THREE new planets photographed in the sky!! nibiru? eris? sackloth?

reply to post by EluThingol


i triple posted because i am answering everyones question, and for someone who isnt interested in the content of the thread and trying to abuse my thoughts on the subject to post 4-5 comments consecutivley is merely adding more pages to the thread he feels is nonsensical.

THAT is nonsensical

reply to post by jdub297


oh do shutup! i need to be banned? for what exactly? i think u need to have a rethink!!

also this book called the bible is the only proof we have that jesus existed..wether he did or not DOES remain a mystery but people live thier lives by his teachings and again a whole religion is based around him.

nibiru has been documented by the sumerians and the hopi tribe as the planet of passing, scriptures and drawings etc exist, so whats the difference??

u cant see neither jesus or nibiru, so the same situation is occuring except that a religion isnt being based around nibiru.

also if ur implying that i made this thread to fool people u are way off the mark when i sed i didnt make this thread to fool everyone i meant just that not in the sense that i did it too fool some people, that comment was a response to someone calling me a fearmonger, and that was not my intent, i was pointing out that people wether they choose to believe or not have the brains to do so. i genuinley believe that what is captured in the picture is real and thats MY choice, everyone can believe what they want.

reply to post by NWOnoworldorder


Are you so stuck in this delusion, this "belief", that you cannot see this obvious contradiction, that you just wrote?:

...nibiru has been documented by the sumerians and the hopi tribe as the planet of passing, scriptures and drawings etc exist....

MY emphasis on "drawings" and "exist". Does that not imply that it was 'seen'???

Because, next sentence:

...u cant see neither jesus or nibiru...

Can't have it both ways.

BTW: Are 'u' using a mobile device to post? It's usually more polite to forego with the "text-speak" on ATS, if you can....thanks.

reply to post by weedwhacker


i will type how i please, u arent having any difficulty understanding what im typing as your responding AND quoting me, so stop being so pendantic will you? IF YOU PLEASE!

reply to post by NWOnoworldorder


I see you ignored the real part of my post, and instead focused on the other aspect.

Please take the time to check the T & Cs (although, after reviewing, the primary "rule" is to type posts in "English", not a 'foreign' language, primarily).

HOWEVER, the general consensus on this board, that you may not have been aware of, is that "text speak" is frowned upon. By one interpretation, I suppose you might consider it to be 'english', but I, and many others, certainly don't.

I would think that a person who has completed at least five years of higher education, as in college or "graduate" level, would appreciate this nicety.

Plus, as a bonus, anything you write will tend to receive more respect....or, at least, if the content is deserving. As it is, the use of "shorthand" is immediately off-putting, and sends people the wrong way you may have intended. Like it or not, people of intellectual prowess find it annoying.......

reply to post by weedwhacker


hmmmm yes...noted....however i think you are mistaking me with someone who actually cares?.....

now i notice that your clinging on to this thread, might i suggest another? seeing as there really isnt anything left to discuss other than grammer and use of the english language...which unfortunately IS NOT what the thread is about and you have veered off topic.

thankyou for all your input

good day

reply to post by vkturbo


That is where 80% of the members end up giving as a source to use in their threads, so using Wikipedia is the norm here I hate to say. They may use other peoples words, they also do have good info and I am not a fan of wikipedia but what can you do?

reply to post by EluThingol


Thanks for the info.

1. I thought that maybe 1 in 4 stars was in a binary system. The ratio continues to change over time as more observations are made. It's truly amazing at all f the new ideas that are developed to find out more about the universe we live in.

2. There is no approaching sun heating up our solar system. It would be incredibly obvious if there were an approaching star.

3. The notion that global warming is happening throughout the soalr system is a bit of a baloney story. The first part of the site you linked to is about a Russian who has a controversial idea. The idea is based on seeing a few years of data on the extent of the Martian poles. They appear to be getting smaller. The conventional thinking is that this is due to the rotational properties of Mars. The Russian has another explanation, which flies in the face of much of climate theory.

4. I did not ask about Pluto, but about the brightenign of Uranus claim.

Pluto is not warming despite moving away from the sun. Pluto is exhibiting thermallag. Just as the summer is warmer well after the longest day of the year and the winter is colder well after the shortest day of the year, Pluto too is showing off its newly formed atmosphere after the closest approach to the sun.

5. Magnetic field strength can be measured on the sun using spectrographic means, but that cannot be done on Mercury. A spacecraft is currently doing that on Mercury. That spacecraft is not showing differences with previous measurements is it.

6. I was well aware of the changes of the precession rate for the Earth. It is also clear that the ratre is not increasing exponentially.

7. So precession could happen with or without a moon. The moon is not causing precession.

Given that our solar system is binary, the rotation of the other star and it's planets would be in a direction opposite to the one our part of the system is moving at.

Where is the other object if we are in a binary system?
Why would the orientation of the planets of another system be dependent on the orientation of our system?

Causing the planet to be destroyed, leavingg in it's place the asteroid belt, and bouncing from the impact - Earth.

There isn't enough mass in the asteroid belt to form a planet.

reply to post by NWOnoworldorder


This is just more nonsense. Can you tell us any observation that they made that was superior?

reply to post by NWOnoworldorder


I'm not a debunker. I'm simply pointing out that this thread is about making the preposterous inference that "whatever" in the images is a new planet. There are no new planets. You can argue if they are lens flares or sun dogs or photoshop all you want. There are no new planets.

reply to post by NWOnoworldorder


Your argument is ridiculous unless you are claiming that Nibiru is supernatural. You are mixing apples and oranges to claim that the existence of god is the same as the existence of a planet.

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


Straying even more off the original intent of the thread's OP, but what the heck!?

I am not entirely convinced that Wiki is all THAT bad, as a source. Its only Achilles Heel may be that it is "accessible for edit" by any Tom, Dick or Harry who chooses to do so....but, it is self-correcting, when BAD or FALSE info is posted, and when articles are altered maliciously.

Meanwhile, yes....I guess until corrected, the BAD info might be spread around...but it does get corrected.

It evolves.

Plus, Wiki adapts and improves, with time, and with new (confirmed) information, as it occurs.

HOWEVER....when cited, it is best to try to find deeper sources, as well, if possible. Just, some Internet Search Engines keep going to Wiki first, so it's a matter of convenience. AND, it is nicely presented, and easy in many ways, compared to slogging through other sources.

I try to balance, personally, when good stuff is equally easy to find....in casual Internet searches.

Another point to remember is: THE INTERNET is NOT the ONLY place to find information!!!! I cannot emphasize that enough. When we discuss, in this forum, in this format, it is most convenient, but by NO MEANS THE ONLY source out there!!!

I often suggest getting to a library, especially for ATS members who may never have set foot in one. READ, and learn, is my advice. The Web is handy, but therein is its curse, too.....

reply to post by EluThingol


There is no such thing as a proper Nibiru disclosure video since it is demonstrable that no new planets can enter the orbits of the known planets.

Wow is that where we have finally gone now? What is the problem if someone wants to make it easier to type. If you can get your point across without it being a lengthy post than good for them. I see a few posts that want to mention T&C of ATS which is fine but also remember that goes both ways and the name calling has also been addressed here on ATS so maybe all parties should take note of this. When did we get the thread police on ATS, because I would think if the mods think this thread needs to be closed they will do that as we do have the best mods on the net and they do a great job. So let them do what they do best. Whether or not it fits your way of thinking this thread is very interesting to read. If this was real or not it is not a members place to tell other members that what they believe in or what they think is foolish and wrong, because one last thing to remember is that your opinions only matter to you. And yes that is what I said your opinion matters to you. Also OP if you fee strongly about your beliefs do not let the computer clan tell you what your supposed to believe in. And since you haven't backed down from what you believe in you get a S&F for that.

reply to post by weedwhacker


I was just commenting on a post that talked about wikipedia as a source.I am not saying that wikipedia is all bad, because I have used it in the past,but you have to try and figure out what to use and what not to. That is what has become the norm for people that are researching things. Until something else comes around that is better than wikipedia that is the best we have to use.I wasn't trying to get off topic it just ended up going tat way. Sorry about that little distraction.

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


FULL clarity understood.

Thank you.

NOW....the OP: So many pages already, and this is (as usual) going to get lost in the mix. Because, a thread like this will be "automatically" sent to certain ATS page categories, and seen by non-members AND members alike, because of the metrics involved in the calculations and algorithms that determine thread "prominence" in the ATS servers....

How am I doing, so far????

NOW....let us RECAP, please.

------NO NEW PLANETS WERE "photographed" in the sky!!

RIGHT THERE. END THREAD. OVER and OUT!!!!

Care to continue this so-called "debate"????

reply to post by stereologist


I was thinking about this and if you do not agree then so be it, but how do we know what is the norm when it comes to space. I wonder if it has occurred to anyone that what we know about space here on earth is actually the norm as space is so vast we haven't even scratched the surface as to what may occur up there. All the scientific data we have has been done by earthbound scientists. Now don't get me wrong here but what if all we know about space isn't even close to the way things happen in space.

reply to post by weedwhacker


Why do people not understand that everyone has different views on everything. Just read what was posted and if you feel he is wrong then post your disagreement to what he posted and if it falls on deaf ears why stay on the post and continually berate the OP. There are many other threads that can be looked at. So since this thread is over and done for you then you should stop there and move on. It's not that hard is it? Also no need to use all caps when replying as I have been very civil up to this point,so I would expect the same.

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


You have missed the point, terribly.

The original post is based on a mistaken belief, on the outset.

See?

Some anonymous guy, who sounds somewhat "clever" (maybe because of an 'exotic' accent?) posts his, and his wife's, interpretations of a (falsely interpreted) view, based on a single image from their iPhone camera memory?????

THIS is NOT a basis for a "conspiracy", sorry....it IS, though, a possible basis for some mental health evaluations.

Should anyone properly qualified happen by, and wish to voice an educated opinion on the matter....

reply to post by NWOnoworldorder


great video and great thread. i am still undecided about the legitimacy of "nibiru" but the video is pretty good.
star and flag

subfab