed and mapped every inch of the seafloor of the atlantic ocean and there were no other major ancient sunken cities to be discovered. It is a shame he died in 1997 or 1998 (I was not able to maintain contact with the internet anymore at that time because of my military career) from an illness he contracted in South America. If he would have been alive today he would have seen he was mistaken.

This has been proven time and time again by lists of planet names, by ancient astronomical charts, by ancient astronomical observatories.

The "more than nine planets" people are lying.

Before science "officially" began to postulate the possibility of other planets in the outskirts of the Solar system, Sitchin was doing it. It is for granted that some scientists thought about this before him, but their theories back then were not accepted officially by science.

It is true that we owe a great deal to modern science, but we owe a great deal more to visionaries who contributed to science/technology and whose views were laughed at by science in their time.

(Muaddib) Everyday science keeps concurring with the information that scholars in these fields have and those that study what the ancients knew.

Which is that:
* the ancients were limited by their technology.
* we know more about the world than they did.
* there are a lot of frauds who want to sell books and make their living on their wild theories and they are hoping that you are too stupid to go look at the real information because once you do, you know what frauds they are.

And this comes from the man who says the Vedic scriptures are a hoax?

If you want to make a point show the proof and do not resort to ad hominem attacks, which speaks volumes of who you are.

[Edited on 29-3-2004 by Muaddib]

[Edited on 29-3-2004 by Muaddib]

[Edited on 29-3-2004 by Muaddib]

Not going into historical writings, I wonder if indeed something could explain some anomalies in the sun's movement...

It has been theorized (sorry no links, don't remember where I read that, I'll try to find it again) that the sun could have a small companion star, a brown dwarf of about 8% of the sun's mass that would account for some of the solar's system "missing mass". The Kuiper belt and the Oort cloud also could be or could contribute to this.

This said, it is highly unlikely that any planet X do exist now, but it is indeed very likely that objects very far away are still orbiting the sun. When one looks at Sedna highly elliptical orbit, it is only reasonnable to think that some other asteroids/planetoids are orbiting even farther.

Now about that speculated companion star, it is also possible (but less likely) that it would actually be a very small black hole that the sun is orbiting... If it is a brown dwarf, it is believed that it would never be closer than 1000UA from the sun, which would make it almost undetectable, even if we knew exactly where to point a telescope...

My personal belief is that we don't know a lot actually about our solar system, and Pluto itself was only discovered in the 1930's. It is not actually even a planet as such, and we would have thus 8 planets...

We still continue today to call it planet, but it is only a bad habit that remains...

Now about the fact that some objects (planets, asteroids, comets,...) can have a highly elliptical orbit, the answer in the Lagrange points.

Read this (in French, sorry for those...)

or this.

This later link provides other references, and who would want to go a bit further can easily find elliptical orbits explained.

Another possibility is that the solar system and the part of the galaxy we are in enters an area of the universe which is hotter, for some reason. Maybe because of a gigantic cloud of interstellar dust or something. Since we are so small, we can not measure it.

About the hieroglyphics in Abydos: Here is a question about those who support the 'double layer' hypothesis: where are the other double layers ? why are the rest of the hieroglyphics not explained by using the double-layer hypothesis ? why did the artists make perfectly sensible hieroglyphics except those that show aircrafts/UFOs ?

Originally posted by Muaddib

Not true. In fact, there have been a lot of papers and discussion at academic conferences about this. As mathematical modeling became better, the consensus is that if there are still more planets beyond Pluto (more than the 3 they know of, including Sedna) that they are very very far away and don't influence the solar system as we know it.

Yes, but for years scientists that have put forth these theories were laughed at until recent years.

Actually, no. Sitchin and Velikovsky WERE laughed at, yes, because their pseudo-science is so ludicrous. If you check www.scirus.com (the science journal search engine) you'll see over 5,100 entries for "kupier" www.scirus.com...
and nearly 500 for "kupier object"

I don't know the oldest citation, but scientists with a good background in orbital mechanics have been talking about this for years. It's only the folk who blather out unsubstantiated data who get giggled at.

And remember, Pluto and Sedna are SO small that they are debating whether or not they're planets.

There are scientists that think there are bigger planets or a brown dwarf that could be causing the strange orbit of Sedna.

Can you cite one or two of them that think this? I just did a journal search and can't find anyone who thinks there's a brown dwarf out there (mainly because a brown dwarf IS a star and it does glow and something that close to our solar system would be kinda noticeable.)

But... if you've got the astronomical journal/astronomical conference citations for this, I'd like to look at the math on it.

You mean the same investigating you did that gave you the conclusion the Vedic scriptures are a hoax? Good job, you should appear in the national news as the man who found the 5,000 plus year conspiracy of Hinduism.

Perhaps you misread my intentions. The description of the weapon was indeed something from the Vedic scriptures. The description of the "radiation" wasted cities, however, is the hoax.

(Muaddib) For years agnostics and those that have studied the past, ancient civilizations and have seen a common trend to what has been happenning to Earth have said that there have been "sudden Earth changes in the past."

(Byrd)I believe you mean either anthropologists or archaeologists (one of our subfields.)

(Muaddib)Some were in those fields but a large bulk of these people are what people consider agnostics and new agers.

I don't see the connection here. A lot of folks of a variety of beliefs believed Velikovsky/Sitchin/etc. That doesn't make them astrophysicists or experts in history or anything else. Perhaps you could explain your line of reasoning here?

No, there haven't been any "sudden changes" in Earth. Yes, we have good written records/histories that go back around 4,000 years and other records before that.

(Adams/Maslin/Thomas citation noted)

Abstract
The time span of the past few million years has been punctuated by many rapid climate transitions, most of them on time scales of centuries to decades or even less." (etc)

Again, I don't get how this applies to the mythical Planet X. According to Sitchin and company, it comes in and you get changes and disasters that occur in days; not vast changes that occur over the space of a decade or more.

As the Ice Age began drawing to a close about 13,000 years ago, for example, temperatures in Greenland rose to levels near those of recent decades. Then they abruptly plunged as the conveyor apparently shut down, ushering in the "Younger Dryas" period, a 1,300-year reversion to ice-age conditions. (A dryas is an Arctic flower that flourished in Europe at the time.)

Excerpts not in order taken from
www.paxhumana.info...

MMMmkayyyy... read the article. They don't define "abrupt climate changes" but there's nothing cited about a sudden global climate disaster that changes the entire climate overnight. And this is what Sitchin and company postulate: a 3,600 year orbital period by a large planetary body that sweeps through and causes earthquakes and floods and other disasters. We do have a long sequence of tree ring data on climate. None of the oldest living things on Earth show proof of a cataclysm during their lifetimes. This is also confirmed by tree ring databases.
wiki.cotch.net...

The creosote would have been alive for 2-3 returns of this imaginary planet. The tree ring databases are good for 3-4 returns of the mythical planet... and none of them record the changes that Sitchin insists were caused by the mythical planet Nibiru.

There is proof that shows there is a high possibility for such a planet, as for whether or not it will pass close to Earth, that's what "some of us" are trying to find out throught research and not by "bah, hogwash, i know its not true because i have a degree and that's the end of it."

So why is the tree ring evidence of NO disaster (as well as the cities present at the time which show no disaster) not convincing?

If you can read Sumerian or Egyptian then post your own translation and post the degrees that shows that you can read these languages... The point is you don't need a degree to learn a language.

I don't know if you'd care to peruse the webpage, but the details are here:
www.xs4all.nl...

There are other pages from Biblical scholars (who have done research and read the languages) that dispute Sitchin's scholarship (he's a journalist and proclaims himself an expert in these areas... but has shown no proof of his expertise. Indeed, he gets lambasted for his inability to translate Hebrew correctly by Hebrew scholars.) I'll look them up later if you're interested in that.

And as to the "Nor can these wild theorists read and translate ancient Egyptian" You have shown me that you did not even look at the link i provided to the translation of the Abydos.

Guilty as charged, I'm afraid. I will read through shorter answers but when I'm tired and in a hurry, I won't read all the links on a longer answer.

Before science "officially" began to postulate the possibility of other planets in the outskirts of the Solar system, Sitchin was doing it. It is for granted that some scientists thought about this before him, but their theories back then were not accepted officially by science.

Are you sure? The earliest citation I see for him is 1977
www.scifan.com...

In the astronomical journal, Icarus, there's a 1973 reference to a hypothesized planet beyond Pluto with an orbital period of 600 years. That predates Sitchin by several years (the theory was later dismissed.) I don't have time to hunt the exact reference for you, but I can. Please note that although it was debated mathematically, nobody dismissed this scientist's calculations or threw them out of the profession.

Has anyone seen the pictures of the sky with two suns in it?? Supposedly it is The sun and nibiru, if anyone can find the pictures please can you post them. Ill try to find them too.

^Those pictures are just a double of the sun...called sundogs, anyways, I think we would have heard about it by now if it was that close

I've heard rumors that the Annunakki claimed their gods came from this planet, but they must get pretty cold when they take that long trip out into space.

As a planet - I think its of chart - that kind of gravity!? Either planet would incorporate as “regular“ part of our solar system or when goes so far ( 3600 years !?!?) it would simply, flay off in the space.

But - there is a Nemesis theory or rather hypothesis ( and one published in “Nature“ ) from Richard Muller of Berkeley ( “ The Death Star“) (( it started by Louis Alvarez, Muller mentor)) about binary - sister companion star of our Sun- being red or brown dwarf, existing and making disturbance somewhere in Oort Cloud. It was based on the hypothesis that Earth is going through regular extinction cycle of some 26 mil years.

As envisioned by Muller, Davis, and Hut, Nemesis is probably a red dwarf, the most common type of star in the galaxy (three-fourths of all the stars in the Milky Way are believed to be red dwarfs). Less than a third the size of the sun and about one one-thousandth as bright, Nemesis might travel in an elliptical orbit that at its perihelion (closest point) brings it within a half light year of the sun (one light year is about six trillion miles) and into the midst of the Oort Cloud. Right now, Nemesis may be at its aphelion (most distant point), nearly three light years away. The sun’s closest known neighbor, Proxima Centauri, is about 4.25 light years distant.

source

And now - Muller and some other physicists, are scanning the sky- hunting Nemesis.

So far, the Nemesis search has eliminated 41 stars. Says Perlmutter, "The system was difficult to start, but we’ve got it down now and could soon have the data on 3,000 more stars." It is Muller’s suspicion that Nemesis might well be hiding in a constellation in the southern hemisphere called Hydra, simply because," he muses, "It’s the biggest."

And off course - there are tons of ideas about incoming flyby of Planet X, through photon belt, which is triggering global warming, shadow government, religious based prophecies...


As - for Sumerian “myth“ - why “planet“ Nibiru- why not a huge space ship “Nibiru“ that come and go!?



Indeed -there are changes in our Solar System - sun spots activity is greater than anything recorded. And not just in heliosphere - but all over other planets and their moons: Martian atmosphere is getting thicker, than ever before, South Pole is melting rapidly....the brightness of planets is also changing - look at Venus, brighter than than  ever...... same with Neptune and Uranus............“Jupiter´s energetic charge has risen so high that there is actually a visible tube of ionizing radiation that´s formed between the surface of Jupiter and its moon Io. You can actually see the luminous energy tube in photographs that have been taken recently“ - its magnetic field has doubled.....


On Earth we can se increasing in volcanic activity..... stronger and more frequent hurricanes, typhoons, mud slides. tsunamis, not to mention melting of polar caps.....

Is this “business as usual“ or ....What does all this mean? What is “normal“ for solar system? What do we know?

Do we turn far back in time and ask Sumerians or Hindus or consult Kabbalah or Bible?