Planet Pluto

[MrNitpicky]

What do you believe Pluto looks like?

I think its an Ice planet with non drinkable ice.

Is it possible to astral travel to Pluto to explore it in our dreams?

[RosieMoonflower]

What do you believe Pluto looks like?

I think its an Ice planet with non drinkable ice.

Is it possible to astral travel to Pluto to explore it in our dreams?

I always think of Pluto as purple, I don't know why, probably because if the P and the L in Pluto makes me think purple.

But, you're probably right about the ice. It's very far away from the sun. I wonder if it gets any heat at all?

Rosie

[citrine]

This is quite interesting... I believe there's nothing special on Pluto, just ice. But all the stuff that they associate with Pluto could be in the end associated with a huge ninth planet on the outer edge of this star system. The orbit of Sedna doesn't make sense, right? So there must be something else, and I'm glad that it could be discovered pretty soon: http://ecowatch.com/2016/01/25/ninth-planet/

[Wricker Dreadtemper]

This is quite interesting... I believe there's nothing special on Pluto, just ice. But all the stuff that they associate with Pluto could be in the end associated with a huge ninth planet on the outer edge of this star system. The orbit of Sedna doesn't make sense, right? So there must be something else, and I'm glad that it could be discovered pretty soon: http://ecowatch.com/2016/01/25/ninth-planet/

I believe the Cal Tech astronomers are doing damage control related to two separate papers that were published in December 2015 by two distinct teams of ALMA astronomers (one Mexican team and one Swedish), in which the signs of 2 new massive celestial objects were observed and charted as likely members of our solar system.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JetAE5CDYm4

Of course their findings were first met with skepticism by the mainstream astronomical community, that is until Jan. 20, when Mike Brown and his cohort at Cal Tech affirmed the findings of the Mexican team (seemingly as if to say that no such findings are ever "official" until they say so).

Interestingly, their description of this recently "discovered" Planet 9 roughly matches the postulations made by Dr. Robert Harrington back in the early 90's.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=you ... 4zaMJk6FPk

Between 4:27 and 4:47:

"If it is in the kind of orbit we describe here, it would be a planet that would have a mass something like 3 to 5 times the mass of the Earth. This would put it intermediate between the gaseous planets, like Uranus and Neptune, and the terrestrial planets that we have in the inner part of the solar system."

The orbit he proposed was strikingly similar to that of the Cal Tech astonomers as well, taking into account a possible miscalculation of precession.

When new "discoveries" line up so nicely with the work of certain past scientists, namely those who were demonized and discredited in their own time for the views they expressed, I think it's fair to call for a reevaluation of the legitimacy of the status quo (then and now).

This could very well be Sitchin's Nibiru we're talking about here.

[RosieMoonflower]

This is quite interesting... I believe there's nothing special on Pluto, just ice. But all the stuff that they associate with Pluto could be in the end associated with a huge ninth planet on the outer edge of this star system. The orbit of Sedna doesn't make sense, right? So there must be something else, and I'm glad that it could be discovered pretty soon: http://ecowatch.com/2016/01/25/ninth-planet/

I believe the Cal Tech astronomers are doing damage control related to two separate papers that were published in December 2015 by two distinct teams of ALMA astronomers (one Mexican team and one Swedish), in which the signs of 2 new massive celestial objects were observed and charted as likely members of our solar system.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JetAE5CDYm4

Of course their findings were first met with skepticism by the mainstream astronomical community, that is until Jan. 20, when Mike Brown and his cohort at Cal Tech affirmed the findings of the Mexican team (seemingly as if to say that no such findings are ever "official" until they say so).

Interestingly, their description of this recently "discovered" Planet 9 roughly matches the postulations made by Dr. Robert Harrington back in the early 90's.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=you ... 4zaMJk6FPk

Between 4:27 and 4:47:

"If it is in the kind of orbit we describe here, it would be a planet that would have a mass something like 3 to 5 times the mass of the Earth. This would put it intermediate between the gaseous planets, like Uranus and Neptune, and the terrestrial planets that we have in the inner part of the solar system."

The orbit he proposed was strikingly similar to that of the Cal Tech astonomers as well, taking into account a possible miscalculation of precession.

When new "discoveries" line up so nicely with the work of certain past scientists, namely those who were demonized and discredited in their own time for the views they expressed, I think it's fair to call for a reevaluation of the legitimacy of the status quo (then and now).

This could very well be Sitchin's Nibiru we're talking about here.

I was reading the whole post and thinking "Nibiru?". So glad you said it first. I would love to read Sitchin's books someday. I have read many do the summaries of them on enkispeaks.com. Dr. Sasha Lessen has said he promised Dr. Sitchin he would help continue spreading his findings. He and his wife have an interesting radio show where they talk ET, Nibiru and Annunaki all the time. I'm inclined to believe Sitchin, or at least parts of it, so I'm really curious to see what goes on when Nibiru gets closer.

Rosie

[Wricker Dreadtemper]

...I'm inclined to believe Sitchin, or at least parts of it, so I'm really curious to see what goes on when Nibiru gets closer. ...

You're not alone there. Many have seen the concerted evangelical effort to discredit Sitchin for what it has been from day one - a transparent sham. In affirming only the aspects of Sitchin's work that happened to be compatible with their Christian worldview, and implicitly denouncing the ancient astronaut theory by way of pushing an almost biblical take on Sumerian mythology, as if advocating the existence of 'fallen angels' (ETC.) were somehow less scientifically problematic than viewing such beings as alien astronauts, men like Michael Heiser and Jonathan Gray have thoroughly demonstrated the true aim of their agenda-driven effort pretty much from the word go.

Not to suggest that Sitchin was 100% correct on everything he wrote, but I have an ominous feeling that the relatively near future will bear him out in several terrifying respects.

[RosieMoonflower]

...I'm inclined to believe Sitchin, or at least parts of it, so I'm really curious to see what goes on when Nibiru gets closer. ...

You're not alone there. Many have seen the concerted evangelical effort to discredit Sitchin for what it has been from day one - a transparent sham. In affirming only the aspects of Sitchin's work that happened to be compatible with their Christian worldview, and implicitly denouncing the ancient astronaut theory by way of pushing an almost biblical take on Sumerian mythology, as if advocating the existence of 'fallen angels' (ETC.) were somehow less scientifically problematic than viewing such beings as alien astronauts, men like Michael Heiser and Jonathan Gray have thoroughly demonstrated the true aim of their agenda-driven effort pretty much from the word go.

Not to suggest that Sitchin was 100% correct on everything he wrote, but I have an ominous feeling that the relatively near future will bear him out in several terrifying respects.

Me too. When I first started studying Gods outside of the Christian ones, Sumerian deities where some of the first to appear in my research. I had seen the television series "ancient aliens" on the History channel years prior to this but remembered it mostly focusing on Egyptian Gods. So I was familiar with the theory of ancient astronaut aliens. During times of meditation about such things I was shown images of giant bird propel and giant snakes. I've since learned of the brotherhood of the snake and pondered its existence today. It's so confusing too because before I was very convinced that all religions came from stories being told over and over again which stared out as personified stars. But, to believe Sitchin is to say, no, many of the stories told ARE true and the characters where ET! That's just crazy to me. For so long I laughed at creationists, and full heartily believed in evolution. But, if Sitchin is right, then it's possible the creation story from the Enuma Elish is true and evolution isn't. Or, the other possibility is that there were ancient ET here, but the creation story was fabricated by them to us, for whatever reason.

What do you think?

Rosie

[Wricker Dreadtemper]

...For so long I laughed at creationists, and full heartily believed in evolution. But, if Sitchin is right, then it's possible the creation story from the Enuma Elish is true and evolution isn't. Or, the other possibility is that there were ancient ET here, but the creation story was fabricated by them to us, for whatever reason.

What do you think?...

Well, I'll tell you what I don't think; I don't think 'creationism' and 'evolution' are necessarily mutually exclusive. As a matter of fact, in my opinion, the most plausible explanation for the advent of humanity lies smackdabb in the middle of that false dichotomy. In other words, while I believe we were 'created' (in a sense), I don't believe our creators were working with a blank slate at the time. In my view, much of the materials they used were almost certainly the products of pure evolution, but the manner in which those materials were brought together was the fruition of intelligent design. Of course, that does nothing to address the question as to how our creators came into being (assuming they're not eternally existent); but in this line of thought, I think Sitchin's interpretations and the theories based on them are very compelling, ... almost to the point of being evidentiary of the synthesis of evolution and creationism.

[Firebird]

Greetings Wricker, thanks for your imput ...interesting stuff...I'm here, however, to request your introduction. Could you please swing by the intro forum and tell us a little bit about yourself,?
http://everythingunderthemoon.net/forum ... rself.html
Gramercy,
Firebird

[Wricker Dreadtemper]

...Could you please swing by the intro forum and tell us a little bit about yourself,?
http://everythingunderthemoon.net/forum ... rself.html
Gramercy,
Firebird

Yes, of course.

Thank you.

[Wricker Dreadtemper]

http://arxiv.org/abs/1608.01808

Discovery of A New Retrograde Trans-Neptunian Object: Hint of A Common Orbital Plane for Low Semi-Major Axis, High Inclination TNOs and Centaurs
Ying-Tung Chen,Hsing Wen Lin,Matthew J. Holman, Matthew J. Payne, Wesley C. Fraser, Pedro Lacerda, Wing-Huen Ip, Wen-Ping Chen, Rolf-Peter Kudritzki, Robert Jedicke, Richard J. Wainscoat,John L. Tonry,Eugene A. Magnier,Christopher Waters, Nick Kaiser, Shiang-Yu Wang, Matthew Lehner
(Submitted on 5 Aug 2016)
Although the majority of Centaurs are thought to have originated in the scattered disk, with the high-inclination members coming from the Oort cloud, the origin of the high inclination component of trans-Neptunian objects (TNOs) remains uncertain. We report the discovery of a retrograde TNO, which we nickname "Niku", detected by the Pan-STARRS 1 Outer Solar System Survey. Our numerical integrations show that the orbital dynamics of Niku are very similar to that of 2008 KV42(Drac), with a half-life of ∼500 Myr. Comparing similar high inclination TNOs and Centaurs (q>10 AU, a<100 AU andi>60∘), we find that these objects exhibit a surprising clustering of ascending node, and occupy a common orbital plane. This orbital configuration has high statistical significance: 3.8-σ. An unknown mechanism is required to explain the observed clustering. This discovery may provide a pathway to investigate a possible reservoir of high-inclination objects.

This bit bears repeating:

". . . Comparing similar high inclination TNOs and Centaurs (q>10 AU, a<100 AU andi>60∘), we find that these objects exhibit a surprising clustering of ascending node, and occupy a common orbital plane. This orbital configuration has high statistical significance: 3.8-σ. An unknown mechanism is required to explain the observed clustering. This discovery may provide a pathway to investigate a possible reservoir of high-inclination objects."

It seems a minor planetary body has broken the ecliptic plane on the far side of Neptune. This object has a highly inclined retrograde orbit that cannot be explained by anything in the observable solar system. I think what we have here may be our first visual confirmation of one of the far-flung orbitals in the Nibiru system. Accordingly, the "reservoir" mentioned above would be the ecliptic plane for our Sun's couterpart in a binary system.

More to come. Buckle up!

[Wricker Dreadtemper]

A couple of the mainstream reports have claimed that this minor planet was named "Niku" after the Chinese adjective for "rebellious", but I haven't been able to confirm that definition via online translator software. What I found was that it referred to a dish somewhat similar to beef stew (lol). A deeper look revealed that the word may have had its origin in the now extinct Khitan language. I was hoping someone on this board might have some idea as to how the misunderstanding evident in the reports may have come about.

It was noted by a YouTuber from central Texas that "Niku" could be a numerology-based encoding of "Nibiru", since the letters "bir" have a cumulative value of 29 (and 2+9=11, the numeric value of "k"). A little far-fetched, maybe, but something to keep in mind.

[SnowCat]

A beef stew planet might be tasty. Maybe if our solar system is invaded they'll stop for lunch and we'll have time to marshal our defenses. Or not.

Snow

[Wricker Dreadtemper]

Could be regional slang, I suppose. I'm about 2 seconds away from e-mailing one or more of the astrophysicists who worked on that discovery. Don't like it when the intended meaning of a word or phrase eludes me.

[Xiao Rong]

Well, so far as I can tell, ni (ni4) is 逆, which means "to counter". More common usages include things like, 逆天 ni tian, which means "to rebel against heaven" or "unnatural", and 逆袭 ni xi, or "counterattack". Can't determine which character "ku" refers to in this context (Chinese has a lot of homophones). It's certainly not a very common phrase, or even a common translation of the term "rebellious". All the links I've seen referring to Niku just keep quoting each other the same bit about being Chinese for the word "rebel". Could also be classical Chinese.