Religion/Nibiru

What do you guys think of this video?

YT - /watch?v=o0pgGTz6Dec

sorry, i forgot how to embed video.

I watched it and the guy brings up some interesting points but i'm not sure how credible he actually is.

Posting videos and video links - ALL MEMBERS PLEASE READ

AboveTopSecret.com takes pride in making every post count. Please do not create minimal posts. If you feel inclined to make the board aware of a video, please post the video or a link to the video, a description of the video's content, and one or two paragraphs offering your own opinion on the video. This will help inspire discussion or collaborative research on your subject.

Don't have time to watch but I'll check it out later.

FYI...click youtube button in ATS (when doing reply) then it'll ask for the video ID #. Just put that in and you are good to go. This vid ID # is o0pgGTz6Dec

OK -

It is so easy to take parts of one idea, and mix-mash them with another idea.

I so badly want to beleive in some of these things - but there is simply not enough evidence - and an abundance of speculation.

I'm sorry, my friend, but Nibiru is a lie.

reply to post by MentorsRiddle


8 minutes to reply? im assuming you have watched this video before then.

reply to post by mojo2012


The first five minutes were that were needed to show that this man's "research" is severely lacking. He gets it entirely wrong about ancient Sumerian accounts of "Nibiru"...as usual on this topic, he is long on the same nonsense claims originally popularized by Zecharia Sitchen, and merely repeated without any proper skepticism ever since.

Zecharia Sitchin, along with Erich von Däniken and Immanuel Velikovsky, make up the holy trinity of pseudohistorians. Each begins with the assumption that ancient myths are not myths but historical and scientific texts. Sitchin's claim to fame is announcing that he alone correctly reads ancient Sumerian clay tablets. [Of course, he didn't announce this by taking out an ad in the New York Times but by implying it with his "translations" that do not jibe with the work of legitimate scholars in the field.]

Furthermore, the narrator's obvious Judeo-Christian centered belief system (referring to "angels" and "satan" being "cast out") disqualify him as a serious scholar on this subject.

But aside from all of that (setting apart the evident fact that the beliefs espoused are nothing but an article of "faith"), pure scientific logic and understanding of astronomy (specifically orbital dynamics as pertain to our Solar System, and planetary interactions) immediately refute any and all claims of this mythical "Nibiru".

That alone should be enough to show that this is all hogwash.

Originally posted by mojo2012
reply to post by MentorsRiddle

 

8 minutes to reply? im assuming you have watched this video before then.

I watched a few mins of it - skipped forward, watched some more.

Once you have seen enough videos that are all put together the same way, say the same things, and grasp at links when there is none - you have seen them all.

But my statement still stands - Nibiru is a lie.

If it was a planet - we would have seen the effects of it on our solar system.

If it was an extradimensional place - then we wouldn't know of it.

If it was code for something else - we will probably never know.

The search for Nibiru is a race that goes in circles. When I saw the book of Revelation and scripture being used as proof and evidence, I turned away immediatly.

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by mojo2012

 

understanding of astronomy (specifically orbital dynamics as pertain to our Solar System, and planetary interactions) immediately refute any and all claims of this mythical "Nibiru".

hm, can you prove that a 10th planet cannot exist, by use of your "understanding" "orbital dynamics", as you claim?

i think not.

Originally posted by metalshredmetal

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by mojo2012

 

understanding of astronomy (specifically orbital dynamics as pertain to our Solar System, and planetary interactions) immediately refute any and all claims of this mythical "Nibiru".

hm, can you prove that a 10th planet cannot exist, by use of your "understanding" "orbital dynamics", as you claim?

i think not.

Can you prove that it can?

To base your argument off someone's logic, based upon the concept that their understanding of physics are wrong - implies that you can prove that a tenth planet can exist with a seperate set of rules of our physical universe that you are privy to.

Mainly - you do not have secret physics knowledge, so you are arguing his "modern factual" opinion, with your rehtorical and imaginary logic.... Thus no logic exists in your statment.

reply to post by metalshredmetal


It can be clearly inferred by the LACK of any direct observation that, in fact, "Nibiru" does not exist.

We can clearly see both Jupiter and Saturn, even with the naked eyes, and at those tremendous distances. With sufficient effort, I imagine even Uranus, and possibly Neptune (***), also....would be a bit more difficult, and away from extraneous "light pollution".

(***) Confirmed.....Uranus can be seen, with effort and knowing where to look, with good naked eyesight:

Naked Eye Observer's Guide

No "giant planet"is going to "sneak up" on us. As I said, just a bit of understanding of astronomy is all it takes to realize this!

Furthermore, as many have claimed "Nibiru" to be very large (in the video the narrator refers to extreme "gravitational" effects to disrupt us here on Earth), then such an interloper into the inner Solar System would long ago (over the course of billions of years) severely disrupted the orbits of Mercury, Venus, Earth and Mars.

This has not happened....and certainly NOT on a so-called "3,600 year cycle". That is more rubbish concocted by Sitchen.....

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by metalshredmetal

 

It can be clearly inferred by the LACK of any direct observation that, in fact, "Nibiru" does not exist.

yes, i agree with you, that there is a LACK of evidence that Nibiru does not exist.

nice use of your knowledge of "orbital dynamics" there.

reply to post by mojo2012


I haven't seen the video yet. What if Nibiru is a black dwarf star?

An object that is only theoretical and could take a trillion years to form? What does that say about the age of the universe? It would seem to suggest that the universe was always here. Cosmology would have to be rewritten.

Just a thought, not saying it is true.

---------------------------------

That's a fifty some minute video. I wish people would at least briefly describe what a long video is about when posting.

As far as the Nibiru myth and religion---The story is basically the Flood Myth recycled for post-Christians. The earth is going to be purged but the illuminated, persecuted for their beliefs, will have the last laugh as they survive because of their foreknowledge.

reply to post by ProudBird


I think your getting mixed up with size and mass. If a planet was 10 times smaller than the earths size but is denser and has 10 times more mass, is it bigger?
I didn't think the size of something in space was as important as the mass of it, when talking about gravity issues.

reply to post by ZeussusZ


reply to post by ZeussusZ


Mass is important, yes.

Now......looking at just approximate equal diameters for a moment; can you provide an example of a planet that would have the same or lesser diameter as Earth, yet still be ten times more massive?

Getting back, now, to diameters compared to known planets......we can clearly see Mars with the naked eye (when it's not in the wrong place in its orbit), and is is considerably smaller in diameter than Earth (and equivalently less massive). Venus is of course nearly the same diameter as Earth, and is quite highly visible due to its high albedo.

Equally "bright" are gas giants, even if they are not producing any light of their own, they will reflect a lot of Sunlight.

So even a theoretical Earth-diameter planet that composed of some unknown material (to all understanding of planetary formation, to include what we have observed so far) that gave it a mass greater than Earth?

It would still be extremely easy to detect, if such a celestial object were "inbound"...