Nibiru Confirmed By Scientist

reply to post by DaveNorris


Percieval Lovell. It was later discovered by Clyde Tombaugh and named Pluto.

Only much later did we discover that there were dozens of simuilar sized objects orbiting beyond Neptune.

reply to post by GreatScot


Thread title suggests actual scientific proof that Nibiru absolutely exists.

Research used to make the claim says it is possible, although not proven, that a fifth gas giant existed at one point and was hurtled off into space never to be seen again.

ATS members can butcher science worse than the MSM even, that is impressive. In case you aren't following the research being used actually "proves" Nibiru does not exist, as the model used does not allow for the possibility of Nibiru existing in the likely scenarios of how our solar system developed.

Awesome. I have no idea what if anything this entails for us here on our flying rock.
I can only pray for things to be of epic proportion of those who induce visions in the jungles.

What i expect? Lackluster mundane tomorrowing.

Jupiter was the first planet in the solar system to form, Mission JUNO is heading there to try and unlock the secrets we don't know about how OUR solar system formed, and Jupiter is the key.

In fact, Uranus and Neptune were not where they are now and it isn't even certain that their orbits weren't altered by each other, or some other massive force. But whatever the force was its not there now, or we could find mathematical proof. Neptune was discovered before it was imaged.

After running these simulations, Nesvorny decided to add a fifth large planet into the mix. With the addition of this large planet, results found that the odds of our current solar system increased significantly.

I don't see how simulated odds are proof that there was another planet, and also the article mentions nothing about Nibiru. You're just jumping to conclusions made by the commenters on the article.

reply to post by Essan


yep, thats why pluto is now clasified as a dwarf planet.

i dont know if it fits with this thread, but if nibiru is another gas giant (if its there at all), how can we be sure that its not a y-dwarf?

these simulation are also assuming that we have all of the parameters of cause and effect when it comes to planet and solar system formation, and I'm sure we do to a certain degree. but I seriously doubt we have all of the information required to predicted it a 100%. information changes quite a bit in science and it would take only one small discovery to up end all of the simulations formulas. just like the speed of light is being challenged right now.

just sayin

The cometary debris hurled sunward from the oort cloud(a belt of rocks out there....beyond mars etc...)
is supposedly ejected by some planetary mass that we havent discovered yet.
I believe it is supposed to be a gas giant too.....This is how the math works out for one man anyways...hes an astronomer so maybe right....or maybe turn out to be just an ass instead...
These are all only models as the man pointed out above....theres more theory to come yet folks so lets just watch the show.....without getting too attached to any one in particular .

reply to post by clutch36hp


thats true, i mean the peice i read said that these results were only supported by about 52% of the simulations, so its pretty close to being a 50/50 chance

reply to post by DaveNorris


About as much confirmation as a 'maybe' lol

reply to post by Lulzaroonie


it really sucks that i cant post threads on this, i get most of the info from science magasines i read at work, and since they are next weeks/months issues they havent got a link on the net yet lol

Originally posted by GreatScot
I believe their is more to what we are being taught in school and in life why is it that people refuse to open their mind to the very plausable idea that this myth is real, Im not saying 2012 is real but what im saying is that science is proving the theorey correct.

Why do you think that this myth is plausible? And yes, 2012 is real, is just after 2011.

Amazing new computer simulations shows that without the addition of a fith planet our current solar system would have failed.

The problem is that the above sentence is not true.

What the computer simulations (and not that amazing, as he had to use two methods to get to the results faster) "said" was that there was a higher probability of success when he used 5 planets instead of 4, it doesn't meant that the 4 planets version was impossible.

Could all the recent news and high exposure towards the notion of end times and fragile earth be there way of conditioning us before the events in our future.

No, because I haven't seen any high exposure towards the notion of end times anywhere except on ATS.

PS: instead of quoting the erroneous article, why not download the full report of the study, available here?

reply to post by DaveNorris


hell that's still better than a local meteorologist.

reply to post by Xcalibur254


Wasn't the moon once part of Tiamat?

reply to post by CLPrime

Which means it's someone else's problem now.

If only... we'll be seeing a link to this story every three days. It's CW Leonis all over again.

reply to post by GreatScot

I believe their is more to what we are being taught in school and in life why is it that people refuse to open their mind to the very plausable idea that this myth is real, Im not saying 2012 is real but what im saying is that science is proving the theorey correct. Amazing new computer simulations shows that without the addition of a fith planet our current solar system would have failed.

Star and Flag for this excellent information. Once again, science comes through with the truth of the matter. From my own studies, most star systems are binary in nature, this seems to be the norm, two Suns for each system. I am a student of the Sumerian and Babylonian records, these are quite real, and yes, I know many of you think Zecharia Sitchin invented the whole Nibiru theory, look at some of the Nibiru/Planet X threads and you will always see it there. Well, the truth is, there are many who have worked on deciphering the Ancient Texts, and Sitchin is not the only author who has worked on, and written books about Niburu. There are many others.

Why can I not see Nibiru/Planet X? Well, legend has it that the Dark Star know as Planet X is a Dark Star, emitting light only in the infra-red spectrum. I strongly believe that there is at least one planet on close orbit around this Dark Star, and that the planet has been hollowed out long ago, and the inhabitants, in Ancient Times known as the Annunaki, live and work. I do not think we here on Earth will be able to see Planet X until it is close to our sun, it's bright twin. What this will bring is anyone's guess, but it will bring a change to everyone, there is no doubt of that. Once it is common knowledge that we, the human race were in fact created in a DNA Splicing Experiment, and not by a white bearded man as thought by the religious crowd, everything will change, everything.

Originally posted by autowrench
From my own studies, most star systems are binary in nature, this seems to be the norm, two Suns for each system.

May I ask the source of your studies? Current studies by astrophysicists suggest this is not the case.

In this Letter I compare recent findings suggesting a low binary star fraction for late-type stars with knowledge concerning the forms of the stellar initial and present-day mass functions for masses down to the hydrogen-burning limit. This comparison indicates that most stellar systems formed in the Galaxy are likely single and not binary, as has been often asserted. Indeed, in the current epoch two-thirds of all main-sequence stellar systems in the Galactic disk are composed of single stars. Some implications of this realization for understanding the star and planet formation process are briefly mentioned.

iopscience.iop.org...

It actually seems that the odds are not that good that the Sun has a stellar companion. In our "neighborhood" only 33% of the sun-like stars are binary and the majority of those systems consist of stars of similar types (sun-like stars have sun-like companions). Recent studies show that the odds go down, way down, when considering a brown dwarf as a binary companion. Brown dwarfs tend to have brown dwarfs for companions, sun-like stars have sun-like stars.
www.deepfly.org...

If a massive companion to the Sun is found it would not be the norm.

reply to post by autowrench


On top of what Phage has asked, I was also wondering if you could could point us in the direction of these other authors that have written about Nibiru. I'm also wondering if they use sources that aren't Sitchin.

reply to post by GreatScot


2 issues :

i) David Nesvorny claims that the alledged 5th planet would have been another gas giant - why do you ignore thst and leap to " nibiru" ?

ii) his study smacks of GIGO - we simply do not have the data to accuratley pridict such things

reply to post by clutch36hp


Earth is what was left of Tiamat.