Waiting for the Apocalypse

[Archer17]

Wow, I sign off for awhile and the crap just gets deeper. I've also noticed nibirutablet tends to ramble and spew his pseudo-science in a scatter-shot manner. When I left he was insinuating that the possibility of a planet beyond Pluto's orbit would somehow legitimize his fatalistic ramblings. There's a lot of your bile to wade through nibirutablet, but since you mention it:

*Where's your irrefutable proof that a planet exists beyond Pluto's orbit and, if one hasn't been proven to exist at this time, how can one state what it's effects would be without it being considered unsubstantiated conjecture? At the time of this post your Planet X has "not been found" according to your own sources.

*Where's your proof for Atlantis? If it is known for a fact that it existed, tell us where it is.

*Provide irrefutable proof from multiple credible sources for the cyclical catacylisms that you are promoting. I want to see one that is specific to your hocus, you know.. the 3600 yr thing.

*I want you to explain why ancient fossils of sea creatures found on what is now dry land is considered unique evidence of your woowoo scenario.

*Tell me where we can find some Annuaki bones. It would be nice to prove I was wrong about Sitchin, wouldn't it?

*Provide credible, multiple-source references backing up your claim of "genetic tampering."

Finally (emphasis added):

Exactly.... Velikovsky was way off. He was wrong about venus. Sitchin, on the other hand, missed the boat with his dating. it is obvious nothing happened 2000 years ago. How these two ukranian jews missed each other is baffling, but they did.

Explain why you felt the need to bring nationalities into this? I'm half-Ukrainian myself and consider it totally inappropriate and a ad hominem.

[TrAI]

Then why would the webmaster of "skepticalmind" post blatent lies along with data taken out of context in an effort to humiliate someone. You call that scientific? It is convenient that i am public and do not hide, while the liar remains anonymous and DOES NOT RESPOND TO COMMUNICATION.
This is not close minded?

As I have no knowledge about your disagreements with the webmaster of that site, I really don't have enough data to base any comment on. He might have done so, or you might be trying to make him out as a liar, or it might just be a difference of opinion about the quotes, but I can't know, and it is rather irrelevant to my post, and me defending or renouncing him doesn't change the validity of my observations...

As for motives, do you really think someone taking my position is after glory? Please.
And do you not think a video with dancing bikini girls would sell much better (and be far less costly to produce) than documentaries about velikovsky/sitchin. Cmon now.

My observation was general, and can be applied to many ideas from the pseudo-scientific/conspiracy community... I know nothing about your incentive to make this movie, it might be to earn a little money, it might be a wish to inform people of something you really believe in, it might be for the thrill of feeling you are in on something that you feel other people
are denied for some reason.. It might be something else, or a combination of reasons, maybe you should try to find your true reasons for believing what you do, not your superficial reasons, but the deep down reasons, getting to know oneself better can be a good idea...

By the way, your embedding of the movie clip doesn't work properly in Opera, I get the SRC file(http://www.streaming-media.info/media/wm_bb.wmv), that is an advertisement for shownet.de, instead of the preview(http://www.shopbaby.net/www_planetxvideo_com.wmv).. it works ok on IE, but maybe you would want to fix it, so that it displays correctly in opera too...

The bottom line is that is humanity was genetically tampered with, it is by far the most important story of our, or any other, time. Period.
religions in their present form make little sence and this theory does. If.... IF IF IF... Sitchin's planet exists, there can then be made a stronger case for the Anunnaki.

Hmmm, Yes, if it were shown that something other than nature was behind our development, that would be a big thing, but for now I know of no good evidence for such an assumption, and it seems more likely that we are descendant of some earlier form of life, than the result of genetic manipulation. I see you are convinced about the validity of this idea though... I wouldn't have chosen absolute certainty if I were in your place, as it tends to taint the examination of evidence for other possibilities... If Sitchins translations of the text is correct it still is a bit of a stretch to say that it is the truth, as the usual practice in more ancient times were to write down things important from an religious perspective, or about an important ruler, and such stories weren't always accurate... But I have only superficial knowledge about these texts, so I can't comment on their relation to the Anunnaki or even if the Anunnaki are good or bad...

In your mind its a long shot, but I think we already established that it is at least remotely possible and you offered up no better explanation for anything brought up thus far (angular momentum, macroevolution, etc). It might be there. You have failed to establish otherwise. And based on this, I suggest we continue to look and observe, rather than to rule the whole thing as impossible based on the word of the BA.

I do think it's quite unlikely, yes. And I was not trying to offer any explanation, I was making an observation, and it's not my job to explain anything, as the burden of proof lay at the feet of the one that comes with an hypothesis... But I don't uncritically believe the BA either, but all evidence points quite strongly toward that there is no Nibiru coming to claim our lives...

You must admit, i brought up no conspiracy theory, channeling, or outer fringe material short of the Anunnaki. As far as Planet X is concerned, the BA is the only hardcore extremist I have seen thuse far, and the above news articles demonstrate this nicely. all that i expect is that the people looking at the sky look with an open mind, rather than with an broad sweeping statements.

I don't think of the BA as an extremist, I think he chooses his wording to allay the fear of people visiting, there were real people being frightened by the Zetatalk site you know, normal people that might just not understand much about science and so he made the pages to calm them, not to win over the extremists on the other side. Its actually sad that people on that side are flaking the BA for this, as their side is much worse as they often try to win believers by playing on uncertainty and fear, and so are hurting people...

I have a feeling that many of the people that are believers in that Nibiru will come along and make disasters for us think they are doing it for the good of mankind, but that the real reason are less noble. I have a feeling that these people are in a way drowning in the modern existence, and this is a way to fill their need to be someone of importance, and a way to put some meaning in their life, though this might be buried so deep that they can't see it themselves. Of course people should have meaning in their life, but never at the expense of other people...

Well, one of my favorite sayings are: "it's always easier to see faults in others, than in one self." I think it's good advice, that people should take heed of, though it's not easy...

[freddo]

nibirutablet, you seem to have no shortage of proposals for an object capable of inspiring "celestial induced cataclysms" on the Earth. This is fine- you are entitled to propose things until the cows come home. However, unless these proposals fit observations, they're wrong.

Lets take a step back and evaluate what it would take for a celestial body to cause Earth-wide cataclysms. The only mechanism I can see for this is gravity.

Consider that Mars, and inner planet, has a gravitational influence on the Earth as an M&M on your table. The Moon, a smaller object, but much closer, has a sizable interaction with Earth, but not to cataclysmic levels. Therefore, in order for a planet to have enough gravitational influence to cause these "Earth Changes" it would need to be very large, or very close (likely both).

This is all fine until you consider this: any planet strong enough to wreak havok on the Earth is going to be similarly merciless with the other members of the Solar System. We could consider the likely outcomes of a solar system history with a close or with a large planet barreling through every 3600 odd years. In the case of a relatively small, but close planet to the Earth, the Moon would be significantly perturbed. We would not see the Moon as it is now, in a (not perfect, but) stable tidally locked orbit around Earth. In the case of a massive planet passing between Jupiter and Mars (so not real close to Earth), there's a good chance that there would no longer be any inner planets in the Solar System, as such massive gravitational perturbation is likely to eject smaller planetoids wholesale.

The fact that our Solar System behaves in the manner it does, stands in direct refutation of some nebulous planet, which sweeps through periodically and is capable of causing the proposed cataclysms. This simple observation has implications for all the proposed theories on a Nibiru-type object. I'm sure you can understand what those implications would be.

[Sever]

This is just getting crazy. Lets not feed the trolls. Cause this thread is going Coco for Coconuts if you catch my drift.

[The Bad Astronomer]

The "Bad Astronomer" himself, Phil, on the coast to coast program conclusively stated that there is absolutely nothing bigger than pluto out there. Period. I will be more than happy to dig up the audio and make up a page about it.

If you can find that, I would be most interested. I don't recall ever saying that. In fact, I spent several minutes on C2C talking about how there may very well be a tenth planet, but if there is, it is nothing like Nancy Lieder, Mark Hazlewood or the others say it is. I recall quite clearly discussing this.

Also, in fact, I have done some work in getting people interested in searching for a tenth planet. It has nothing to do with Nibiru or PX, but it does stem from work I did involving looking at protoplanetary disks around young, nearby stars. At some point, I'll write all that up. It's an interesting story.

[The Bad Astronomer]

Incidentally, I have read about halfway through the thread, and I am very unhappy with the tone taken on both sides. Yes, I was confrontational in my first post here in this thread, but that's different than being out and out rude.

I am therefore putting out a general call here in this thread: be polite, or be banned.

[The Bad Astronomer]

Astronomers announced the discovery of the largest object in the solar system since Pluto:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...07_quaoar.html
I am interested in comments from anyone, besides the original ones made by the Bad Astronomer, that there is absolutely no chance anything else will be discovered (these comments, by the way, came before the above article if I'm not mistaken).

Do you have a citation about my saying nothing would be discovered beyond Pluto? Again, I don't recall ever saying anything like that.

[Aldebaran135]

'In his book, Maps of the Ancient Sea Kings, Charles H. Hapgood revealed that the 1513 Piri Re'is map exhibited a knowledge of the true ice-free portions of Antarctica. The longitudes for twenty-four sites are accurate within one half a degree of the true positions. This standard accuracy could not be matched until 1735 when John Harrison invented the marine chronometer.'
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Troy...ghtfall051.htm

The ice cap in those portions of Antarctica are presently about a mile thick.

The Piri Reis map has nothing to do with Antarctica. It's simply an early map of the Central and South American coasts, with the coastline south of Rio de Janeiro to possibly just beyond Rio de la Plata not yet fully explored or accurately mapped.

It's funny, if the longitude measurements are so accurate in regard to Antarctica, why would the latitude be so completely off? It would place Antarctica at about forty degrees south of equator! And if it's so accurate in regard to Antarctica, where on Earth is the Drake Passage?

[Sammy]

Nirabutablet, I'm asking politely: What "pryamids on the sea floor near Japan?" If it refers to Atlantean history or other woo woo sources, please don't bother with an answer, as far as I am concerned.

Thank you

[CharlesEGrant]

I'm not a prophet who is babbling about a certain hour or date.... i am not here to spread doom and gloom. i only ask that you read this:
http://users.pgen.net/kithra/ecevprevpx.html

I read the link and found:

In the July 15, 1999 paper published by the journal, Geophysical Research Letters, the Sahara desert's arid climate change occurred quickly and dramatically 4000 to 3600 years ago. A team of researchers headed by Martin Cluassen of Germany's Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact research analyzed computer models of climate over the past several thousand years. They concluded that the change to today's desert climate in the Sahara was triggered by changes in the Earth's orbit and the tilt of Earth's axis. The switch in North Africa's climate and vegetation was abrupt. In the Sahara, "we find an abrupt decrease in vegetation from a green Sahara to a desert scrubland within a few hundred years" scientists reported. No longer were grasses and other plants collecting water and releasing it back into the atmosphere; now sand baked in the stronger sun and rivers dried up. The scientists do not say what caused the change in the tilt of Earth's axis.

I then looked up the referenced paper on the web and found:

In conclusion, our results indicate that the long-term cooling and drying from mid-Holocene to present-day is triggered by subtle changes in the Earth's orbit. However, the abrupt desertication in North Africa during the mid-Holocene can be explained only in terms of internal, mainly regional, vegetation-atmosphere feedbacks in the climate system

(emphasis mine)

I would also note that the paper dates the climate change in the Sahel as being 4k-6k years ago NOT 4k-3.6k (though the paper does note 4ka-3.6ka as having been one of two particularly arid spells, the other being 6.7k to 5.5ka).

This paper models the climactic effect of long term variations in the earth's orbit and axial tilt. It concludes that these long term variations may be amplified by regional effects to produce sudden climate changes. There is nothing in this paper that suggests or supports the existance of sudden changes to the earth's axis or orbit.

[Humphrey]

Great Charles. :-D Thank you!

[freddo]

Nirabutablet, I'm asking politely: What "pryamids on the sea floor near Japan?" If it refers to Atlantean history or other woo woo sources, please don't bother with an answer, as far as I am concerned.

This is as far away from woo-woo as I could get sammy:

Science-Frontiers.com

This next link is of the woo-woo inclination, but it has actual photos of the area, so you can see they're not harping on about nothing. What the something is though is up for grabs.

Underwater Pyramids Near Japan

Anyway back to the topic...

Thankyou CharlesEGrant for demonstrating evidence of 'quote-mining.' It's always enlightening to see things in their proper context.

[Archer17]

Sammy, regarding the underwater Japanese pyramids, I've done some research and discovered that there are what appear to be "structures" underwater near Japan that's either: A) a natural formation, B) a natural formation that was later enhanced by humans when the area was above sea level, or C) remnants of a lost civilization akin to Mu or Lemuria (the Pacific ocean verson of the Atlantis myth) .. you decide! I also came across references that explain that the sea level in the area where these "structures" were found are known to rise and fall significantly over time, no cataclycism required. The reason this "discovery" hasn't been plastered outside the woowoo-fringe is that there's nothing really conclusive regarding it being evidence of a previously unknown advanced civilization. Word of advice, if you do a search of "underwater Japanese pyramids" expect a deluge (no pun intended :^o ) of woowoo sites. That's how I heard about the Mu/Lemuria connection.

** edited to add **

freddo was nice enough to post a link that mentions Dr. Robert M. Schoch, a geologist from Boston University who investigated this structure. This in turn resulted in my finding his summary of the investigation of this "structure." Even those that are biased toward psuedo-science re: this structure will have to admit Dr Schoch is fair in his presentation. Here it is, thanks again freddo for steering me here.

[kanon14]

nibirutablet

i've read thru ypur posts and found the "evidence" you presented is quite compelling. but before going any further, can you show us how valid for you to connect the evidence with PX? i mean the cause of all those events you've shown can be attributed to some other incidents or can be interpreted in some ohter ways which would lead to different conclusions.

until you can show the validity of your argument, please stop posting any more "evidence" because that really doesn't help reinforcing your overall argument

[Sammy]

Archer and Freddo:

Thanks guys (I assume) for the info on the "pyramids! About what I expected to hear.

[Archer17]

Just a bump to alert y'all that, thanks to freddo, I came across a paper from the geologist cited in his link and added it to my last post. What the heck .. I'll just tack it on here .

[R.A.F.]

niburutablet...

I'm confused about something, perhaps you can straighten me out.

If, (by your own admission), Velikovski, Sitchin, and Lieder are wrong, then why are they "featured" on your website?

[ignorant_ape]

ROB SEP :

in the 12 months since i last encountered you

you jumped from 2003 to 2012 now i dont know what your position is , and dont care any more

you have clearly ignored EVERYTHING from the yahoogroup days that does not tie into your current fantasy

you seem to have abandoned your faith in lieder and hazlewood

i have not got time to go over the same stuff word by word

as for the most part your " evidence " is the same reffuted garbage you brought up last time - and i will scream if i see another mamoth / mastodon thread

BA has laid down the law on name calling , and i have no intention of getting booted from this board , back on yahoo i didnt care now i do

you attack me personally , just cos i value my privacy and use a nick - theis is not anominity quite a few people know who i am - but not you and certainly not any one with a browser who can google up board profiles

your attrocious debate style has not altered one whit

so all things considered i no longer have time for you or your fantasy

so sir - good day and take care . i bear you no malice , if people are dumb enough to buy your vids then take the money and run


YRS - APE

[LTC8K6]

I don't see John Murray's work as even remotely related to the Planet X referenced in your videos or in this forum.

Let's not forget that you also own Planetx2012.com.

Hedging your video bet?

Note how Robert uses Murray to support his version of Planet X, even though Murray offers no such support:

John Murray: According to UK astronomer, Dr. John Murray, there seems to be a huge, massive planet in the midst of the Oort cloud, which is "shepherding" the comets. If he's right, the planet would be incredibly far from Earth, which would explain how it could have eluded most astronomers for so long. Murray also says Planet X orbits in the opposite direction to the other planets, suggesting it was captured from outside the solar system at some time and could even be a brown dwarf star.

Note also that Murray's article is from 1999 and he still hasn't found this massive object, even though he claimed to know what constellation it was in.

[LTC8K6]

http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...ts_991014.html

Dr. Murray rules out the notion that the object might be a heretofore undiscovered brown dwarf since, being brighter than a planet, it would probably have been detected by now. He does not, however, rule out other possible explanations for the observed entrainment of comet orbits.

[Archer17]

Back in 1996 NBC aired a special called the Mysterious Origins of Man (MOM) narrated by Charlton Heston. I don't remember it myself but it reportedly contained swaths of pseudo-scientific hocus, much of it re-regurgitated by nibirutablet on this thread. MOM heavily leaned on the fringe-rantings of Graham Hancock who, if you don't know by now, promotes ideas such as Atlantis, an ancient civilization on Antarctica, cataclysmic crustal shifts, the mammoth thing .. all mentioned by nibirutablet here. (I also remember Nancy L briefly bringing up the mammoth thing during The Debate last May). MOM was heavily criticized by the scientific community for it's one-sided presentation and I assume nibirutablet, during his sifting through the net for links to promote this spiel, had to see mainstream science's response to much of these outlandish claims. Since he didn't bother sharing them with us, I will. It's quite lengthy, so instead of posting snippets, you can go here for a more scientific perspective on Antarctica, the shifting of the Earth's crust, and the infamous '77 woolly mammoth.

[sts60]

OK, so Richard Hoagland is a loon here, too.

It's a special invariance principle... Poor Richard is a loon everywhere.

What's your answer to these guys:
<snip>
A UK astronomer may have discovered a new and bizarre planet orbiting the Sun, 1,000 times further away than the most distant known planet.
<snip>
Since the article does not reference zetatalk, see if you can answer without use of the word Lieder.

OK, no problem.

You are posting in favor of a planet which wanders through our solar system every 3600 years or so, despite the fact that the dynamics are all wrong - for starters.

You have just quoted an article about a hypothetical planet which, if it existed, would have an orbital period of several million years.

Didn't mention the L-word once.

I'm sure everyone here fell for an MLM or some stupid chain letter at least once....

Not me. I've made plenty of dumb mistakes. But not MLM or chain letters. Especially not illegal pyramid schemes. Not that this is relevant to the lack of evidence for, and the great deal of evidence against, a "Planet X" as described by Sitchin, Lieder, McCanney, et al.

[nibirutablet]

>niburutablet...
>I'm confused about something, perhaps you can straighten me out.

I'll do my best.

>If, (by your own admission), Velikovski, Sitchin, and Lieder are wrong, >then why are they "featured" on your website?

Sitchin is wrong because of dating. Nothing happened 2000 years ago that could be attributed to Nibiru's passage.
Velikovsky is wrong because, among other things, he incorrectly blamed Venus for cataclysms on earth, but he got the dating right.
Nancy lieder was wrong because there was no pole shift on (or shortly after) May 15th, 2003

Sitchin is on my website because though he failed to include the geological record in his dating (he apperantly went strictly by calanders), he correctly identified the existence of this other Planet in ancient text and did a decent job of correlating it to current NASA findings.
Velikovsky is featured because he missed the boat with venus, but have you read any of the data supporting his dating? Amazing body of work... too bad the man never bumped into Sitchin in his lifetime. He correctly blamed these global events on a celestial event and I give him credit for that aspect of his work.
As for Nancy lieder, sure she was wrong. Period. No excuses, no discussion, no two ways about it. But what does this mean? Because Einstein could not keep up with quantum physics, does that mean he was a loser and should be belittled and ignored? Nancy successfully combined Velikovsky and Sitchin. She did so with a huge database of facts and articles that have nothing to do with aliens. Without a way of checking her "sources", she could have said 2004, 2008, 2031, etc and it would have made as much sense to me. What made sense to me was the general timeframe. The way I see it, even if she is off by 100 years, but got the general idea correct, then her efforts were well justified.
You see, I openly acknowledge that no single source has all the answers and what I've tried to do was give a broad overall perspective that gives one the ability to put the pieces together on their own.
Surely, I am not here saying i have it all figured out. but isn't that was the BA is saying when he conclusively dismisses the search for Planet X a scam and adding that he knows for fact no other large bodys exist beyond Pluto?

[nibirutablet]

>Let's not forget that you also own Planetx2012.com.

Let's not forget that my first video, produced in 1999, clearly has me postulating 2012 as a more reliable date about 20 seconds after Nancy Lieder finishes up about 2003.

I know you can't stand it, but I never claimed to be psychic and my name is not Mark.

I also give 80% more air time to the idea that Planet X is 1000 years away.

Its so hard for you people to deal with someone who comes at you with data that you have no answers for, so you lump everyone together. Can I hold YOU to every word that comes out of the BA's mouth since you are a member of his forum?

If you have it all figured out, can you enlighten me?...

[nibirutablet]

>You are posting in favor of a planet which wanders through our solar >system every 3600 years or so, despite the fact that the dynamics are >all wrong - for starters.

No, I am demonstrating the possibility that other bodies exist (larger than earth). Why must this be bound by the orbital dynamics of the article? If there was an article that summed it all up and called it" Nibiru", we wouldn't be chatting here, would we. Again, because i support Sitchin, does not mean i agree with every word... the same way only a fool would live and die by the outragous claims of the BA. 100% no other planets indeed.

>You have just quoted an article about a hypothetical planet which, if it >existed, would have an orbital period of several million years.

So? Maybe this is Nemesis. I also believe our solar system is binary and that PX circles BOTH suns (one being dark). Maybe this article has nothing to do with nemesis or PX, but then why do credible sources discuss such possibilities? Do you really think i am here to convert your beliefs here to mine? I would send you a dozen roses for the simple admission that it is possible that another body, larger than Quarr, may exist and not have been photographed yet. Go ahead and test me and see if your wife does not recieve some flowers on your behalf. Forget about the Greys, the Annunaki, etc. Lets just see what is in the realm of possibility, and what can we (like the BA did) rule out as being 100% scientifically impossible... shall we?

>Didn't mention the L-word once.

You have displayed a level of willpower that is practically unheard of for this board. You are are true gentleman and a pleasure to communicate with. =)

>I'm sure everyone here fell for an MLM or some stupid chain letter at >least once....
>Not me. I've made plenty of dumb mistakes. But not MLM or chain >letters. Especially not illegal pyramid schemes.

OK... so what are you saying? I sent in a dollar and was had. I am a felon now? Honestly, this is the lamest thing I could have ever concieved of. If I did something illigal in my life, it was getting a speeding ticket back in 1998. What is illigal is spamming my personal info on the net, encouraging crank calls and threats to my parents/grandparents, not responding to my emails to get the facts straight, and to top it off copyright violation.

[Archer17]

..Sitchin is on my website because though he failed to include the geological record in his dating (he apperantly went strictly by calanders), he correctly identified the existence of this other Planet in ancient text and did a decent job of correlating it to current NASA findings.

Is that so? There has been no credible proof for the existence of Nibiru or the reliability of Sitchin. Hypothesizing about a planet or planets beyond Pluto's orbit is a far cry from "correctly identifying the existence of this other planet." The NASA findings you mention certifying Sitchin are a product of your imagination.

Velikovsky is featured because he missed the boat with venus, but have you read any of the data supporting his dating? Amazing body of work... too bad the man never bumped into Sitchin in his lifetime. He correctly blamed these global events on a celestial event and I give him credit for that aspect of his work.

There is no proven celestial event that vindicates Velikovsky's theories. Once again you take unsupported woowoo myths and present them as fact.

As for Nancy lieder, sure she was wrong. Period. No excuses, no discussion, no two ways about it. But what does this mean? Because Einstein could not keep up with quantum physics, does that mean he was a loser and should be belittled and ignored? Nancy successfully combined Velikovsky and Sitchin. She did so with a huge database of facts and articles that have nothing to do with aliens. Without a way of checking her "sources", she could have said 2004, 2008, 2031, etc and it would have made as much sense to me. What made sense to me was the general timeframe. The way I see it, even if she is off by 100 years, but got the general idea correct, then her efforts were well justified

Nancy's track-record speaks for itself. Combining Sitchin and Velikovsky's pseudo-science just multiplies the misinformation she spouts.

..Surely, I am not here saying i have it all figured out. but isn't that was the BA is saying when he conclusively dismisses the search for Planet X a scam and adding that he knows for fact no other large bodys exist beyond Pluto?

You're twisting words by comparing Nancy's (and Sitchin's) Planet X with a hypothetical planet beyond Pluto's orbit. You've done this throughout the thread and as far as what you claim Dr Plait said, maybe you should respond to his posts concerning this matter instead of repeating the same thing over and over again.

..Its so hard for you people to deal with someone who comes at you with data that you have no answers for, so you lump everyone together..

Maybe you should re-read the posts here. Seems like you got all kind of answers to me. Your data was shown to be flawed.

If you have it all figured out, can you enlighten me?...

Enlightenment starts at home nibirutablet. We can show you the way, but you got to do the traveling yourself.

[R.A.F.]

Sorry, niburutablet, but I just don't find your arguments compelling. You take what you think will "work" for you, and disregard the parts you don't like. And you seem to do this in a random fashion. That is not how the scientific method works. Like it or not, if you can't convince a few folks on an "Astronomy Bulletin board" that your "ideas" have merit, one starts to wonder just how well thought out those ideas are.

And please don't respond with any more of that "your blindly following the BA" type stuff. It just makes you look uninformed as to what the people on this board actually know.

(edited to clarify the last sentence.)

[The Bad Astronomer]

the same way only a fool would live and die by the outragous claims of the BA. 100% no other planets indeed.

This is the third or fourth time you have said this in this thread.

Please provide the quotation and citation of where I said there are no other objects in our solar system. I do not recall ever having said this, and in fact it goes against what I think is true. Therefore I don't think I would say what you claim I said.

I would strongly urge you to post the citation soon.

[nibirutablet]

>I know nothing about your incentive to make this movie, it might be to >earn a little money, it might be a wish to inform people of something >you really believe in, it might be for the thrill of feeling you are in on >something that you feel other people
>are denied for some reason.. It might be something else, or a >combination of reasons, maybe you should try to find your true reasons >for believing what you do, not your superficial reasons, but the deep >down reasons, getting to know oneself better can be a good idea...

I really enjoyed this, thank you. I have about 5 minutes, so please excuse spelling, grammar, etc.
First of all, if you'll notice, I have more than one guest and in fact have 24 taped interviews (10 of which are in the documentaries). These people do not live close to each other and I am not living off of a trust fund. I, as a starving college student, flew around the world on my own dime to do this. I finaced all equipment, filmed, edited, hosted and even did the music myself. during initial production, I slept on my mother's couch for 6 months because I had not a penny to my name and in fact went into considerable debt. I temporarily dropped out of school to finished what i started. To even imply that this was done for money is an insult, but one that I expected from the start, so i live with it. It does not make me feel good, but i tell myself its not about me and to be honest, the positive feedback greatly outnumbers the negative, so I accept this minority perception. Like it or not, this world revolves around money. Production, duplication, packaging, shipping, etc (and let's not forget bandwidth that looks somewhat decent is even more expensive). You mentioned my desire to inform, and this goes without saying, but i am also still learning. You mentioned something about my believing that i am in on something that others are not. This is absolutely true. In all honesty, the sources that have had the most influence on me have not been discussed by me yet. The best I can do to express this at this time is to give an example and hope you "get it". Let's say, just hypothetically now, that you met an ex president.... let's say Reagan... actually, considering his current state, let's say Carter. Let's say that one day you had the honor of meeting him and were exposed to some of HIS opinions. No facts, no back up, but this is an ex persident we are talking about and you took HIS concerns seriously. Now let's say... again, pure fiction here, let's say it was explained that HE was concerned about some periodic cataclysm that would happen due to some celestial event. Now imagine this was way before you ever heard of Lieder or any of this. Then, you stumble across Sitchin, Velikovsky, etc. What would you do? I can only hope that if i was oblivious and this type of situation happened to someone else, and they then spent a decade researching and discovered supporting data (like ancient depictions, geological evidence, and current findings) that they would share this. To think that there are people that withold such information from the rest of the population was something i could not accept. To be honest, this has nothing to do with doom and gloom to me or about warning people. Even when I entertained the possibilities of 2003, I never left Los Angeles. I am not trying to warn anybody and I never discuss "safe places" etc. In my opinion, our lives are not as important to the survival of the species. We will all die anyway sometime. what motivates me is simple. I believe that witholding this data, though a good idea in terms of keeping the economy going, is generally counter productive. Having all our eggs in one basket, on earth, has lead to our species being knocked back into the stone age every several thousand years. It is time to use our technology to colonize Mars or the moon instead of spending all resources on finding efficient ways of blowing ourselves up. Assuming there is such a thing as reincarnation, I would like to come back to a world void of religious fairy tales and superstitions and ignorance, and maybe come back to a place that can deal with this cycle that keeps humanity earthbound and exploited. Before you start labeling me a conspiracy theorist, let me say this. i could care less about conspiracy. if there is one to make someone money or to keep us dependent on oil, then so be it. What can i do? But where I drew the line was when I, and again I am only talking about myself... when I discovered that data regarding our true origins and situation was deliberately being witheld from the general population. Now, assuming any of this is true, just humor me here... what am I to do? I can not come out and say "hey, this is how it is bacause i say so". So, what is left is to build a case using established findings. How? Well, without coming out with what convinced me personally, i had to do some homework and put the details together in a way that spoke for itself. If there was truth to this scenario, then there should be no shortage of evidence... and there isn't. If one finds global tales of a deluge, and if one finds ecological and archeological evidence of a global deluge, then one can then conclude that this was a real flood and not a myth. I can see how one might conclude that I went out in search of this, in an attempt to prove what i was exposed to, and I found isolated incidents and "cobbled" them up together. This is were we are at now and my whole point here is to demonstrate that these events are not isolated and seperate things that just happened, but they were global events and they were caused.... triggered, induced, by this periodic influence of PX.
I have about 30 seconds, so i need to go for now. the bottom line is that I believe that as smart as you all are, it is arrogent to close the case on this subject because BA declared it as scientific fact that there is no other planets yet to be discovered. The second I see that it is agreed that it may be possible that another planet (larger than earth) may exist and that celestial events effect the earth from time to time, my work here will be done. Again, this does not mean i am asking people to wear white and to join some cult in japan preparing for the Apocolypse. I hope I am clear on that. I am not saying all should run to the hills. I am trying to encourage the search to continue, especially astronomically, and this effort is not helped by sweeping statements made about how no other planets exist or will ever be found.
I can't help but giggle sometimes when motives are questioned in this field. I'll say this... if anyone is considering this field (archeology, geology, astronomy, etc) as way to become rich and famous and to get chicks, I would suggest thinking it through because you are dooming yourself to being poor, ridiculed and harassed (sometimes by more than just the general public). That being said, I have no regreats and will continue doing what I do because I am the one who has to live with myself and to be honest I am very proud of myself. I believe that if anyone on this list experiences something like this in their lifetime:
http://www.apple.com/trailers/fox/dayaftertomorrow/
accompanied by a red thing in the sky... i can only assume the survivors will educate their kids differently from the way they were educated. And if we do come back, in some way, wouldn't civilization be better if it were built on this data rather than the current watered down versions disseminated by major religions there days?
I am far from having it all figured out, and i know this is far from elloquent (I have to go now)... but for what its worth, i think if you persue this subject from any angle you choose, you will arrive at similar conclusions and just maybe, you'll want to talk to those who once thought the way you did... i hope.

[nibirutablet]

The Bad Astronomer said:
>This is the third or fourth time you have said this in this thread.
>Please provide the quotation and citation of where I said there are no >other objects in our solar system. I do not recall ever having said this, >and in fact it goes against what I think is true. Therefore I don't think I >would say what you claim I said.
>I would strongly urge you to post the citation soon

I absolutely will. I will have to join the coast to coast am website member section and listen to some of your interviews to find it. I am confident i will have it for you BEFORE your next appearance this Monday and maybe you can clarify it for us all then. I will also encourage my lists to write in and email the hosts to ask you about this statement once i obtain it. I originally heard it live in a room of 12 people. Again, i am late for work, but i will tell you this... you made yourself clear and it was more than a quick sentence taken out of context. Correct me if i am mistaken (like you already have), but you said that there was a lot of particles and combined they might have mass, but there was NO large body, remotely close to what we are talking about, and it does not exist. Please note that we are not talking about whether a pole shift will happen this year. we are talking about Planet X, at any distance, even if it is over 1000 years away. I am aware you feel there may be others like Quarr, but we are talking larger than earth. I'll be back tonight.