Well, and it was only a quick look, Enuma Elish to me appears to be tale of what went on before mankind and shortly after but probably in line with other cultures beliefs? The tablet deciphering that I read does not appear to immediately point any fingers at wandering planets that we can apply today though there are some vague references that would appear to apply only after a few pointers from this thread. Not having all day or weeks to delve into this, it was interesting as a history project for a short while today.

As the son, stepson, and grandson of teachers (and an instructor myself in some areas) I take profound exception to this claim. As might some other BAUTers (and a Mod) who are teachers, some in the very area we are discussing. You might want to reconsider.

(Aren't you the one who complained about a perceived ad hom in another post?)

__________________
Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by ignorance or stupidity.
Isaac Asimov

For more in depth research I'd say reading Sitchin's Twelfth Planet and Genesis Revisited would be beneficial.
A cursory review will reveal next to nothing.

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

Okay... that is oh, so close to being sig-line worthy.

__________________
Relight the 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)

__________________
Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by ignorance or stupidity.
Isaac Asimov

Quickly, I can't address every question, but yes, we did consult NASA and other professional journals.

What does this mean, exactly?

There is evidence, and I stated some of that in previous letters.

Kindly address the rebuttals already offered to this "evidence".

The distance question is good. Space bodies have magnetic polarity,

No. Most space objects do not have organized magnetic fields. Most of the planets do, but not all, and the vast majority of natural objects in our solar system are planetoids, moons, asteroids, comets, and random meteoroids which do not.

so it's like taking two magnets and pointing their north poles at each other. The closer they get, the more repulsion you see. Otherwise, if the opposite poles are pointed at each other, they draw one another in.

Irrelevant. Gravitational forces dominate, by far, the dynamics of the solar system.

But suppose that there is also electrical polarity. Opposite poles can cause lightning, with the electricity going from positive of one body to the negative of the other. If the electric universe theory is proven, not only will it make Jim McCanney happy, but we could see electrical sprites coming from the sun and going towards this thing as it approaches.

One might as well suppose there is color, or temperature. This statement is meaningless and does not support the "Nibiru/Planet X" claims.

BTW, "sprites" are an Earth atmosphere phenomenon.

How close? I am no scientist, and I prefer to write about humanity rather than this, but from what I gathered in working on the book, it depends on the power contained in both bodies.

The "Nibiru/Planet X" claims are meaningless without quantitative predictions. One must note that you are happy to invoke the names of real scientists (no longer around to defend themselves), and real (though irrelevant and so far uniformly misrepresented) scientific observations. If you wish to don the trappings of science to lend an air of legitimacy to your claims, then you need to be prepared to answer real scientific questions.

On the disk, have you ever seen a weight plate underneath the body of a van? Or those plates that they put on the road to allow drivers to drive over construction areas? Those are flat, and they are no more than 1 inch thick. Yet, to lift one takes a crane or a tractor, because they are very dense. And looking through one edge-to-edge is impossible. That's why I used the pea-soup fog analogy.

This analogy is hopelessly incorrect. Accretion disks are formed around stars. Any such object gravitationally bound to our sun, and only a few years' travel from the inner solar system, would not only be an easy visible-light target - almost certainly a naked-eye object - but would also be causing significant gravitational disruptions to the orbits of known bodies (including interplanetary spacecraft). Real disruptions, not the phantoms you have invoked.

According to the Epic of Gilgamesh, the Sumerian creation story, the planet that Earth used to be was located in what is now the asteroid belt. Another planet crashed into it, splitting it into one small whole and millions of tiny parts (small and tiny relative to the planet that supposedly crashed into it). The tiny parts became the asteroid belt, but the small whole was knocked inward towards the sun. The impact rearranged the water that covered the planet into seas. According to the Sumerians, the planet that crashed into it was captured by the sun and trapped in a long elliptical orbit. I don't have a copy of this book, but have read bits of it here and there on the web, in English, of course.

This description of the formation of the solar system is flatly incompatible with known physics. I suspect my anthropology professors would have a few comments about such claims, too, but that's another story.

The sun going crazy. Hmmm... We just entered solar cycle 24. Solar cycle 23 was pretty crazy, in itself. It had a double-maximum, and we had to invent a new solar-flare class to measure the whopper flares it sent out. Lots of CME, too. All of my friends and I expressed gratitude whenever one of the giant CME's pointed away from Earth. Yet, NASA has predicted #24, that peaks in less than 5 years now, to be 1.5 X the strength of #23, which was much stronger than many of the cycles before.

Sheer handwaving. Leaving aside your characterizations of the solar cycles - if you wish to claim this as support for your "Planet X/Nibiru" claims, it is incumbent upon you to explain exactly what this has to do with your alleged superplanet. You have tossed about claims about magnetic this and electric that with great abandon. Perhaps you could explain, if this Magic 8-Ball is having such an effect on our Sun, why we have not observed wholesale upheavals of the interplanetary magnetic field? Why spacecraft magnetometers throughout the solar system aren't going crazy? And, if all space bodies have "magnetic polarity" which gets them tugged hither and yon, why we don't see the effects on their orbits, if the effect is strong enough to make the Sun "go crazy"?

__________________
"Slapping a guy on the head is just as funny now as it was eighty years ago."

Quickly, I can't address every question, but yes, we did consult NASA and other professional journals.

What's the name of the person you spoke to at NASA, and did he or she agree with your theories? Or did you simply ask them for some background material and then proceed to make your own assumptions about it and draw your own conclusions later?

I was in a hospital waiting room the other day and picked up a copy of the Journal of the American Medical Association. Consulting a professional journal doesn't automatically make me a doctor. I'm not immediately qualified on the basis of that consultation to speak authoritatively on immune system suppression for kidney transplants. Professional journals are meant to communicate among professionals, not to educate laymen.

Many authors try to lend authority to their claims by saying they've consulted with experts and with bodies of scholarship. That doesn't mean much if the experts with whom they've consulted don't share the conclusions, or if the authors have misunderstood or misrepresented the previous research.

Space bodies have magnetic polarity, so it's like taking two magnets and pointing their north poles at each other.

Well that certainly makes much more sense than the allusion to monopolarity. However that doesn't fix your problem.

Most of the action in the Solar System takes place in the ecliptic plane, or close to it. And most of the planetary magnetic fields are aligned perpendicular to that plane. Which means your analogy to bar magnets end to end doesn't really hold.

When you experiment with magnets, you find that when the magnets are close enough so that the magnetic fields dominate the dynamic solution, rotation and not displacement becomes the primary behavior. So if two bodies hypothetically draw near enough to together for their magnetic interaction to rise to the same order of magnitude as gravity, the likely behavior is a rotation of the body within its local reference frame, not a wholesale shift of orbits.

That's because of the relative inherent instability of magnetic repulsion and the general second-order nature of moment of inertia (especially in spherioid objects). It simply takes less effort, in general, to make something rotate than to make it shift course.

But the fact remains that we've been rigorously practicing celestial mechanics for well over a hundred years, and in all that time magnetism has failed to rise to significance as a natural force in the heavens. These days we can compute third- and fourth-order effects that perturb orbits, such as solar wind pressure. That is the degree to which we can plot things in the heavens. Magnetism still doesn't count at that degree of scrutiny.

Only in recent years have we used strong artificial magnetic fields in satellites to provide orbital maneuvering forces relative to Earth's magnetic field. The effect is very small, and we tolerate its miniscule magnitude only because it's a way of steering satellites that doesn't expend limited fuel. The magnetic coils can be energized from solar cells.

Sorry, but magnetism as a safety net for the rogue body theory simply doesn't work.

I am no scientist, and I prefer to write about humanity rather than this, but from what I gathered in working on the book, it depends on the power contained in both bodies.

We are scientists, and the theory doesn't hold. Since we, not you, are the better judge of the scientific merits of the theory, perhaps you should give us the benefit of the doubt when we use works such as "delusional" and "hogwash." Perhaps we're not so far off.

Saying that electrostatic attraction depends on the amount of power contained in both bodies doesn't answer the questions of whether such power has ever been observed to any order of sufficient magnitude in the Solar System, how such power would be generated and maintained, and what has happened to all the other observations that would signal a vast amount of electrostatic potential at work.

Again, you're grasping at straws in order to shore up a completely unworkable theory. It just doesn't fit the observations.

That's why I used the pea-soup fog analogy.

Your analogies don't fit the actual astrophysical phenomena. Analogies are fine for getting the gist of a new idea across to people, if they're accurate. However, you're talking to people who don't need analogies to understand astrophysical phenomena. We understand them according to their essence.

When you say, for example, that some cloud of material will be dense enough to hold in light and heat from a brown dwarf such as to make it wholly invisible, and yet itself impervious to reflected light, your audience here knows enough about the behavior of the universe to know just how preposterous and impossible that is. Handwaving at pea soup or thin steel plates doesn't change that.

Further, we have enough experience with fringe theories to recognize when someone is really just making conjectural excuses for why the evidence says one thing but their theories say another. The whole notion of a magical, invisible-yet-opaque protoplanetary cloud is just a desperate attempt to keep making money off of a bad idea. You might just as well say "Romulan cloaking device," for all the scientific plausibility the cloud theory has.

About the hoping that these things don't happen, I don't think that's a negative self-assessment at all. I don't believe that anyone in their right mind would want these things to happen.

I disagree. Many people seem to want to define their lives according to conflict and adversity. There have been doomsday cults throughout history, very few of which have happy endings.

And a lot of people enjoy being doomsayers. No one pays attention to the man who says, "Don't worry; everything's fine." People pay more attention to, "Repent ye, for Nibiru is at hand!" And those who say that sort of thing say it in order to reap that attention. They crave it. And they'll do or say whatever it takes to hold it, including make vague allusions to imaginary or inapplicable physical phenomena.

However, as a former Girl Scout, I also like to be prepared.

As an Eagle Scout myself and a professional engineer, I can't agree more. However, we need to use our brains and expend our resources toward preparedness against credible threats. When unscrupulous authors whip the public into a frenzy over nothing, they do much more harm than good. And they do it for their own benefit, not for any supposed altruistic motive of general preparedness.

Unfortunately doomsayer books and videos are not harmless. People alter their lives on the basis of such things, often to their ultimate detriment. They forego essential medical treatment. They compromise their financial futures. They even commit suicide in extreme cases. At the very least they demand we focus attention on the examination of empty theories when more pressing and evident problems are at hand, simply so some author can bask in glory for a while.

I think it's a very legitimate question to ask whether you and your co-authors will be giving refunds on the sale of your book when your predictions fail to come true. Will you be accepting responsibility for the strength of your conclusions? I'm an engineer. That means I accept legal liability for the correctness of my thinking, upon which others may choose to rely. Are you willing to rise to that level of accountability?

In the marketplace of ideas, you're selling a defective product. Don't blame those who notice.

The sun going crazy. Hmmm... We just entered solar cycle 24. Solar cycle 23 was pretty crazy, in itself.

Compared to what? We have detailed records of solar activity going back to Victorian times.

"Going crazy" is still not a good enough explanation. What is the physical mechanism by which a recent elevation in solar anomalies is tied to the physical properties of a brown dwarf? By the same token I can say that the recent solar activity is being caused by space pixies. And just because no one has yet seen a space pixie doesn't mean they don't exist. And if I postulate in ad hoc fashion all the properties of space pixies (regardless of known physical law) so that they happen to coincide with my cherry-picked observations of solar activity, what has that proven?

You see, invisible brown dwarf stars are no more probable than space pixies. You haven't given the public any sort of evidence they can trust. Just a lot of ignorant conjecture dressed up in scientific-sounding language.

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

I was in a hospital waiting room the other day and picked up a copy of the Journal of the American Medical Association.

Jay, I'm glad to hear that! Since you are now a medical expert - or have at least consulted them - could you look at this growth on my backside and suggest a treatment?

__________________
Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by ignorance or stupidity.
Isaac Asimov

How big is the growth?? could I take a look?? take a seat, lay down.......Tell me about your mother...........

__________________
"Attack the idea, not the person" Posted by a Moderator.
Useful words around here indeed!!

"....well I had this pet turtle and one day he crawled under the refrigerator and I never saw him again.."

See what I told you? Nibiru -- 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.

...could you look at this growth on my backside and suggest a treatment?

Sure! Please take off all your clothes and sit on a cold metal table while I chat with the nurses.

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

Actually, today's Straight Dope is about the 2012 phenomenon!

http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mmayancalendar.html

I realize that it's not entirely relevant to the discussion at hand, but since that which is has been largely ignored, I thought I'd throw it out there anyway.

__________________
Gillian

"Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"

"You can't erase icing."

"I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"

Poor guy/gal, kind of got crushed.

Princess,
Glad you like my frog.

No, I won't google those names. The rules of this forum are that those who propose new or controversial ideas must support their claims. If you have particularly links you wish for us to read, please post those links. You should also summarize briefly what is given in a particular link.

But, as STS60, JayUtah, and others have already pointed out, the past detection of bodies in our solar system by the effects on the orbits of other bodies is not relevant to this discussion. The motions of all the known bodies are perfectly explained by the relative interactions of those bodies. There are no unexplained deviations which might be explained by your "Brownie".

Several people have shown you calculations of how close this body would have to be to us if it follows the orbit you claim. At that range, its gravitational influence would be easily seen. There is NO evidence that this is happening. Mystery clouds that block it being seen visibly would not mask its gravity.

Another rule of this forum is that you have to address questions asked of you. If you feel you are not qualified to answer them, then you need to say so. And, if one or more of your associates are better qualified, you might wish to get them involved in the discusssion.

I alluded to some questions in this post. I'll ask them straight out.

Am I correct to understand that you claim the asteroid belt was created by the passage of this brown dwarf through our solar system? Did this happen on the last passage or was this a cumulative effect over many orbits? How exactly did it do this - did it break up a larger body into smaller pieces, or what? Why didn't it have this effect on Jupiter, the Earth, or any of the other planets?

My understanding of orbital mechanics is that the passage of a large body like you propose would mostly displace planets out of their orbits and mostly eject them from the solar system. Can you show if this is the case in your proposal and if not, what exactly are the dynamics of the system?

Why wasn't the protoplanterary disk around your brown dwarf disturbed by repeated passages through our solar system?

Has this brown dwarf been orbiting our sun for the entire four billion years of our solar system or is this some new body? If it has been going on for four billion years, how did our planetary system form in this binary system? Why did our planets form out of a protoplanetary disk, but the ones around the brown dwarf didn't? If it is a newly captured body, when did it begin to orbit our sun and how was it captured?

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

One Earth, One Sky - IYA 2009
All moderation in purple

OK Princess, I have my keyboard on my lap and a browser with Google up with those names in the seach bar.

Sooooo what, exactly, am I looking for?

Princess Vader said:I said:Princess Vader replied:Hi Princess Vader

The problem I have is that throughout your posts you describe things with certainty. Here are a few examples:But then you say:How can you present so many statements as facts, then say you could be mistaken? If the jury is still out, you have at least a moral obligation to make that clear in your videos. You don’t get to yell “Fire!” in a crowded room, and then say afterwards you only *thought* you saw a fire.

This isn’t like telling scary stories around the campfire. This sort of stuff seriously messes with the heads of vulnerable people. I strongly recommend you read these threads:

I'm not proud.. but it proves she's a fake

Are we definately sure...

Is this planet coming???

Then tell us how likely it is that what's in the videos will happen.

The only brown dwarf I can prove exists is actor Deep Roy, from Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. He's a star, too.

__________________
"If this were play'd upon a stage now, I could condemn it as an improbable fiction."
Shakespeare, Twelfth Night
"The Mayan symbol for "book" looks a lot like a triple hamburger, but I've never seen them claiming it as proof the Mayans had Big Macs." - KaiYeves
"Distance doesn’t matter much in space, where if you just start a thing off with the right kind of shove, sooner or later it will get where you want it to go." -Frederik Pohl, Mining the Oort

You forgot "Mr. Hankey " from South Park .

Ah, but he's fictional! Twenty points!

__________________
"If this were play'd upon a stage now, I could condemn it as an improbable fiction."
Shakespeare, Twelfth Night
"The Mayan symbol for "book" looks a lot like a triple hamburger, but I've never seen them claiming it as proof the Mayans had Big Macs." - KaiYeves
"Distance doesn’t matter much in space, where if you just start a thing off with the right kind of shove, sooner or later it will get where you want it to go." -Frederik Pohl, Mining the Oort

And Kiran Shah (his brother, I think), who was in Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe.

__________________
Gillian

"Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"

"You can't erase icing."

"I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"

Two of them? We're doomed twice!

Yes, it all fits together now... TWO brown dwarfs, TWO thousand twelve...and twelve contans TWO sixes... and SIX is the number of the Beast, as well as the number of sides in a HEXAGON... The rise of the popularity of Boy Bands is directly correspondent with the increase in Global Warming, and the Girl Scouts are responsible for crop circles... Yes, Yes, I can SEE the PATTERNS! Ah hah haahahahahahaha!

__________________
"If this were play'd upon a stage now, I could condemn it as an improbable fiction."
Shakespeare, Twelfth Night
"The Mayan symbol for "book" looks a lot like a triple hamburger, but I've never seen them claiming it as proof the Mayans had Big Macs." - KaiYeves
"Distance doesn’t matter much in space, where if you just start a thing off with the right kind of shove, sooner or later it will get where you want it to go." -Frederik Pohl, Mining the Oort

NoCleverDutch.

I forgot about that one. This is the guy who claims comets are the size and mass of planets:

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc...omet_huge.html

Yeesh.

__________________
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

What makes you think I have faith in my Government?

1. The only comment I made about Government in my posts was to ask, "How good do you think governments are at keeping secrets?" How does that suggest I have all the faith in my government?

2. Even if the government was able to keep the secret, they can't stop other governments from releasing the information if they so chose.

3. Even if every government on Earth decided to keep the secret, how can they stop thousands of amateur astronomers from seeing Brownie? Based on the descriptions Princess Vader has been giving us of what Nibiru consists of, everyone in the southern hemisphere who looks in the sky on a cloudless night is going to see it.

Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together - mass hysteria!

A few days ago I read the current Journal of the American Medical Association while staying at a Holiday Inn Express. Jay, please examine the patient's backside. I'll talk with the nurses, in private.

Back OT, wouldn't it be nice (as Brian Wilson once wrote) if we finally got a Planet Xer who posted some objective evidence for any of the various Nibirunianism claims? Meanwhile, the plural of anecdote is not data. Speculations raised to the nth power are not demonstrated theories.

__________________
A person's name, or a mark representing it, as signed personally or by deputy, as in subscribing a letter or other document.

I don't know how relavent this is, but I was married to a brown dwarf for 7 years.

(Four and a half foot tall Basque. I still miss her.)

__________________
In your rush to call everyone "entrenched" or closed-minded or "limited" you fail to note that the "limit" here has a very natural boundary: that point at which the evidence stops. - JayUtah

Science fiction was never meant to be an educational tool. - Editor Amazing Tales

Then I was ejected from my orbit.

__________________
In your rush to call everyone "entrenched" or closed-minded or "limited" you fail to note that the "limit" here has a very natural boundary: that point at which the evidence stops. - JayUtah

Science fiction was never meant to be an educational tool. - Editor Amazing Tales

Any satellites?

one makes an orbit around here once and while.

__________________
If it's just us, it seems like an awful waste of space.
Contact Carl Sagan

http://davidsuniverse.wordpress.com/