(to reel you in) Nibiru confirmed by scientists and other smart people!!!!!!!...(kinda)

I just saw this article from space.com via yahoo's homepage

Rogue Worlds Outnumber Planets With Suns

Here is some cool stuff i gleened going through I was just trying to be the first to post so i don't look like a jacka-- (and yes I have searched for that exact phrase and didn't see a duplicate article so if there is, sorry.)


Sumi and his team calculated, in fact, that these planets are probably almost twice as common in our own Milky Way as main-sequence stars. And they likely outnumber "normal" planets with known host stars by more than 50 percent.

Many of the previously detected objects could actually be "failed stars" known as brown dwarfs, Sumi said.

DISCLOSURE of Nibiru? Hmmm? HMMMMMMM?


Aaaaaanyway, I'd like to hear your thoughts. It was a good article.

Mac

Originally posted by mac420
I'd like to hear your thoughts.

1. Nibiru is not "confirmed".
2. This idea of rogue planets has been around for many years. This isnt "disclosure".
3. People disagree on what Nibiru is (if it existed). If you want to hang your hat on it being a rogue planet, I'll beat you over the head with quotes from other Niburu fans who say its something else.

Also, according to Sitchin (who invented it), Nibiru has a 3,600 year orbit.
Meaning it is not a "rogue"


oops. See No. 3 above.

reply to post by mac420


They're gas giants which would not support any life. Also to become intelligent enough to once hold life it'd most likely need to be near some sort of sun and not in the middle of cold dark space. We were lucky with our planet. This just shows there's a lot more planets that we think. Not Nibiru.

reply to post by alfa1


obviously you have misinterpreted the point of this thread, its meant to be read sarcastic,

look at the title, i say KINDA. Just wanted to show this article cause i thought it was interesting, excuuuuuuse me..

Down killer, down!

reply to post by mac420


They did not claim these planets were more common than main sequence stars.

They claimed that they were more common than main sequence stars with planets.

*** Oops, I have re-read the article and they are saying that these planets are likely more numerous than main sequence stars. MY BAD.***

... and most of the Nibiru stuff I have heard says that Nibiru is inhabited.

These worlds without stars would likely be very cold and lifeless.

The building blocks of life would be frozen solid.

The article does not confirm Nibiru so your tittle is a bit misleading.
It simply says that out between the stars there have been planets discovered that orbit no star.
besides most of the Nibiru stories I have encountered say that the mythical planet "ORBITS"
the sun in a very long orbit. If Nibiru was out in deep space like these planets then it would not be any problem.

reply to post by ELahrairah


I've heard Nibiru is a planet, is a gas giant is a Jupiter, so technically, its not misleading, the title did its trick, which is to reel you in, hey read it again, i gave fair warning

Originally posted by mac420
reply to post by ELahrairah

 

I've heard Nibiru is a planet, is a gas giant is a Jupiter, so technically, its not misleading, the title did its trick, which is to reel you in, hey read it again, i gave fair warning

Is a gas giant is a Jupiter? what are you trying to say?

Two threads already on this topic of starless planets
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

"and other smart people" lol.
2nd

reply to post by jeremiah8401


lol I'm allowed to make mistakes, damn it im only human!

good night all, cant wait to see other thoughts on the article in the morning (/afternoon)

reply to post by ELahrairah


nope, those were 10, mine are NUMEROUS, much different story. don't focus on little things, its a good article,

reply to post by Elsek


haha thanks! bout time someone gets my humor.

reply to post by mac420


Sorry for the semi off topic mister, mac420
But i just wanted to tell you the way your Headline is presented you seem to have made the assumption that scientists are smart people.

Ontopic, this is bogus. Lol
'Nibiru'
I wish we had a companion star and i owned the media so when i reported it i could just say 'Compainion star discovered' Not 'NIBIRU' was discovered

reply to post by Anttyk47


The article isn't about Nibiru, but Nibiru-ish planets or brown dwarf stars, I figured that title would bring in people, being as i posted in a 2012 forum and Nibiru/Planet X is a possible 2012 theory, however slim.

reply to post by mac420

Nibiru/Planet X is a possible 2012 theory

That is one of the wild guesses for 2012 that is demonstrably false. Gravity studies and whole sky surveys make a new planet in our solar system impossible.

reply to post by stereologist


Any theory for 2012 is radical, but the whole point of the 2012 doomsday is the Mayans, and who did the Mayans worship? Annunaki. Where do Annunaki live? Nibiru or... something like that.

2012 in itself is a radical theory, but one that is fun to think and theorize about. Hence why I put this in the 2012 forum and not in one that is taken seriously by anyone. I simply found an awesome article displaying how truly remarkable our Universe is and wanted to share it.

reply to post by mac420


I can understand your logic. I was wondering why now have they just told us of wonderes with no star magnetics to controll them. As a child this completly missed science class.. Good thought. And Yes I am a planet Xr so I think its real..

reply to post by mac420


"Any theory for 2010 is radical"??

Well...how about this one? (It's by far the best one....):




[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/4f594bcee1a8.jpg[/atsimg]