It seems our friend Phip is truly a BAD Astronomer. He apparently does not keep up with recent astronomical discoveries. Maybe he just doesn't like reading. I kind of got the impression of his quotes from Lieder that he just skims. Anyway, my point is that he seems to be unaware of a recent discovery by two separate teams of astronomers, one in the States and one in the UK. I have a copy of the press release as an html page. I will try to post it if I can in original form. They both state that they think they may have found what may be a tenth planet or a dead twin of the Sun, a Brown Dwarf ??? Isn't that what the guys from NASA said, that they had found something. Is it possible the NASA dudes jumped the gun with their press release ??? and then told to keep a lid on it, hence a re-release that allowed for another explanation. One fellow says he's a betting man and claims there's a 50/50 chance that there is something out there. One theory I've heard from the Doomsayers,as Phip calls them, is that there is a dead twin star and Nibiru is a rogue body that was captured by the two bodies, the Sun and the Brown Dwarf. Having two large bodies in close proximity (ie binary system) would allow for a greater possibility of a capture of a rogue body, Nibiru. I myself would be quite skeptical of such a story (Return of Nibiru) if there wasn't such a large body of geological evidence to support poleshifts. Poleshifts are REAL but I'm not nessecarily saying that Nibiru is responsible, however it is a reasonable possibility. There is also a wealth of documentation that most dismiss as myth or legend that indicate some sort of scenario such as this. There's Sitchin's translations from the Sumerian cuniform text. Another disturbing account of this event comes from several native North American lore and legends. Now what would these natives have to gain from supporting this story if they have even heard of it on todays info highway ??? These accounts come from elders not young natives and I don't believe that ANY of them use the internet so how would they know of Lieder or Hazelwood. Speaking of Hazelwood, I do agree with our BAD Astronomer that he(Hazelwood) is an idiot and doesn't know squat about science. He is a con and that's it, he's just using this as an opportunity to make some dough.
Getting back to the physics of this thing, if there is a dead twin to our Sun and a rogue in orbit bewteen the two,consider this; what if the orbit is like a figure 8 between the two main bodies. How would you predict what orbital behavior the rogue would exhibit ??? How can you do calculations without all the variables ??? Even if there is only one rogue with no dwarf twin, you still don't have all the variables to make an accurate calculation of position and speed. One thing that bugs me more than a bunch of doomsayer crackpots spouting about the end of the world from some far-fetched Rogue planet scenario...is scientists spewing what they are calling hard science when they themselves are not working with a full data set. You're (Phip) just as bad as they are, actually a bit worse just because most scientists are very close minded and I really detest that. It seems thinking outside of the box is foriegn and unpalatable for them. One thing that comes to mind about scientists being close minded is the topic of anti gravity. They don't even acknowledge that it exists. In a Universe overflowing with dualities, according to science gravity is and anti gravity is NOT. Hmmm ??? These guys are really on the ball. Most physicists say that gravity is a force...well I say it is an effect from the flow of energy, not a force. If this effect can exist in one direction why can't it exist in another ??? Anti Gravity . . . anyone ??? Even if you call it a force why can there not be an equally powerful force in opposition to gravity. I remember reading some articles about a lot of strange gravitic behaviors being discovered about asteroids. One in particular is of asteroid pairings and why they don't behave as astro-physicists think they should. Is this an example of scientists not knowing all there is to know about gravity and it's effects and that should include anti-gravity as well. These asteroids seem to be doing strange little dances among themselves and the scientists can't figure out why they just don't crash into each other. A powerful and opposite effect to gravity maybe ??? Good ol Phip seems to know a lot about gravity but I bet he can't explain this one. I don't claim to know much about gravity except that I can and have build a device that could possibly demonstrate this effect. I'm not a scientist but it seems I understand more about the Universe than most. I'm a musician for God's sake not a scientist, Jim !!! Bones !!! Well my typing finger has worn out for the time being and I'll be going now. I actually spoke to Phip on the Art Bell show one night and didn't really get to say or ask what I wanted to. It was my first time on the air and was a tad nervous so I decided to join this board and speak my peace. Besides there wasn't enough time for me spout all of this eh ??? I'll be waiting anxiously for Phip to respond to this.

__________________
Anti Gravity and Zero Point Rule.
11:11
777
33
1

Most what?

Here is original article as promised.

By Kenneth Chang
ABCNEWS.com
Oct. 7 — Astronomers may have found hints of a massive, distant, still unseen object at the edge of the solar system — perhaps a 10th planet,perhaps a failed companion star — that appears to be shoving comets toward the inner solar system from an orbit 3 trillion miles away. Two teams of scientists — one in England, one at University of Louisiana at Lafayette — independently report this conclusion based on the highly elliptical
orbits of so-called “long-period comets” that originate from an icy cloud of debris far, far beyond Pluto.“We were driven to this by rejecting everything else we could think of,” says University of Louisiana physicist Daniel Whitmire.
Clump of Comets
A couple years ago, Whitmire, along fellow physicists John Matese and Patrick Whitman, noticed the farthest points of the comets’ orbits didn’t appear random but bunched together, tracing a path across the sky.
“We accidentally noticed they weren’t uniform,”Whitmire says. First, they tried to explain the clumping from the gravitational pull from a main disk of stars in the Milky
Way stars. “That ultimately didn’t work,” Whitmire says. “We’ve gone through several other models trying to explain this.” At around the same time, John Murray, a planetary scientist at The Open University in Great Britain, made a similar observation in similar comet data. “I started puzzling what this might could be,” he says. The most obvious but seemingly unlikely explanation would be a planet. “I thought we’d better
rule that out,” he says. But as he analyzed the orbits, the farthest points appeared to fall on a circular orbital path — “which is exactly what you would expect if there was a planet out there.” As the planet — estimated to have a mass between one and 10 Jupiters — orbits, its gravitational wake disturbs the icy debris of the outer solar system, causing some of it to plunge toward the sun as comets,sort of like an elephant ambling through a china shop. No one has yet directly observed a 10th planet, and there could still be another cause for the cluster of comets.
The University of Louisiana research will be
published in an upcoming issue of the journal Icarus. Murray’s paper will appear in Oct. 11 issue of the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. Very Distant What’s surprising is just how far out there this
supposed planet is. Both Murray and the University of Louisiana physicists put the planet in an orbit about 3 trillion miles — or half a light-year — from the sun. The nearest star is four light-years away.
To put this distance in perspective, consider a miniaturized version of the solar system in which Earth is one inch from the sun. On this scale, Pluto, the ninth planet would be a bit more than a yard from the sun. The new planet, by contrast, would be a half-mile
distant. At that great distance, the 10th planet would be too dim to see by current telescopes, although there is some hope that if it exists, the next generation of space-based infrared telescopes might be able to pick it up. Murray hypothesizes the planet may have been wandering through the galaxy before being captured by the solar system’s gravity. Whitmire suggests it is a “brown dwarf,” or a failed star, a companion to the
sun that was too small to light up. Although suggestive, the findings are not conclusive. While Murray and the Louisiana physicists
agree how distant the new object is, they trace out very different orbits. Murray considers the orbits of 13 comets with the most accurately known orbits; the Louisiana team considers 82. Too Early to Look for a Name “It’s possibly suggestive,” comments Brian Marsden, associate director for planetary sciences at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge, Mass. “I don’t want to bet on it. We’re certainly not going to name it.” Whitmire agrees it’s too early to say definitely there’s something out there. “Until it’s found, you can never be overly confident,” he says. “We know in science you can be fooled by statistics.” But he adds, “If I was betting, it’s better than 50-50 odds that it’s there.”

So there you have it. I know it says that nothing is conclusive but it sure says something when it comes from the science community that had already shot the whole idea down years ago. If there is a controversy about this thing why isn't anyone looking with the right equipment to prove or disprove this thing unless there is a very coordinated effort to keep this hush hush. Apparently in my home town, several amatuers have tried to gain access to local observatories to investigate and have been told that the observatory is closed to the public indefinitely with no reason given.
Curious eh ???

__________________
Anti Gravity and Zero Point Rule.
11:11
777
33
1

Most people, especially scientists !!!

Mr. XoFFoX, welcome to the board. You're welcome to post your views here. But please, there's no need to be antagonistic. Just state your case politely. We'll attempt to answer it politely in turn.

As far as I know, Mr. Plait has never claimed that a tenth planet or brown dwarf categorically doesn't exist. He's only stated that it doesn't exist as claimed by the Nibiru promoters. There's a difference there.

Another thing is that good scientists are very reluctant to jump to conclusions. They don't like to state that something is true until they are reasonably sure that it exists as claimed. This is not closed-mindedness, it's just caution.

This is why most of science doesn't embrace the idea of anti-gravity. There has been no reliable evidence (or even a viable theory) presented yet that it exists, therefore it's not accepted. When and if such evidence is presented, and when it can be confirmed beyond a reasonable doubt, science will accept it's existance.

Recently, however, the idea of dark energy has become accepted for debate in cosmological circles. New measurements of the expansion of the universe have shown that it is accelerating. Therefore, there seems to be some force counteracting gravity at very large scales. It's still under debate though, and not accepted, but there's enough evidence to give it a closer look.

These are my views. It's up to the BA to answer in more detail if he wishes.

__________________
...And that, my liege, is how we know the Earth to be banana-shaped. --Sir Bedevere

Another thing, the BA doesn't like to have full texts copied and pasted due to copyright restrictions. If you have a web page link, please just paste the URL address itself, and maybe a few highlights from the article if you want. Those interested can read it from there.

As for the article itself, I think it illustrates my point. The researchers have presented their findings, but even they are very cautious about drawing any final conclusions from them. Remember also, that this is just a single finding. Others will have to confirm the research before it can be accepted. Then it will be open to more consideration. Once again, simple caution not to jump to conclusions.

And as for your final paragraph, the article itself says that current telescopes wouldn't be able to see this object, even if it's exact location were known. And observatories are under no obligation to allow every Tom, Dick, and Harry into their facilities to do "research". Nor is there any obligation to even say why they are refusing it. Does your company allow just anyone to come in and use your photocopiers and fax machines? They have their own projects to work on. Why should they give up time and equipment to people they don't know for purposes they don't know?

__________________
...And that, my liege, is how we know the Earth to be banana-shaped. --Sir Bedevere

Well, I suppose we'll get to see what happens to Whitmire's theory when it's published in Icarus. From a quick google search, he seems to have quite a following in the Planet X community.


-Adam

Dr. Plait's nickname is Phil, not Phip.

See, we can be antagoniostic too! [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

Actually, I do read. As a matter of fact, I read the actual science journal articles about the comet studies, and didn't get all my information from a news article.

I have said this many times on radio and on the web, though not on my Planet X pages yet. The studies done that examined comet orbits were not very convincing to me. One, for example, only looked at the orbits of 12 comtets, and threw out some data that looked like it was pertinent. I talked to an orbits expert and he agreed that the paper was interesting, but unconvincing.

Don't mistake a published paper for fact. And certainly don't get your science from a news article.

As someone else pointed out, by claiming that astronomers have found evidence for a tenth planet, the Planet X crowd is shooting themselves in the foot. That evidence (if you believe the hypothesis is correct) points to a totally different object than what Ms. Lieder and Mr. Hazlewood claim to exist. Saying this is the smoking gun is basically announcing that they have no grasp of basic science at all.

And, in fact, when I was on Coast-to-Coast the first time, I talked at length about the real possibility of an actual tenth planet in our solar system very far out, over 100 billion kilometers out. It's unlikely, but possible. I was even involved in some studies to look for it. But this is a different thing entirely than a planet that is on its way in to pass by us in a scant 9 months.

So, on the contrary to what you said, I do in fact read current news, but I try get my news from the source. There's less chance of making mistakes that way.

Do we know this is "Mr."? We've made this mistake before.... [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_redface.gif[/img]

Unless he's referring to ParaHydrogen Induced Polarization, or PHIP for short. (A special effect in NMR spectroscopy.) (But I don't think he is.)

Sorry for being such a geek. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif[/img]

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Chip on 2002-08-24 05:06 ]</font>

It's also possible that some people use "Phip" as a nickname for "Phillip". Or that he intended to type "Phil" but his fingers keeps turning it into "Phip".

Well, about the Phip thingy...I suppose I could use the excuse that P is just above L on the keybrd but that's a little weak as I am a champion typist.(Won 1st place 3 years running at the Possum Lodge type off) I could say that someone maliciously switched my L & P keys on my keybrd but that's equal to m times c cubed and not very relative. So I am resigned to admit that I was mostly being silly sprinkled with a little sarcasm and dipped in chocolate sauce to temper the apparent harsh antagonism. Me and my bandmates have an ongoing tradition of making nicknames for each other and our other friends so this may just be a spill over.
I'm the kind of guy who would challenge anyone to a curling match on thin ice using old Volkswagon Beetles instead of the traditional Tibetan Yaks for curling stones. I know it's kinda krazy but that's just me. Don't forget I'm a musician not a scientist so I'm prone to bouts and spouts and irrational outbursts of outlandish ideas that usually rile the sane and rational analytical mind. Maybe I'm a twin ???

As for being antagonistic, you all thought that was harsh ??? I am a Geminii and I have a very sharp mind and likewise tongue and I don't like tippy toeing through delicate egos that tend to bruise easily. I get enough of that dealing with musicians who can't take criticism well. You tell them honestly what you think and they get all defensive and childish. So, I have had to learn to temper my tongue and I thought that my posting was direct, to the point and not antagonistic. I guess I'll have to teach my typing finger to be more gentle. Sometimes I get quite angry about the lack of progress in science due to close minded ones and it comes through my comments sometimes as being sarcastic or anatgonistic as you have stated. I am very pragmatic and I don't deal with beating around the bush or deception well. I am very adept at seeing through deception and believe me, it's all around us in these times. You only have to look at the stockmarket scandals these days and now imagine that this is only a very small tip of the iceberg. The good ol boys down at NASA are very good at this game as well. I hope this answers some of your questions and clears up any misunderstandings.
Well, enough about me... I do have some replies to some of your comments but I have to head out the door to watch my buds play music down at the bar tonight and I have to go now.

PS> Sorry bout the pasting of the article. I only had a copy of the page. The article links only last for a few days and are then archived into cyber-heaven or hell, depending on yer point of view. I'm sure the author and/or news service won't mind as they probably aren't interested in real science anyway. Cheers
777

Hey Chip... I liked your version of what phip was. Maybe they are related somehow ??? And Donnie B needs to learn how to spell antagonistic.

You're a lousy writer and thinker. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

I can't express the humor in someone speaking of astrology on an astronomy website.

- Artema

I would say that the derogatory nature and sophomoric sarcasm of your posts gets well in the way of any vestige of pragmatism you might believe you have. If you don't like being polite, you'd still go a lot further here by simply stating an astronomy related idea (such as your Planet X ideas or questions) without personal or vindictive attacks. It takes up less space too.

Dear XoFFoX

Watch out.
I know what curling is.
I know what it's done with.
Beetles figure nowhere in it.
My parents are from Port Glasgow & Greenock.

I would annihilate your article but I have
to go and check on the tablet I'm making ...

__________________
Garlic Bread?!?!

Happy grin! I like you already!

Yeah, your original post was pretty brutal, really. You have to realize that this bbs isn't like most others. Most other discussion groups (usenet, etc.) are like playgrounds for sugared-up 5th graders. This, on the other hand, is more like the reading room at the British Museum.

Or...so we would like to believe! (Sometimes, it gets to be a bit like a playground for sugared-up eighth graders...)

Silas

I doubt I will have any impact on your thought processes but maybe, just maybe, with a bit of kindness and sincerity, (since your second long post was much nicer than your first), I might have a tiny impact with some specific comments.

I to, am very direct. I to, sound too harsh to many people. I think I can be direct without a tone of anger most of the time. So that is not the issue. But communication is. What you have posted and what you later describe as how you thought you sounded don't jibe. So here are some specifics about messages in your statements that from your subsequent posts, you don't seem to have recognized.


Insulting someone is a tactic people use when they can't debate an issue with evidence. A lot of us on this BB recognize that and insults don't impress us.

Wow, could you be a little out of touch here? Are you suggesting Native Americans don't use the internet? Especially their 'elders'? Or do you know these guys personally? Native Americans aren't exactly like the Aimish you know. And, there is a wide variety of people among Native Americans. They couldn't ALL not use the net.

And you are? How can you make this judgement about people you've only heard talk a time or two or only read a few things they've written?

At the risk of being sarcastic I shall be direct. Where has your 'data set' come from? It sounds like you've read a bit. Does that really compare to someone who has spent more than 8 years, (about the minimum time to get a phD.), reading and studying as much as one can on the subjects you think you know more about? Not to mention all the other knowledge gained from experience and additional education. Whether you respect university education or not, the individual doesn't sit around sucking up the party line during that 8+ years.

You may have seen one too many movies on this one. If 'most scientists' are closed minded and never think outside the box, how have we gotten this far advanced in technology? How could close minded scientists transplant hearts, livers and lungs into people? How could they save premature infants who weigh less than one pound? Have you ever been inside of a neonatal intensive care unit?

How did close minded scientists develop the internet? How did they send all those communication satellites into space and gotten them into just the right orbits so your cell phone and pager work? Obviously I could fill pages here. I think you get my point.

Did this revelation come to you and so it is so? Have you thought of ways to test your hypothesis? Is there a reason we should listen to this idea?

Science welcomes new thinkers with open arms but you can't just decide you understand the Universe better than the rest of the world and then get upset that no one listens, agrees, or whatever it is that upsets you as you stated. You have to seek and present something in the way of evidence to support what you believe.

That doesn't mean you have to do the research yourself, but it does mean you can't just read about a discovery or potential discovery here or there and claim you've made your case. Because you haven't.

The proof's in the pudding dude. Where is this device and when can we see the demonstration? Excuse me if I cannot believe this on faith.

If that's true you haven't convinced me. You don't have to of course. But to think you've learned so much from so little. And all those rocket scientists have learned so little from so much. Hmmmm?

I'll defer addressing any of your astronomy facts to the other intelligent souls on this BB. They handle those issues quite well.

If you're nice we'll mostly address your issues with logic and evidence. People I've chatted with on this BB seem perfectly willing to entertain new ideas and listen to alternative theories and hypotheses. But they aren't going to buy unusual perspectives on the Universe without clear evidence and rational logic to back it up. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

__________________
~~ ><>><> ~~ ><,,> ><,,> ...`;=;p d;=;' /\/\^/\ ^^ ^/\/\_
Democracy Now! - The lost art of investigative news reporting.

Now who's making fun of who ??? Who is being sarcastic ??? I pay as much respect to Astrology as I do to Astromomy. I like both and respect both. I was merely trying to relate my nature according to my birth sign, which for the most part I fit pretty closely to the ascribed traits. I actually like making people laugh if you hadn't noticed. It's my nature, I'm an entertainer,and a communicator.
555

Well, yet another example of this being a nice friendly place. No one gets slammed in here. I did feel a little prick from this one though, Grapes but that's OK. I can take it. I do feel a certain pride about my communication skills. Composition, Grammer, Spelling etc. I have seen some pretty scary stuff from University Grads who still don't know how to spell. Anyway, after reading some of the latest posts, it seems I'm in a deep bitta doo doo. I've stirred up a Hornets nest.

I'm not attacking anyone. (at least I hope not) If you feel it's an attack then that is what you will deal with. I have no control over that from where I sit. If I were to attack you personally CHIP I would have firstly directed it squarely on you and no one else and I would have been much harsher than my initial comments that I believe I specifically directed towards The Bad Astronomer and not yourself. I do NOT have trouble with being polite as I believe I have NOT been overtly rude. I haven't used any four letter words yet, if that counts for anything ??? I'm sorry for the LONG posts it seems that there is a lot for me to say in response to your posts. There are a lot and I do or would like to respond to most of them. That's why this is a discussion board, right ??? I like a good debate... and I realize that sometimes they can get a little rough but that's the nature of it sometimes. Wait till me and beskeptical lock horns !!!

_________________
Anti Gravity and Zero Point Rule.
11:11
777
33
1

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: XoFFoX on 2002-08-26 04:45 ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: XoFFoX on 2002-08-26 04:56 ]</font>

What is this topic about???

What are binary asteroids doing that is unexpected and that can not be explained with gravity?

Calculations in orbital mechanics are pretty sophisticated these days. They even account for non-gravitational effects on small bodies of the solar system. So I wonder what surprises binary asteroids should have... Did I miss a publication there? Does someone have a reference?

Of course you fit your sign, almost everyone fits almost every sign.

The Skeptic's Dictionary explains the fallacies of astrology as well as anyone:
http://skepdic.com/astrolgy.html

__________________
~~ ><>><> ~~ ><,,> ><,,> ...`;=;p d;=;' /\/\^/\ ^^ ^/\/\_
Democracy Now! - The lost art of investigative news reporting.

To be honest, I thought about deleting that post and sending out a warning, but I couldn't decide if it was satirical or not, and I prefer to err on the side of leaving things in. So, Grapes, which was it?

I was a little worried by that post slipping though. We can't have two sets of rules for regulars and newbies...

I'd vote for taking it out. OTOH, you're right about the satire--XoFFoX's comments were pretty rude, plus XoFFoX made the reference to delicate egos that bruise easily when people objected to the rudeness. I wondered how they'd react to similar insults. XoFFoX did OK, so I vote to let 'em stay. XoFFoX I mean, not my post.

THanks for the support BA. Your not such a bad guy after all. For the future, I will make an extra effort to be less agressive in my comments and hopefully I can still get my points across without losing too much impact or edge. Rock on !!!
333

It was something I read not too long ago. I will try to find it and give you a link for it.