Hi:

I'm new here, and I have a few answers to some of the posts.

First, I am one of the co-authors of the book titled above and featured in those 5 videos, so I know the other two authors very well.

In terms of our authoring duties, I did not work on the science. Jacco did that. I worked together with Marshall on other aspects of the book.

Peter B, I was particularly drawn to your letter with all the questions, so I will be quoting your entire question letter.

Beginning:

That was "US News and World Report." I saw copies of the news reports. The first was dated sometime in September, 1983.

Nibiru / Planet X is on a 3600-year tightly elliptical orbit that is roughly perpendicular to the ecliptic of the solar system. It is a planetary system of a brown dwarf and planets with a protoplanetary disk that resembles a very thick dust cloud. Check any astronomy book, and it will tell you that this is how planetary systems form around stars. We have one here. It's called the Oort Cloud.

No. The Greek philosopher Plato was the cause of the name given to Atlantis that we now know it by. Who knows what the people we call Atlanteans called themselves?

Mayan anthropologist George Erickson would be a good person to start with.

Let's not just look at only the heat of a brown dwarf. Stars also have magnetism, which gives them polarity. If an incoming brown dwarf has a polarity that is opposite to our own sun, that would cause the sun to react. Also, the brown dwarf would affect any planets it nears, and we would not be able to see it at a Pluto distance, for instance, without infrared, because of the protoplanetary disk.

Do the research. You'll find that all of our planets are suffering global warming.

It's not on a 4 - 5 thousand year orbital cycle. Its cycle is 36 to 37 hundred years. Also, the orbit is highly erratic, which indicates planets circling it and pulling on it with their own gravity.

It will seem to come out of nowhere, yes, when it comes up. That's because of the protoplanetary disk again. Have you ever driven at night in either pea-soup fog or a very nasty sandstorm? How about doing those things with your headlights off?

Picture (not two, but) at least twelve cars all driving around under those conditions. Now, try to accurately predict which of those twelve will escape without a scratch. It's not going to happen.

Brown dwarfs are brown because they don't generate enough heat to make them appear red or yellow. Added to that, there is the matter of (again) the protoplanetary disk, which is a cloud-like structure that holds heat in. So, again, detection without a far-infrared instrument will be next to impossible.

That's true -- or will be true for us by the time it gets here. The trick is not to wait to leave the tracks until the train is upon you, but to plan your exit when you first feel the rumble under your feet. Therefore, we need telescopes that look outside the visual spectrum.


Try Google. Google William Herschel, John Couch Adams and Clyde Tombaugh. They were neither NASA nor Russians, but they were looking for Planet X long before NASA, the Russian Space Agency, ESA, JAXA, etc., took up the mantle.

William Herschel noticed that Saturn was perturbed from its orbit and discovered Uranus. Adams did the same for Neptune, and Tombaugh discovered Pluto.

Now, before you rush to say, "There, that's proof that Planet X doesn't exist," here is what Dr. Brian Marsden of the Smithsonian Institution said: "If you fail to find something, it only means that you failed to find it. It doesn't mean that it's not there."

<snip>

Well, folks, let's belly up to the bar, and make Peter B our new best friend. He must have the bux (either US or Australian) to purchase one of these beauties in either the near- or far-infrared range! (Sorry, Pete -- couldn't resist that! )

Seriously, the SPT in Antartica that just went active in 2007 is a far-infrared telescope that will be able to do the search for us, and at the most optimal place.


Amateur astronomers are like those driving through the pea-soup fog at night without headlights. No, I am not calling them stupid, just unequipped. They can't tell about what they don't yet know, or as Dr. Marsden put it, "haven't yet found."

The jury is still out on that, but I hope you're right.

About the military, be all that you can be, JimH. I did, and I'm still alive and kickin'.

Again, 36 to 37 hundred years. Yes, it did leave a trace in a very early flyby. That's called the Asteroid Belt.

As for the planets, that's earlier in my letter.

Pete, I am having some real, good-natured fun with your letters. Here is your follow-up letter after having watched the videos. Really, it is nothing against you.

Maybe the person who started this thread didn't, but we did. According to the first video, after the press conference announcing the discovery of the space body at the edge of the solar system, NASA capped the topic. No more information came out -- that is, until they stated what you said. However, that took several months for them even to go that far.

Did you listen to the second video? In the second video, about 1/4 of the way through, Marshall Masters states that prevailing scientific thought about brown dwarfs is that they must be larger than Jupiter. He briefly again touches on the US News story, but stops short of saying that he believes that object to be Planet X, because the previous sentence indicates that he does not. However, read the next paragraph.

Planet X, with a protoplanetary disk around it, is not traveling light. It will bring many smaller objects with it, including one like the one spotted by IRAS.

Yes, it is a lot cooler than the sun, but inside the orbital sphere of Pluto, it is within the sun's gravitational field. It affects, and is affected by, the sun's gravity. That is making the sun go crazy, and the sun affects Coruscant -- no; Tattooine -- no; oh, yes, Earth and the other planets in our system. (Fans of Star Wars are well aware that Coruscant and Tattooine had enough problems of their own without Nibiru jumping into their $#!t.) Then, the global warming of the outer planets is affected by the heat of the brown dwarf, itself.

Ignore the five videos if you wish, research them if you wish (please!), or if you wish, take the videos at their word, for Marshall did suggest research at the end of the last video, too.

One more thing, Pete, you asked about The Kolbrin Bible. Here is its current website. http://yowbooks.com/html/kolbrin.html Yes, group, I also edited that book, as you will find near the bottom of the page.

The reason that it doesn't show up on Wiki is that people were putting erroneous entries onto its Wiki page, using their "public editing" system, and stating them as facts. I don't remember now what they were because this happened several years ago, but as editor, it was my responsibility to check them out. Marshall sent Wiki the facts and asked them to update the page. It was pulled, instead.

Such is life.

Thanks, Pete.

Now, on to STS60:

STS, since I already stated my position about the original post and Pete's answer, I will not restate it. It has not changed in the last 5 minutes, nor will it.

However, I do have a bone to pick about the ad-hominem attack you launched against Marshall and the other two co-authors of the book that the videos are about. You said, in response to another statement:

None of the three of us is delusional; one of us is a scientist, and I respectfully, but publicly request that the moderator edit that paragraph out of your letter. You don't know us, and you don't have a right to use a public forum to judge us in that manner. I didn't judge Pete, and though I may not agree with him, he is entitled to his opinion about the subject of Planet X, which is what this thread is about.

Now, to end this letter on a happier note, Bozola, your post had me rolling on the floor with laughter! That tells me you spent some time watching Hardware Wars. Keep the humor coming, guy!

Cheers,
Princess

http://www.earthage.org/EarthOldorYo...de%20flood.htm
This one is a Young Earth Creationist site chock full of misconceptions, bad evidence, heavily distorted evidence, severe cherry picking, outright falsehoods and unsubstantiated claims.

That's the Black Sea idea. Debatable, but, no world flood, and doesn't require a Nibiru.

A YEC site. Next.

Looks like Black Sea again.

There isn't any scientific evidence for how long humans have been on the planet? That's news to me.

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

Van der Worp?

Would that be this guy?

Calculating the orbits of invisible planets and the explosive power of gas giants, adding an healthy dose of fear-mongering, must just be a hobby then.

Hasn't published a single peer-reviewed paper ever.

[/sarcasm]

__________________
Join the Illuminati

It sounds like you assume everything "the government" (who is that anyway) says must be a lie.

To follow that logic, the government must be lying when they claim suicide is bad. Please follow that logic and commit suicide.

Or wait, could it be that even the government CAN tell the truth?
How do you actually determine whether they tell lies or the truth?
Is it whether they agree with your theory or not?

A quick shufty on the IRAS claim on Planet X throws up some answers. Few facts and lots of claims. Or is it me?

After 2012 and when everything is still normal, what is the next disaster on the horizon?

Hi yourself, welcome to BAUT. You should look over the rules and the FAQs, particularly for the CT section.

I won't try to answer all of your post, but will pick a couple of points.


And if you read the BA's blog (linked above) you will find that when he spoke with the actual scientists (not NASA or the government), he found out that there initial reports on Planet X were speculation and that further research found that this IR objects were much further away (dust clouds in our galaxy or other galaxies).

But if there was a protoplanetary disk around it, this would be huge. Such disks are usually bigger than our solar system. We have easily observed them around distant stars. And such objects would reflect light from our on sun, and would be easily visible to backyard astronomers. It would also block distant stars behind in the sky. There is no way such an object would not be seen.

In spite of the name, brown dwarfs are still fairly bright objects, and that close to us would be visible. They have been detected out to hundreds of light years.

Most of all, an object that big, with a protoplanetary disk around it to boot, would cause gravitational effects that would been seen long ago. Yet, last I checked, every planet in our solar system is exactly where it is supposed to be.

__________________
At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

By the way PrincessVader08, I just thought of one other thing.

You are claiming that this brown dwarf is on a 3600 year orbit and has a protoplanetary disk. I assume it has had this disk for a while, and that it didn't just get happen in the last orbit (such disks form with their star).

There is absolutely no way that such a disk could survive a trip through our solar system without being torn apart by gravitational forces, and would probably similar effect the planets in our solar system. It certainly could not have survived multiple trips every 3600 years.

__________________
At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

I would agree that the description "delusional ravings" is inappropriate in your case, at least, Princess. But "scientific illiteracy" is right on the money. Here's an example:

The perturbations in Saturn's orbit did indeed lead Herschel to discover Uranus, and Neptune was discovered by a similar technique. However, Tombaugh's discovery of Pluto was entirely fortuitous. The perturbations that led to his search were later shown to be invalid -- simple mismeasurements. What's more, Pluto is far too small to have caused them, even if they had been real. Tombaugh simply lucked out and discovered a large (and the first known) Kuiper Belt object.

In fact, as Swift mentioned, all the planets are just where they should be based on our present understanding of gravity (i.e. General Relativity) and the known masses in the solar system. There is absolutely no indication of any other large objects nearby, and this most definitely rules out anything like the brown dwarf you're describing.

The bottom line is that you seem to think the history of planetary discovery somehow supports your notion of the existence of this brown dwarf, or at least allows its possibility, when in fact it completely precludes it. I see that as scientific illiteracy, pure and simple.

__________________
Bring back Firefly!

"It is quite clear that Occam's razor does not sharpen in your pyramid." (Nicolas)

"Still, a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest." (Paul Simon)

Hello Ms Manning (I hope I have your name right – I thought it was a reasonably safe guess). Welcome to the BAUT forum.

Okay, but what about astronomical sources? Like other scientists, astronomers publish their findings in professional journals.

Okay, but how do you (collectively) know these details? Is there evidence, or are these things which need to be true in order for your theory to work? And I’ll come back to the Oort Cloud later.

At what sort of distance would the brown dwarf need to be for this interaction to happen? Can you provide some calculations?

But protoplanetary discs are flat, and would at best block light in one narrow plane. For your theory to be right, this disc needs to be aligned with the Earth. More than a couple of degrees out, and there won’t be any blockage. Is there any evidence to support this claim? Or is this something else which needs to be true in order for your theory to work?

And the Oort Cloud certainly doesn’t obscure our vision out of the Solar System, so it certainly wouldn’t block any outside view of our Sun. If Brownie’s protoplanetary disc is as thick as the Oort Cloud, it isn’t going to block our view of Brownie, regardless of the alignment of the disc’s plane.

Unfortunately, the evidence I’ve found suggests that only a couple of planets or moons are heating up, and in some cases the heating is localised within the planet. For other planets, I understand there’s no evidence of heating. Can you please tell me the source of your data about the planets heating?

Fair enough. I know of the 3600 year figure for Nibiru. But the OP talked about the Sumerians, whose civilisation flourished 4000-5000 years ago, and I assumed he meant Brownie last visited the Earth at that time.

How do you (collectively) know Brownie’s orbit is highly erratic, if you can’t see it?

Well, I’ve already suggested that the protoplanetary disc is unlikely to be thick enough to obscure Brownie.

Again, the disc is unlikely to have this effect. And anyway, the disc is going to reflect the Sun’s light, making it more visible.

Well, in my humble opinion they’re going to be hard pressed to miss Brownie.

This is a strangely negative self-assessment after the certainty you’ve displayed up to now.

But Brownie isn’t necessary to explain the Asteroid Belt. Jupiter alone is a sufficient explanation for the asteroids.

And anyway, if Brownie has been passing through the Solar System every 3600 years for the last 4.5-odd billion years, why does it still have a protoplanetary disc?

:-) @ Star Wars refs. But can you be a little more precise about Brownie’s presence making the Sun go crazy? At what sort of range does the effect arise, and what sort of effect is “crazy”?

You don't know us, and you don't have a right to use a public forum to judge us in that manner.

The act of publishing a book necessarily exposes one's ideas to the public, to be received in a manner in which the public deems appropriate. I don't know you either, but I've known Sts60 for many years. I have yet to find an instance where he has erred, and if he is wrong in judging the scientific strength of your findings, it would be a first.

Magnetism acting on the same order as gravity in planetary interactions is scientific hogwash.

Added to that, there is the matter of (again) the protoplanetary disk, which is a cloud-like structure that holds heat in.

More hogwash.

I will also endorse Swift's comment about the gravitational effect of a "protoplanetary disk" passing through the Solar System. He is entirely correct.

Many of the participants here are professionally qualified in such fields as astrodynamics and astrophysics. We are obviously not your intended audience.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Perhaps this thread could be renamed "Niburu -- Brown Dwarf, Destroyer of Brain Cells".

__________________
Microsoft is over if you want it.

The bar has been lowered for the promotion of ATM ideas; the bar for the acceptance of ATM ideas must remain high.