i recieved an email a few days ago, with the following URL in it, which was all about ‘planet x’ i presume some of you are familiar with it, and im sure your also very quick to dismiss the following websites content. but id like you all to check it out if you get a few spare minutes, as i would like to know your opinions on it.
i couldnt find the original URL so that one will have to do. ive just been on a NASA site which states that no ‘planet x’ has been found in this solar system, but that doesnt convince me !
Of course, it’s got nothing to do with the so-called ‘Planet X’ which supposedly caused gravitational preturbations in the orbits of Neptune and Uranus. Said preturbations were recently determined to be a result of errors in the original calculations made during (I think) the mid-19th Century.
In short, reply to the person who sent this codswallop to you by suggesting they stock up on Reynolds Wrap pronto allegre. (Look ma, I just mixed words from two different languages together for no reason!)
Here’s a more recent article than those cited in the OP’s link on perturbations of Uranus & Nepturne’s orbit, and other 10th planet speculation (like the comet analysis discussed in Michael Ellis’s link): Space.com story.
I cannot find any independent confirmation of the content of the paragraphs headed “New York Times, June 19, 1982.” The text of the article is repeated in several places, but only on pro-10th-planet websites. Until someone can find this article reproduced by a reputable source, we cannot be sure whether text has been adulterated or even entirely fabricated. It is cited on various websites with different dates (June 19, 1982, January 30, 1983) which is also suspicious.
I can’t bring myself to believe that the NYT would publish the following drivel:
It’s poorly written, well below the standards of the Times, I would think, and, without caveat, utterly contradicts mainstream scientific and archaeological thought.
Also, this statement is false:
Astronomers use “Planet X” as a catch-all term for any proposed planet beyond Pluto. The fact that the term exists does not in any way imply that astronomers are convinced that the planet exists. Astronomers seriously assessing evidence for the existence of another planet tend to shy away from the “Planet X” label because of its negative connotations.
Here is a copy of the Washington Post article referenced by the supposed NYT article. The article might not be a faithful reproduction of the orignal, but you can see that the brown dwarf hypothesis was merely one of many possibilities: Washington Post article. Again, I find it hard to believe that the New York Times would print an article that so obviously distorts the issue!
Now, if there is at 10th planet, it is not Marduk. Or Nibiru, or whatever the popular kids are calling it this week. If a gas giant larger than Jupiter was blundering through the inner solar system every 3600 years, we would know. Its perturbations on the orbits of the planets, far from being just a barely-detectable disturbance on the orbits of Uranus and Neptune, would be obvious and pervasive. And there is simply no physical way that a planet could do the things that Sitchin claims the Nibiru did. Just to pick one obvious example from the “Planet X Exists!” webpage, the asteroid belt is not debris that was knocked off the Earth. It ridiculous to think that this could have happened less than a billion years ago (I think that’s what they’re conteding, although these Sitchin enthusiasts are always frustratingly vague with their timescales!). Such an impact would have completely broken up the Earth, not left half of it, and its continents, iintact. It would have boiled away the oceans, for heaven’s sake! Also, the composition of meteorites is quite distinct from the at of the Earth, and many meteorites that originted in the asteroid belt were clearly never part of a body that was molten (such as the Earth.)
Just a quick addition: I realize no one has brought this up in this thread, and I didn’t find this claim at the website in the OP, but there’s an email circulating with a link to a website claiming that Nibiru will return in 2003. (Sorry, I don’t have the URL, as I haven’t received the email, myself, only descriptions of the website.) By solving Kepler’s equation for a planet with an orbital period of 3600 years arriving at a perihelion of 1 AU 1 year from now, I found that Nibiru would be inside the orbit of Jupiter right now–that is, it would be a blatantly obvious object in the night sky to anyone with functioning eyeballs.
Here’s a more recent article than those cited in the OP’s link on perturbations of Uranus & Nepturne’s orbit, and other 10th planet speculation (like the comet analysis discussed in Michael Ellis’s link): Space.com story.
I cannot find any independent confirmation of the content of the paragraphs headed “New York Times, June 19, 1982.” The text of the article is repeated in several places, but only on pro-10th-planet websites. Until someone can find this article reproduced by a reputable source, we cannot be sure whether text has been adulterated or even entirely fabricated. It is cited on various websites with different dates (June 19, 1982, January 30, 1983) which is also suspicious.
I can’t bring myself to believe that the NYT would publish the following drivel:
It’s poorly written, well below the standards of the Times, I would think, and, without caveat, utterly contradicts mainstream scientific and archaeological thought.
Also, this statement is false:
Astronomers use “Planet X” as a catch-all term for any proposed planet beyond Pluto. The fact that the term exists does not in any way imply that astronomers are convinced that the planet exists. Astronomers seriously assessing evidence for the existence of another planet tend to shy away from the “Planet X” label because of its negative connotations.
Here is a copy of the Washington Post article referenced by the supposed NYT article. The article might not be a faithful reproduction of the orignal, but you can see that the brown dwarf hypothesis was merely one of many possibilities: Washington Post article. Again, I find it hard to believe that the New York Times would print an article that so obviously distorts the issue!
Now, if there is at 10th planet, it is not Marduk. Or Nibiru, or whatever the popular kids are calling it this week. If a gas giant larger than Jupiter was blundering through the inner solar system every 3600 years, we would know. Its perturbations on the orbits of the planets, far from being just a barely-detectable disturbance on the orbits of Uranus and Neptune, would be obvious and pervasive. And there is simply no physical way that a planet could do the things that Sitchin claims the Nibiru did. Just to pick one obvious example from the “Planet X Exists!” webpage, the asteroid belt is not debris that was knocked off the Earth. It ridiculous to think that this could have happened less than a billion years ago (I think that’s what they’re conteding, although these Sitchin enthusiasts are always frustratingly vague with their timescales!). Such an impact would have completely broken up the Earth, not left half of it, and its continents, iintact. It would have boiled away the oceans, for heaven’s sake! Also, the composition of meteorites is quite distinct from the at of the Earth, and many meteorites that originted in the asteroid belt were clearly never part of a body that was molten (such as the Earth.)
Just a quick addition: I realize no one has brought this up in this thread, and I didn’t find this claim at the website in the OP, but there’s an email circulating with a link to a website claiming that Nibiru will return in 2003. (Sorry, I don’t have the URL, as I haven’t received the email, myself, only descriptions of the website.) By solving Kepler’s equation for a planet with an orbital period of 3600 years arriving at a perihelion of 1 AU 1 year from now, I found that Nibiru would be inside the orbit of Jupiter right now–that is, it would be a blatantly obvious object in the night sky to anyone with functioning eyeballs.
great reply Podkayne, yeah the circulating email you mention was the one i recieved, but i no longer have the URL.
Way to go rip apart the guys theory; im in awe.
thanks for all your replys.
