COMETGATE !!! Elinin+2005 YU55+Nibiru = A Major Concern for Humankind: Triple Threat From Space

Originally posted by daz__
reply to post by Phage

 

I conditionally accept your offer upon proof of claim it is not true.

peace

daz

your data mr phage or do you just expect us to take your word for things as usual.

I found that there were many things about this comet that were not fitting to well. The “expert”, Don Yeomans from JPL, formulates projections of Hale-Bopp’s path through our solar system, based upon observations. These are called “ephemeris’”. Period comets do not regularly change their approach and departure, with a very few exceptions. But the trajectory of Hale-Bopp has changed. And not just once or twice. Mr Yeoman has so far to date FORTY-ONE solutions concerning Hale-Bopp! First estimates show it passing just under an AU (93 Million miles-the distance from the sun to the Earth) from the sun. With an ephemeris that has changed a number of times, it appears that it may likely be coming more like 20 million miles closer to the sun. In astronomical terms, this can make quite a difference. But I’m getting ahead of myself a bit.

source

I could post this type of material for weeks. Surly you can come up with at least one link to support your claim.

peace

daz

reply to post by daz__

You are asking me to prove a negative. Please prove that the orbit of Hale-Bopp exhibited short term changes during it's approach in 1995-1997.

Again, you are quoting a source which claims that changes in the calculated ephemerides represent a change in orbit rather than a refining of the orbit based on more observations. More observations = a more accurate ephemeris.

Hale Bopp's perihelion was .914 AU, that's pretty much "just under an AU" of the initial call and nowhere near the 20 million miles Moyer babbled about. Moyer was wrong. The initial ephemeris was good, and with more observations they got better. Just as they are with Elenin.

I'm sure you can post garbage "sources" for weeks. How about some that makes some sense.

reply to post by thorfourwinds


I just don`t think people are quite getting it just yet,but I am sure it will be seen soon.

This is not the end of anything, it is a beginning of a very appropriate transition from the government explorers to the people who have funded those government explorers being able to get out and reap the benefits of that exploration themselves,” he said “That goes across all borders, it is going to be based on merit, it is going to be based what different countries, what different companies in those countries, can bring to the game. I think that within the next five years we will see the launch of multiple space facilities. It is time for private companies, no matter what country they are in, to begin co-operating and opening the airlock to space.”

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by daz__

 

You are asking me to prove a negative. Please prove that the orbit of Hale-Bopp exhibited short term changes during it's approach in 1995-1997.

Again, you are quoting a source which claims that changes in the calculated ephemerides represent a change in orbit rather than a refining of the orbit based on more observations. More observations = a more accurate ephemeris.

Hale Bopp's perihelion was .914 AU, that's pretty much "just under an AU" of the initial call and nowhere near the 20 million miles Moyer babbled about. Moyer was wrong. The initial ephemeris was good, and with more observations they got better. Just as they are with Elenin.

I'm sure you can post garbage "sources" for weeks. How about some that makes some sense.

edit on 2/27/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)

As usual you play the same game and expect people to believe your version of science which is nothing got to do with science. The burden of prooving rests on your shoulders. you have run down the esteemed astronemers that worked on the tmgnow.com web site and yet you bring forward nothing of substance except your hearsay.

At least I have garbage sources. Have you brought anything to the table yet. Or is it your objective to spread disinformation and derail the thread.

LINEAR may have disappointed casual stargazers, but it is intriguing professional astronomers with unpredictable behavior including jets that are perturbing the comet's orbit and an outburst in July that may have sent a fragment hurtling away from the comet's core.

science.nasa.gov

now continue with your disinformation.

peace to you

daz__

from the same article

Something similar happened to the already-brilliant comet C/1996 B2 (Hyakutake) in 1996. Ground based telescopes recorded transitory flares while the Hubble Space Telescope and others captured pictures of fragments flying away from the nucleus (see below).

science.nasa.gov

same article again. just another garbage source though

Like comet Hyakutake, comet LINEAR is a "dirty snowball" from the outer reaches of the solar system. Its nucleus is laced with volatile gasses that vaporize furiously as the comet falls toward the Sun. Marsden explains that this is probably LINEAR's first visit to the inner solar system, and it has a greater proportion of vaporizable material than comets that have passed by the Sun many times before (e.g., Halley's Comet). C/1999 S4 is losing so much of its mass to solar vaporization that it's being pushed and shoved by the reaction force of its own gaseous jets. Just as a jet airplane under its own power does not follow a ballistic trajectory, LINEAR's orbit is not a perfect gravitational ellipse

science.nasa.gov

Sorry OP I do not want to derail your thread but I feel obliged to prove my point here. It is so frustrating sometimes on this forum that is supposed to deny ignorance it is a wonder there are any intelligent people here at all. but yet another garbage source

The frequent erratic motions of comets—in apparent violation of gravitational laws—have long been attributed to the “jets” seen erupting from the nucleus. The distinguished astronomer Fred Whipple first suggested that jets from comets could account for unpredictable motions. As summarized by Francis Reddy in an obituary the day after Whipple’s death in 2004, the astronomer believed that “The jets supply a force that can either speed or slow a comet, depending on the way it rotates — a force unaccounted for in the astronomical calculations used in predicting comet returns”. As Comet Linear moved toward perihelion, a NASA release stated, “powerful jets of gas vaporized by solar radiation have been pushing the comet to and fro”. Astronomers applied the same interpretation to the energetic jets of Borrelly and Wild 2. But in the case of Wild 2 (see link above), the close-up photographs gave no indication of caverns in which selective heating by the Sun could build up the pressures of “jet chambers” or produce the sonic and supersonic jet velocities our instruments have measured. And yet today, the astronomers’ dogma holds: “What else could these jets be”? To save the theory astronomers cling to the incredible.

thunderbolts.info

peace to you all

daz

Originally posted by daz__

At least I have garbage sources.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Garbage in.... garbage out!

I guess the meat of the matter I would like to get to is explained further down that thunderbolts article

From an electric viewpoint there is no enigma in these comet attributes. The jets are not released under pressure but are created by electric arcs to the surface, and it is these arcs that carve out the surface craters. The jets do not explode from hidden areas within the nucleus. In the best photos ever of a comet, Wild 2 (link above), no such caverns are evident. Rather, we see hot spots on high points and on the rims of shallow, flat-bottomed craters. By now it should be obvious that something more than gravity is at work in the behavior of comets. Since a comet holds a highly negative charge, it attracts the positively charged particles of the solar wind, giving rise to an immense envelope of ionized hydrogen, up to millions of miles across. But the comet watchers do not realize that this vast envelope is gathered and held electrically. And so the question continues to haunt them: How could a tiny piece of rock, no more than a few miles wide, gravitationally entrain and hold in place a ten million mile wide bubble of hydrogen against the force of the solar wind? Yes, the entrained envelope is extremely diffuse, but in gravitational terms it should not be there!

And thank you phage for helping me get this far as I probably would have abandoned this thread much earlier.

peace all

daz

i see the shills are arriving.

so long thread

point made

peace all

daz

reply to post by daz__
Yes, the orbit of comets can be affected by jets but not enough so you would notice, unless you were around for a long time.

LINEAR S4's erratic jets make predicting the long term fate of the comet tricky. "The large nongravitational effect complicates the calculation of long-term motion," continued Marsden. "Without the nongravitational effect, comet LINEAR would be back in some 30,000 years. With it, I don't know."

science.nasa.gov...

Here is the first set of orbital elements for Hale-Bopp. August 1995.

Orbital elements:
C/1995 O1 (Hale-Bopp)
T 1997 Apr. 1.80952 TT Marsden
q 0.9281873 (2000.0) P Q
Peri. 129.95583 -0.13435701 -0.16622733
Node 282.33948 +0.27126152 +0.94200416
e 1.0 Incl. 89.77943 +0.95308204 -0.29154183
From 208 observations 1995 July 24-Aug. 1.

www.minorplanetcenter.org...

May 1996

Epoch 2450520.50000 = 1997 Mar 13.00000
Post-Fit Std.Dev.
e 0.995038361 .000005177
q 0.914119479 .000009551
Tp 2450539.6668732 .0031738483 1997 Apr 1.16687
Node 282.4709323 .0000289
w 130.5943673 .0003987
i 89.4283468 .0002580

www2.jpl.nasa.gov...

June 1996

Epoch 2450520.50000 = 1997 Mar 13.00000
Post-Fit Std.Dev.
e .995072729 .000004475
q .914084667 .000007855
Tp 2450539.6399555 .0023588 1997 Apr 1.13996
Node 282.4707037 .0000174
w 130.5927430 .0003436
i 89.4299101 .0001570

www2.jpl.nasa.gov...

August 1996

Epoch 2450520.50000 = 1997 Mar 13.00000
Post-Fit Std.Dev.
e 0.995074405 .000002637
q 0.914091158 .000003276
Tp 2450539.6403976 .000784846 1997 Apr 1.14040
Node 282.4707136 .000006434
w 130.5924921 .000208536
i 89.4297811 .000059341

www2.jpl.nasa.gov...

September 1996
www2.jpl.nasa.gov...

November 1996
www2.jpl.nasa.gov...

January 1997
www2.jpl.nasa.gov...

March 1997
www2.jpl.nasa.gov...

April 1997
www2.jpl.nasa.gov...

Notice the perihelion distance (q). Didn't change a whole lot did it? Notice the other parameters. Didn't change much did they? Notice that the margin of error the (Post-Fit Std. Dev.), gets less and less with each set of orbital elements. More observations, more accurate elements.

On the very first set of orbital elements the perihelion was set at 0.928 AU, when it was far beyond the orbit of Jupiter. By May of 1996 it was established at .914 (a change of 1.5%) where it remained. The actual perihelion was .914 AU. Yessir, that comet was zig-zagging all over the sky wasn't it?

"Esteemed astronomers" on tmgnow. Like the one who claimed Hale-Bopp was a planet?
Funny, it seems that Steve Moyer sort of disappeared after Hale-Bopp passed through. It seems that his estimate of perihelion wasn't quite right. I wonder what happened to all his other proclamations.

Originally posted by daz__
At least I have garbage sources.

This thread is one big mess, and then I read this above.
Admitting your sources are garbage are no way to defend yourself.
Pathetic

reply to post by gringoboy


Greetings gringoboy:

Glad to see that you are still hanging in there. It's getting close.

Coffee has doubled in the last 12 months, the price of corn jumped 80% in the same time frame, wheat has doubled in 7 months - 1 out of 6 humans worldwide are desperately hungry and 1/2 of and average Egyptian's take-home pay is spent on food - before these problems as of late! Something has to give... And we'll be in Libya up to our ears in a few days. Remember "U.S.A. Splash 2, Libya 0?" We should have finished the job then... just saying.

To the point at hand:

Your additions to these varied discussions are appreciated and certainly well thought out. We find America today on the verge of bankruptcy, having to deal with skyrocketing fuel and energy prices, everyone fearing the next earthquake while enduring massive flooding (that will inevitably lead to widespread food shortages), out-of-control wildland fires in multiple states here in the homeland - and worldwide - and with everything piling up, the sheeple are getting excessively worked up about the symptoms and failing to consider underlying causes. Doesn't Timewave Zero call for an 8.0 quake in Alaska on March 21, the vernal equinox? And Dancing With the Stars is back! We live in exciting times.

As a service, I am sharing these links to aid the true student and help keep the sheeple up-to-date on many fronts.

Earthquakes, Floods, Volcanoes, Tornados, Severe Weather, Fires, Disaster Assistance, Space Weather, and Orbit trackers for C/2010 X1 / Elinin, 2005 YU55, and 2003 UB313 / 136199 Eris (Brown Dwarf) can be found HERE.

COMETGATE-Part 2 is almost ready. I am coding by hand this time so as not to lose anything when formatting "in the box." This space program information subterfuge appears to be the mother of all conspiracies coming to pass right before our eyes, and getting these things wrong can affect our very survival. Please understand I do not seek to create fear, but instead, to sound an alert and provide a basis for understanding our current, very real, dilemma and provide a forum for discussion regarding these challenges to life and sanity on this planet that must be met with clear minds and sound hearts. All hands on deck!

BTW, I was following a path The 2011 Sagan Exoplanet Summer Workshop: "Exploring Exoplanets with Microlensing" that lead me to NAI Workshop Without Walls on Molecular Paleontology and Resurrection: Rewinding the Tape of Life - one of my favorite topics - "where participants discuss ‘top down’ origin of life research, which will ultimately allow us to rewind the evolutionary record of biochemical processes and assemblies."

And somehow ended up with this little gem.

This one might occupy you for at least a minute...

Extreme Planet Makeover

And another must have:

Solar System Simulator


In Peace & Light
tfw


SURVIVING THE AMERICAN FOOD CRISIS OF 2011

DOMINO EFFECT OF FEBRUARY 2011 - I Had a Dream About America's Future

reply to post by thorfourwinds


Well ,ying and Yang ,we are all exploring the big bang ,or multiple unsymetrical big bangs throughout the void of limitless energies transfering in a multi cosmic paradigm..Oh...no, that was quite ethereal and paranormal.Need to stop reading mr Jung,don``t want books falling from the bookshelves ?
Funny,einstein and De Boer,Jung and Freud,why the hell is Ying and Yang everywhere !Sun and brown dwarf,perplexing dillemas,and considering in decades in the future all will be as De Boer stated"Can you really prove it is`nt "(in the eye of the beholder).I digress ,and digest the dimensional conquest.
Phage:
BY WAY OFF HALE BOPP WAS AND STILL IS A WELL DEFINED RECORDED COMET JUST LIKE OLE HALLEY ..
Elenine is just a baby....arriving into its crib.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by gringoboy

 

Apollo 10 did not "slingshot" around the Moon. It orbited the Moon for 2 and half days before firing its rocket to leave lunar orbit and return to Earth.

But sure. An asteroid which was on a precisely calculated trajectory, moving at a precisely calculated size, approaching the Moon at a precisely calculated distance, might do that. But this asteroid is not doing that.

If the apollo missions did not slingshot around the moon then whats this,sheeple be sure to click on lunar trajectory and click your rocket from earth to moon,slingshot,well ,I thought the missions to the moon did`nt slingshot !Now do the reverse,select earth trajectory......oh well !
spaceflight.nasa.gov...
BE SURE TO CHECK BELOW FOR FURTHER ENLIGHTENMENT

reply to post by gringoboy

The Apollo missions entered stable orbits around the Moon.
This is a slingshot:
www.schoolphysics.co.uk...

reply to post by gringoboy Apollo 10 did not "slingshot" around the Moon. It orbited the Moon for 2 and half days before firing its rocket to leave lunar orbit and return to Earth. But sure. An asteroid which was on a precisely calculated trajectory, moving at a precisely calculated size, approaching the Moon at a precisely calculated distance, might do that. But this asteroid is not doing that.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by gringoboy

 

The Apollo missions entered stable orbits around the Moon.
This is a slingshot:
www.schoolphysics.co.uk...

Oh well in that link sling shots....I thought the possibilties of orbitals slingshotting was`nt valid,but yet a retraction on your parthere

and here,Please stand by..............LIFT OFF ! Now thats a slingshot.

I have limited knowledge on the Apollo missions using the slingshot effect but when Apollo 13 needed help, they used this method to get back to earth safely as quoted below:

"The first part of the flight went fairly smooth. As Apollo 13 entered the Lunar corridor, the Command Service Module separated from the third stage and maneuvered around to extract the Lunar Module. Once this was completed, the third stage was driven on a collision course with the moon. This was done as an experiment and the resultant impact was to be measured by equipment left behind by Apollo 12. The Command Service and Lunar Modules were then on "free return" trajectory, which, in the case of complete engine loss, would slingshot them around the moon and on course back to Earth."

General knowledge on the slingshot effect:
en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by kalenga

Thankyou after being derailed and made to grow a beard and sit in the philosphers corner with my finger on my chin this evidence rebukes the assertions of some
Wait....an echo...Please .Stand by......Makes one wonder how saying elenine is a brown dwarf niburu is not a hoax !www.abovetopsecret.com...

Strange standards,free expression has a new meaning,or does it.Retorical
Thread put to hoaxwww.abovetopsecret.com...
Thread on same subject not put to hoax,?
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Hows that,some agenda,or voting sensorship for some !Is that not biased.Undemocratic,dictorial and fraudelent sensorship,mmm...very tabloidy getting ,editorial,certainly not open to discussion.
So every fake ufo footage should be in ,the philosophers corner along with the above,odd,how can dialogue continue.Seeing a pattern here,neewbies beware !

reply to post by kalenga

Yes. Apollo 13 did follow a slingshot trajectory. Apollo 10 did not, contrary to what was claimed.

And like I said:

But sure. An asteroid which was on a precisely calculated trajectory, moving at a precisely calculated speed, approaching the Moon at a precisely calculated distance, might do that. But this asteroid is not doing that.