Click Here
home features news forums classifieds faqs links search
6071 members 
Amiga Q&A /  Free for All /  Emulation /  Gaming / (Latest Posts)
Login

Nickname

Password

Lost Password?

Don't have an account yet?
Register now!

Support Amigaworld.net
Your support is needed and is appreciated as Amigaworld.net is primarily dependent upon the support of its users.
Donate

Menu
Main sections
» Home
» Features
» News
» Forums
» Classifieds
» Links
» Downloads
Extras
» OS4 Zone
» IRC Network
» AmigaWorld Radio
» Newsfeed
» Top Members
» Amiga Dealers
Information
» About Us
» FAQs
» Advertise
» Polls
» Terms of Service
» Search

IRC Channel
Server: irc.amigaworld.net
Ports: 1024,5555, 6665-6669
SSL port: 6697
Channel: #Amigaworld
Channel Policy and Guidelines

Who's Online
19 crawler(s) on-line.
 105 guest(s) on-line.
 0 member(s) on-line.



You are an anonymous user.
Register Now!
 Comi:  18 mins ago
 Gunnar:  21 mins ago
 amigakit:  38 mins ago
 vox:  1 hr 4 mins ago
 zipper:  1 hr 7 mins ago
 kolla:  1 hr 14 mins ago
 OneTimer1:  1 hr 28 mins ago
 BigD:  2 hrs 10 mins ago
 OlafS25:  2 hrs 12 mins ago
 NutsAboutAmiga:  2 hrs 44 mins ago

/  Forum Index
   /  Free For All
      /  Re: [Poll] Nibiru: What if?
Register To Post

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 Next Page )
Poll : What do you think?
Plain simple paranoid BS
Interesting reading, still BS
Largely BS as Nibiru isn't nearby at this point
I'm open minded, could be true... But I'm sceptical
I think there's much truth in this
I'm convinced Nibiru/Planet X is looming nearby
Interesting gotta do some research
 
PosterThread
T-J 
Re: [Poll] Nibiru: What if?
Posted on 7-Apr-2011 18:17:13
#141 ]
Cult Member
Joined: 31-Aug-2010
Posts: 596
From: Unknown

@Lou

Quote:
All I read is your words, not proof. I've directed you to video proof, you haven't even produced pics of your skull modifications that match the skull in question.


You mean the 'proof' that consisted entirely of photoshopped fakes? Pull the other one.


I'm feeling generous. Here's an overview of the practice of cranial modification in the archaeological record and in modern societies.

Quote:
You can't tell me that cracking a skull would produce the symetry in question. There were no signs of damage to the skull, fyi.


You just aren't getting it, are you? You don't need to crack the skull to reshape it with binding. Infants' skulls are not fused at birth. You bind them to apply pressure which leads to a reshaping which is permanent once the skull has fused.


Quote:
FYI, birds don't have straight wings mounted across the top and a vertical tale.


Its an artistic carving, not an anatomical model. I've seen plenty of examples in art throughout history where birds are artistically represented with simplified geometry.

Interpretation of the Saqqara Bird suggests that it may be either a weathervane or a form of boomerang. Both were well known in Ancient Egypt, with primitive boomerangs (not curved as in the Australian examples, but straight as in the Saqqara case) being commonly used to hunt waterfowl.

Now, I'm not going to nail my colours to the mast on either of those interpretations. But the plane or glider interpretation? Well, let's let Martin Gregorie, a designer, builder, and flyer of Free Flight model gliders, examine that:

Quote:
The requirements for a free flight model glider to be automatically stable in flight are that it should:


1 - Balance somewhere between 25% and 60% of the wing chord back from the leading edge. The wing chord is the average width of the wing, measured from front to back. A glance at the bird shows that the body is made from a single piece of wood whose proportions are such that the balance point is at or behind the trailing edge of the wing. The bird's head region has clearly never had a weight attached to it or buried within it. Such a weight would be needed to bring the balance point forward into the range given above.


2 - Have a horizontal tail surface of around 20 - 25% of the wing area. Despite some claims to the contrary, no such tail surface currently exists and there are no traces of a tail plane's attachment point on the bird's fin or rear body. The fin is the vertical tail surface that forms the rear of the bird's body.


3 - Be shaped to provide spiral stability. The presence of a large fin at the rear of the body must be balanced by a dihedralled wing if the bird is to glide without tipping over sideways into an terminal spiral dive. A dihedralled wing is one with the tips raised above the center of the wing like virtually all passenger planes and model aircraft. The bird has the opposite wing arrangement. Its wing tips are drooped to give anhedral, which would only serve to increase the bird's spiral instability.


So, not a plane or a glider. Its a bird. Martin Grigorie goes on to construct a replica of the bird and conducts a series of experiments to determine its airworthiness. His conclusions:

Quote:

1 - The performance of this model proves conclusively that the Saqqara Bird never flew. It is totally unstable without a tailplane. A cursory inspection of the photos shows that it never had one.

2 - Even after a tailplane was fitted the glide performance was disappointing. The Saqqara Bird was certainly never a test piece for a low speed, cargo carrying aircraft.

3 - The model makes an excellent weather vane. It points directly and steadily into the wind and does not veer from side to side.


see http://www.catchpenny.org/model.html for Grigorie's initial observations, and http://www.catchpenny.org/birdtest.html for his experiment.

Last edited by T-J on 07-Apr-2011 at 06:24 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
T-J 
Re: [Poll] Nibiru: What if?
Posted on 7-Apr-2011 18:33:20
#142 ]
Cult Member
Joined: 31-Aug-2010
Posts: 596
From: Unknown

@Lou

Quote:
And this?


Swarovski crystal, £49.99 at your local high street outlet.

@MikeB

Tyche is a *proposed* distant companion object to the Sun. A brown dwarf, yes. But with an orbital period of 27 million years and at a distance so great as to be only relevant to events on a massive timescale. Meaning - nothing to do with human civilisations whatsoever.

Very little evidence exists as yet, but more information is being gathered all the time by satellites and space telescopes which should disprove or confirm the hypothesis over the next few years.

If we do find evidence for Tyche, it will be the final nail in the coffin for Nibiru/Planet X. An object such as you describe as Nibiru could not exist in a solar system also including Tyche.

By the way, we have 16 million years still to go until the next peak predicted if we assume the existence of Tyche, so no need to get too worried.

Last edited by T-J on 07-Apr-2011 at 06:42 PM.
Last edited by T-J on 07-Apr-2011 at 06:38 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: [Poll] Nibiru: What if?
Posted on 7-Apr-2011 18:41:08
#143 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 4169
From: Rhode Island

@T-J

Quote:

T-J wrote:
@Lou

Quote:
All I read is your words, not proof. I've directed you to video proof, you haven't even produced pics of your skull modifications that match the skull in question.


You mean the 'proof' that consisted entirely of photoshopped fakes? Pull the other one.


I'm feeling generous. Here's an overview of the practice of cranial modification in the archaeological record and in modern societies.

Once again you miss the target. It's like you don't even know what I'm talking about and randomly post about something similar to act as dis-proof.
Let me save you the trouble of the one in question, they blames Hydrocephalus. However it's wrong due to the age/size of the skull.
Quote:
Pye's "Starchild Project" supporters claim that the skull is that of an extraterrestrial infant, or the hybrid offspring of an extraterrestrial and a human female. [1] According to Pye, a dentist determined, based on examination of the upper right maxilla found with the skull, that it was a child's skull, 4.5 to 5 years in age,[5] however, the volume of the interior of the starchild skull is 1,600 cubic centimeters, which is 200 cm³ larger than the average adult's brain, and 400 cm³ larger than an adult of the same approximate size. The orbits are oval and shallow, with the optic nerve canal situated closer to the bottom of the orbit than to the back. There are no frontal sinuses.[4] The back of the skull is flattened. The skull consists of calcium hydroxyapatite, the normal material of mammalian bone.[6] Pye says that Carbon 14 dating was performed twice, the first on the normal human skull at the University of California at Riverside in 1999, and on the Starchild skull in 2004 at Beta Analytic in Miami, and both tests provided results of 900 years ± 40 years since death.


as for your story on the battery, it wasn't used to store scrolls.
http://www.ancient-wisdom.co.uk/baghdadbatteries.htm

Giants are here specifying what's real and what's fake:
http://www.ancient-wisdom.co.uk/giants.htm

Quote:

Quote:
FYI, birds don't have straight wings mounted across the top and a vertical tale.


Its an artistic carving, not an anatomical model. I've seen plenty of examples in art throughout history where birds are artistically represented with simplified geometry.

No artistic representation of anything I can think of would twist something 90 degrees.

Quote:
Now, I'm not going to nail my colours to the mast on either of those interpretations. But the plane or glider interpretation? Well, let's let Martin Gregorie, a designer, builder, and flyer of Free Flight model gliders, examine that:

Quote:
The requirements for a free flight model glider to be automatically stable in flight are that it should:


1 - Balance somewhere between 25% and 60% of the wing chord back from the leading edge. The wing chord is the average width of the wing, measured from front to back. A glance at the bird shows that the body is made from a single piece of wood whose proportions are such that the balance point is at or behind the trailing edge of the wing. The bird's head region has clearly never had a weight attached to it or buried within it. Such a weight would be needed to bring the balance point forward into the range given above.


2 - Have a horizontal tail surface of around 20 - 25% of the wing area. Despite some claims to the contrary, no such tail surface currently exists and there are no traces of a tail plane's attachment point on the bird's fin or rear body. The fin is the vertical tail surface that forms the rear of the bird's body.


3 - Be shaped to provide spiral stability. The presence of a large fin at the rear of the body must be balanced by a dihedralled wing if the bird is to glide without tipping over sideways into an terminal spiral dive. A dihedralled wing is one with the tips raised above the center of the wing like virtually all passenger planes and model aircraft. The bird has the opposite wing arrangement. Its wing tips are drooped to give anhedral, which would only serve to increase the bird's spiral instability.


So, not a plane or a glider. Its a bird. Martin Grigorie goes on to construct a replica of the bird and conducts a series of experiments to determine its airworthiness. His conclusions:

Quote:

1 - The performance of this model proves conclusively that the Saqqara Bird never flew. It is totally unstable without a tailplane. A cursory inspection of the photos shows that it never had one.

2 - Even after a tailplane was fitted the glide performance was disappointing. The Saqqara Bird was certainly never a test piece for a low speed, cargo carrying aircraft.

3 - The model makes an excellent weather vane. It points directly and steadily into the wind and does not veer from side to side.


see http://www.catchpenny.org/model.html for Grigorie's initial observations, and http://www.catchpenny.org/birdtest.html for his experiment.

It's supposed to be a model and not necessarily an exact one. No one claimed it was supposed to be a working model.
It's a model of something that could have existed...and probably wasn't made out of wood. The fact that somebody recontructed it out of wood and attempted to make it fly is quite laughable actually but thats what people do to prove something doesn't work to those who wants to hear such things.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: [Poll] Nibiru: What if?
Posted on 7-Apr-2011 18:45:04
#144 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 4169
From: Rhode Island

@T-J

Quote:

T-J wrote:
@Lou

Quote:
And this?


Swarovski crystal, £49.99 at your local high street outlet.

You're seriously comparing that to:



?

Really?

Well, I'm ready to declare you a troll...


Info on the crystal skull:
Quote:
The skull was discovered in 1924 by Anna Le Guillon Mitchell-Hedges
daughter of F.A. Mitchell-Hedges who was in charge of the digs at Lubaantun. The story goes that his daughter,
Anna, was exploring inside some ruins thought to have been a temple, when she found the exquisitely carved
crystal skull which was then missing the jawbone. The missing jawbone was found three months later, about
25 feet away from where the top part of the skull was found.
...
The Mitchell-Hedges family loaned the skull to Hewlett-Packard Laboratories for extensive study in 1970. Art
restorer Frank Dorland oversaw the testing at the Santa Clara, California, computer equipment manufacturer, a
leading facility for crystal research. The HP examinations yielded some startling results.

Researchers found that the skull had been carved against the natural axis of the crystal. Modern crystal sculptors
always take into account the axis, or orientation of the crystal's molecular symmetry, because if they carve "against
the grain," the piece is bound to shatter -- even with the use of lasers and other high-tech cutting methods.

To add to the enigma, HP could find no microscopic scratches on the crystal which would indicate it had
been carved with metal instruments. Dorland's best hypothesis for the skull's construction is that it was roughly
hewn out with diamonds, and then the detail work was meticulously done with a gentle solution of silicon sand
and water. The exhausting job -- assuming it could possibly be done in this way -- would have required man-hours adding
up to 300 years to complete.

Under these circumstances, experts believe that successfully crafting a shape as complex as the Mitchell-Hedges skull is
impossible; as one HP researcher is said to have remarked, "The damned thing simply shouldn't be."

The skull remains in the possession of Anna Mitchell-Hedges.

LIKE OMG! IT EXISTS! Who would have thunk it?

By the way, still unexplained by you is the signs of ancient nuclear explosions in the deserts.

Last edited by Lou on 07-Apr-2011 at 06:50 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Daniel 
Re: [Poll] Nibiru: What if?
Posted on 7-Apr-2011 18:49:21
#145 ]
Regular Member
Joined: 6-Mar-2010
Posts: 239
From: Unknown

@MikeB

Why would 'planet x' have such a wildly different orbit to all the other planets?

Surely if the gravity of a 'planet x' had caused the Japanese earthquake we would be experiencing extreme tides and the like too. Earthquakes on the scale of the recent one in Japan are not all that rare, they just go largely unnoticed unless they tragically hit heavily populated region.

The 'end of the world' theories always seem to come from what we think some ancient civilization believed many thousands of years ago. Surely with the technology and scientific understanding today we shouldn't be taking such ancient theories so seriously. A few hundred years ago people thought the world was flat and if you sailed far enough you would fall of the end. Sure, ancient civilizations and their beliefs are interesting, but surely nothing more than a curiosity today and not the basis for making predictions about the end of the world.

If our 'world' ends it will most likely be down to our own greed, selfishness and short-sightedness in ruining what we have.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Nimrod 
Re: [Poll] Nibiru: What if?
Posted on 7-Apr-2011 18:55:15
#146 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jan-2010
Posts: 1223
From: Untied Kingdom

@MikeB
The bearded star is a comet. Any comet.
In a sky full of fixed stars and planets with predictable patterns of movement, comets were seen as omens and portents of doom. In the Bayeux tapestry reference is made to a comet seen in the sky shortly before the battle, that was claimed to predict the death of a king. Any "prophet" wanting to predict big events should always throw in mystical references, and a comet is always a good one.

The key phrase in science is "I don't know", with the implication of "yet"
A scientist will keep looking until the answer has been found and peer reviewed, the i's dotted and the t's crossed. Hence the current search to corroborate or contradict earlier searches

The problems arise when, while the scientist is deciding between a and b some nutjob comes along and says "scientists can't answer therefore z is true."

Last edited by Nimrod on 07-Apr-2011 at 07:18 PM.

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BrianK 
Re: [Poll] Nibiru: What if?
Posted on 7-Apr-2011 19:13:18
#147 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 30-Sep-2003
Posts: 8111
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA

@MikeB

Quote:
But as with the intention of this thread I'm keeping an open mind and explain why some may think this may indeed be related.
To me keeping an open mind doesn't mean one accepts any silly wild-ass guess. To me being open means verifying the rationality of the hypothesis. Unfortunately the characteristics claimed of Nibiru has lead to no finding. So either it doesn't exist (Vulcan has this problem) or we clearly do not understand it's properties in a useful way.

Quote:
Nostradamus
Is useless at best. All of the 'predictions' are identified after the event occurs.



@T-J

Nice Crystal Skull.. Though more perferrable with Vodka. Egads the Crystal Skulls have so thoroughly been identified as a hoax. It amazes me that some (Lou) have brought up such purposeful hoaxes. Did you know that Fairies were discovered in 1917? They've likely become extinct since because no pictures have been taken in the 21st century.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
T-J 
Re: [Poll] Nibiru: What if?
Posted on 7-Apr-2011 19:19:45
#148 ]
Cult Member
Joined: 31-Aug-2010
Posts: 596
From: Unknown

@Lou

To quote from your 'ancient-wisdom' link: 'The Chinese had developed acupuncture by this time, and still use acupuncture combined with an electric current. This may explain the presence of needle-like objects found with some of the batteries'

The tenuous interpretation is that the 'Baghdad Battery' *might* have been used in groups of ten or more to provide a means for electrified acupuncture. I believe I already mentioned that possibility when referring to the MythBusters experiment. One battery possibly used to deliver a mild electric shock to an acupuncture patient does not provide evidence for space aliens or invisible planets.

And giants. Humans can occasionally end up around 3m tall in extreme cases. Any bigger than this and the physics doesn't work - the body literally crushes itself under its own weight. Any proposed species of giants simply couldn't live on Earth over any significant length of time, because they would not survive to reproductive age.


Quote:
No artistic representation of anything I can think of would twist something 90 degrees.


Pablo Picasso. QED.

Quote:
It's supposed to be a model and not necessarily an exact one. No one claimed it was supposed to be a working model. It's a model of something that could have existed....


No model representation of anything I can think of would leave out so vital a component as the tailplane of an aircraft. Also, the dimensions are all wrong.


Quote:
and probably wasn't made out of wood. The fact that somebody recontructed it out of wood and attempted to make it fly is quite laughable actually but thats what people do to prove something doesn't work to those who wants to hear such things.


And what do you propose the original was made of? Stone? Aluminium? Naqahdah? That was mysteriously and conveniently not preserved anywhere in the archaeological record?

Quote:
Well, I'm ready to declare you a troll...


Well, you know where the button is.

Quote:
Info on the crystal skull...
...LIKE OMG! IT EXISTS! Who would have thunk it?


I can't say anything about that skull. Do you know why? Because Anna Mitchell-Hedges refused to allow further scientific study to be done on the skull after scientists working for HP showed it to have been polished from a single quartz crystal, rather than the composite her associate Dorland (a freelance art restorer... hmm) claimed it must be.

Now, I wonder why she would do a thing like that?

The current owner, Bill Homann, also refuses to cooperate, claiming to believe in its mystical powers. I can't comment on that, but I'm sure he believes strongly in the pay-per-view revenues he and Mitchell-Hedges racked up over the years.

Quote:
By the way, still unexplained by you is the signs of ancient nuclear explosions in the deserts.


There are no signs of ancient nuclear explosions in the deserts. There are signs of several nuclear explosions in deserts, for example around White Sands and in Woomera, Australia. But these date to the 1950s, of course.

What certain cranks have interpreted as ancient nuclear explosions are selected locations with either isolated blobs, or occasionally locally contiguous layers fused sand. These result from the sudden release of lots of heat. Such as, perhaps, the impact of a meteorite.

Such shock melting is well-documented. The glass found in the Libyan desert was even conclusively connected with an impact crater structure dating to ~21 million years ago.

And before you go on about it, the radiation at that site at Rajasthan in India? There's a nuclear power station on that site that was taken to court for violating regulations regarding safe disposal of low-level waste. Does that explain the radiation? I think it possibly might.

Last edited by T-J on 07-Apr-2011 at 07:21 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: [Poll] Nibiru: What if?
Posted on 7-Apr-2011 20:03:24
#149 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 4169
From: Rhode Island

@T-J

Quote:

T-J wrote:
@Lou

To quote from your 'ancient-wisdom' link: 'The Chinese had developed acupuncture by this time, and still use acupuncture combined with an electric current. This may explain the presence of needle-like objects found with some of the batteries'
The tenuous interpretation is that the 'Baghdad Battery' *might* have been used in groups of ten or more to provide a means for electrified acupuncture. I believe I already mentioned that possibility when referring to the MythBusters experiment. One battery possibly used to deliver a mild electric shock to an acupuncture patient does not provide evidence for space aliens or invisible planets.

Unrelated material. You are reaching here. However you seem to be admitting that it is a battery. No one made any postulations as to what it was powering. The fact is that a battery exists millenia before Ben Franklin.

Quote:
And giants. Humans can occasionally end up around 3m tall in extreme cases. Any bigger than this and the physics doesn't work - the body literally crushes itself under its own weight. Any proposed species of giants simply couldn't live on Earth over any significant length of time, because they would not survive to reproductive age.

And where do you suppose that these genes came from? This is where you see corroboration with Sitchin's translations (as well as biblical references) of cross-breeding.

Quote:
Quote:
No artistic representation of anything I can think of would twist something 90 degrees.


Pablo Picasso. QED.

You're comparing paintings to sculptures? Really?

Quote:

Quote:
It's supposed to be a model and not necessarily an exact one. No one claimed it was supposed to be a working model. It's a model of something that could have existed....


No model representation of anything I can think of would leave out so vital a component as the tailplane of an aircraft. Also, the dimensions are all wrong.

If you did your research you would see that when someone recontructed it, they added the lower horizontal cross section of the tail as it appeared that part may have broken off at some point.

Quote:

Quote:
and probably wasn't made out of wood. The fact that somebody recontructed it out of wood and attempted to make it fly is quite laughable actually but thats what people do to prove something doesn't work to those who wants to hear such things.


And what do you propose the original was made of? Stone? Aluminium? Naqahdah? That was mysteriously and conveniently not preserved anywhere in the archaeological record?

According to Sitchin, all (or most of what they could find) remants of their technology (Annunaki) were intentionally retrived or destroyed and buried...

I already told you I'd much rather stick with Sitchin's translations by default.

Quote:

Quote:
Info on the crystal skull...
...LIKE OMG! IT EXISTS! Who would have thunk it?


I can't say anything about that skull. Do you know why? Because Anna Mitchell-Hedges refused to allow further scientific study to be done on the skull after scientists working for HP showed it to have been polished from a single quartz crystal, rather than the composite her associate Dorland (a freelance art restorer... hmm) claimed it must be.

Now, I wonder why she would do a thing like that?

The current owner, Bill Homann, also refuses to cooperate, claiming to believe in its mystical powers. I can't comment on that, but I'm sure he believes strongly in the pay-per-view revenues he and Mitchell-Hedges racked up over the years.

1924. 1924 is when it was found, long before pay-per-view. It exists which means ooparts, along with the others I mentioned exist. That snide 'hmmm' means nothing. The fact that HP said it's 1 piece means more. The jaw is a separate piece, ofcourse. Something this valuable didn't leave the family hence it's never "mysteriously disappeared" like alot of other things have thru history that the powers that be don't approve of.

Quote:

Quote:
By the way, still unexplained by you is the signs of ancient nuclear explosions in the deserts.


There are no signs of ancient nuclear explosions in the deserts. There are signs of several nuclear explosions in deserts, for example around White Sands and in Woomera, Australia. But these date to the 1950s, of course.

What certain cranks have interpreted as ancient nuclear explosions are selected locations with either isolated blobs, or occasionally locally contiguous layers fused sand. These result from the sudden release of lots of heat. Such as, perhaps, the impact of a meteorite.

Such shock melting is well-documented. The glass found in the Libyan desert was even conclusively connected with an impact crater structure dating to ~21 million years ago.

And before you go on about it, the radiation at that site at Rajasthan in India? There's a nuclear power station on that site that was taken to court for violating regulations regarding safe disposal of low-level waste. Does that explain the radiation? I think it possibly might.

I think again you are not doing your research. Signs of nuclear waste and signs of nuclear explosions are two different things.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Nimrod 
Re: [Poll] Nibiru: What if?
Posted on 7-Apr-2011 20:32:55
#150 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jan-2010
Posts: 1223
From: Untied Kingdom

@Lou

Quote:
I already told you I'd much rather stick with Sitchin's translations by default.


Of course you would. Sitchins "translations" stand in glorious isolation.
Nobody with experience or qualifications in translating ancient languages agrees with Sitchins translations.

Quote:
1924 is when it was found, long before pay-per-view.

True enough in respect of television, but there is always the book sales to consider.

Quote:
However you seem to be admitting that it is a battery.

The enclosing of the terms "battery" and "baghdad battery" in quotes implies to me that T-J was showing a healthy scepticism while using your term to refer to the Mythbusters episode.

When anybody, including Sitchin and Mitchell-Hedges refuses peer review, their theory effectively disproves itself and retreats to the realm of fantasy. At least stargate was entertaining.

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: [Poll] Nibiru: What if?
Posted on 7-Apr-2011 20:48:52
#151 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 4169
From: Rhode Island

@Nimrod

Quote:

Nimrod wrote:
@Lou

IWhen anybody, including Sitchin and Mitchell-Hedges refuses peer review, their theory effectively disproves itself and retreats to the realm of fantasy. At least stargate was entertaining.


So Hewlitt Packard is not peer review?

As for Sitchin, he doesn't own the Sumerian tablets...anyone else is free to come to their own conclusions. As I said, I like his story better than everyone else's.

Regardless, the pyramids and monolisk could not have been built by the perceived technology of the time. They are the greatest ooparts there is and you can't deny their existence.

Last edited by Lou on 07-Apr-2011 at 08:50 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
T-J 
Re: [Poll] Nibiru: What if?
Posted on 7-Apr-2011 21:00:33
#152 ]
Cult Member
Joined: 31-Aug-2010
Posts: 596
From: Unknown

@Lou

Quote:
If you did your research you would see that when someone recontructed it, they added the lower horizontal cross section of the tail as it appeared that part may have broken off at some point.


Incorrect. The most cursory of investigations reveals that the bird never had anything attached to the tailfin. Nothing had 'snapped off'. The bird is pretty much in its original condition, and in that condition it neither flies nor approximates a machine that could.


About the 'battery' - 'Battery' is just one interpretation. There is as much, if not more, evidence for the scroll-case interpretation, as you would know if you perused the peer-reviewed literature.

And if it was a 'battery', it didn't generate enough electricity to do anything useful with. I mentioned the acupuncture because that was the only use the MythBusters could come up with for such a feeble device.


About the 'giants' - are you familiar with the concept of mutation? Probably not.

And inter-breeding? Interspecies breeding is almost always impossible, and where it can happen, it is between closely related species, and the offspring is sterile. Mules, ligers etc. The only place where fertile hybrids between different species occur is in the realms of science fiction and fantasy. Mister Spock et al.


Regarding the skull, it is a matter of recorded fact that Mitchell-Hedges used to display it to the paying public. For an additional fee, she would offer a one-to-one viewing. Just the customer, the skull and herself. This was paid for, on a per view basis.

Anyway, the offer was made to examine the object scientifically, under her supervision. She turned it down. She and her successors are therefore hiding something. Probably the 'Made in USA' stamped on the base.


Quote:
According to Sitchin, all (or most of what they could find) remants of their technology (Annunaki) were intentionally retrived or destroyed and buried...


How convenient.

Quote:
I think again you are not doing your research. Signs of nuclear waste and signs of nuclear explosions are two different things.


I think you are failing to read my points in enough detail. Read what I write, not what you wish I had written, its much more effective.

I addressed the nuclear explosions, pointing out that the 'evidence' the cranks concocted is actually evidence of meteorite strike. And dates back some twenty million years, as well. Which, by the way, is well beyond the period in which humanity has been around.

Then I proceeded to pre-empt a related but separate nutty theory, that of the radiation at Rajasthan. Which is from the modern power station, not the Goa'uld. Klingons. Whoever.


Quote:
So Hewlitt Packard is not peer review? As for Sitchin, he doesn't own the Sumerian tablets...


Hewlett-Packard lost access to the skull as soon as they disproved the first of the made-up claims about it. Nobody else with a shred of credibility is allowed anywhere near it. Its a fake.


Quote:
...anyone else is free to come to their own conclusions. As I said, I like his story better than everyone else's. Regardless, the pyramids and monolisk could not have been built by the perceived technology of the time. They are the greatest ooparts there is and you can't deny their existence.


Could not have been built? Citation needed, I'm afraid. I maintain that they could have been built. Experimental archaeology has shown how with nothing more than some A-frames and some rope, Stonehenge was built. It has also shown how a simple arrangement involving water and sisal string cut the blocks for the Pyramids. And so on.

You cannot prove that the ancient civilisations couldn't have built their monuments themselves, and you cannot provide a shred of evidence for aliens doing it, either.


Now, if you're willing to admit that your belief in this Nibiru business amounts to nothing more scientific than an expression of religious faith in the Prophet Sitchin, I will happily leave you to your delusion as there's no point arguing with devoted cultists.

But as soon as you start trying to pass it off as science, you tread on my turf.

Last edited by T-J on 07-Apr-2011 at 09:01 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Caveman 
Re: [Poll] Nibiru: What if?
Posted on 7-Apr-2011 22:25:46
#153 ]
Cult Member
Joined: 16-Feb-2005
Posts: 655
From: Norway

@Lou

Don't you think Aliens would have used another material other than stones? hmm...

Last edited by Caveman on 07-Apr-2011 at 10:27 PM.

_________________

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
MikeB 
Re: [Poll] Nibiru: What if?
Posted on 7-Apr-2011 23:01:38
#154 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 3-Mar-2003
Posts: 6487
From: Europe

@Daniel

Quote:
Why would 'planet x' have such a wildly different orbit to all the other planets?


It is estimated to have a much greater mass than our solar planets and travels far from the sun. Other far away stellar systems will effect its orbit with the sun. If you know the mass of the companion brown dwarf as well as the mass and orbits of the stellar systems around us, one could probably determine its most likely path through simulation.



And probably this causes a minor planet located far from the sun, such as pluto, to behave differently as well (due to the brown dwarf's orbit and push/pull).

Simulations have shown that the presence of a binary companion can actually improve the rate of planet formation within stable orbital zones by "stirring up" the protoplanetary disk, increasing the accretion rate of the protoplanets within. Our solar system is showing a lot of evidence things are being stirred up, hence the asteroid belt, comets, lots of debris and the scarred planets surfaces.

Last edited by MikeB on 07-Apr-2011 at 11:12 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
MikeB 
Re: [Poll] Nibiru: What if?
Posted on 7-Apr-2011 23:10:16
#155 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 3-Mar-2003
Posts: 6487
From: Europe

@T-J

Quote:
Tyche is a *proposed* distant companion object to the Sun. A brown dwarf, yes. But with an orbital period of 27 million years


Do you really think some object which takes 27 million years to orbit would really be part of just our solar system? I think that's very unlikely.

Maybe they based their theory on some major events such as the end of the dinosaur age some 65 million years ago. But not every passing of such an object needs to result into equal amounts of devastation, just an increased risk of a major body slamming into the earth. Some passings may do limited damage depending where the earth is located during the passing.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BrianK 
Re: [Poll] Nibiru: What if?
Posted on 7-Apr-2011 23:17:16
#156 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 30-Sep-2003
Posts: 8111
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA

@T-J

Quote:
And inter-breeding? Interspecies breeding is almost always impossible, and where it can happen, it is between closely related species, and the offspring is sterile. Mules, ligers etc. The only place where fertile hybrids between different species occur is in the realms of science fiction and fantasy. Mister Spock et al.
I don't believe that's quite correct. Mules are a cross of a donkey and a horse. AFAIK there are no mule stallions. There have been mule mares that have been bred with another horse or donkey. I believe the same is true for ligers. Males are always infertile but infrequently a female is not.

Quote:
Could not have been built? Citation needed, I'm afraid. I maintain that they could have been built. Experimental archaeology has shown how with nothing more than some A-frames and some rope, Stonehenge was built. It has also shown how a simple arrangement involving water and sisal string cut the blocks for the Pyramids. And so on
1 man moves stones weighing tons

Human ingenuity is so amazing it's sad people have to invite L.ittle G.reen M.en.

Edit- spelling

Last edited by BrianK on 08-Apr-2011 at 05:26 AM.
Last edited by BrianK on 07-Apr-2011 at 11:25 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
MikeB 
Re: [Poll] Nibiru: What if?
Posted on 7-Apr-2011 23:45:32
#157 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 3-Mar-2003
Posts: 6487
From: Europe

@Daniel

Quote:
Surely if the gravity of a 'planet x' had caused the Japanese earthquake we would be experiencing extreme tides and the like too.


Magnetism and gravitational forces are different forces at play.

Last edited by MikeB on 07-Apr-2011 at 11:46 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: [Poll] Nibiru: What if?
Posted on 8-Apr-2011 3:08:42
#158 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 4169
From: Rhode Island

@T-J

Quote:

T-J wrote:
@Lou

Quote:
If you did your research you would see that when someone recontructed it, they added the lower horizontal cross section of the tail as it appeared that part may have broken off at some point.


Incorrect. The most cursory of investigations reveals that the bird never had anything attached to the tailfin. Nothing had 'snapped off'. The bird is pretty much in its original condition, and in that condition it neither flies nor approximates a machine that could.

We've been thru this. I never said it was supposed to fly. Heck most of the paper airplanes I built as a kid were horrible, but the point is I knew I was basing them on a plane.

Quote:
About the 'battery' - 'Battery' is just one interpretation. There is as much, if not more, evidence for the scroll-case interpretation, as you would know if you perused the peer-reviewed literature.

And if it was a 'battery', it didn't generate enough electricity to do anything useful with. I mentioned the acupuncture because that was the only use the MythBusters could come up with for such a feeble device.

We can't know what they were powering or how effective the battery was. And it doesn't mean Myth Busters is right.

Quote:

About the 'giants' - are you familiar with the concept of mutation? Probably not.

Yes and considering the current population of the planet, you'd think you'd see it more often. Looks like a recessive gene that slowly got phased out to me.

Quote:
And inter-breeding? Interspecies breeding is almost always impossible, and where it can happen, it is between closely related species, and the offspring is sterile. Mules, ligers etc. The only place where fertile hybrids between different species occur is in the realms of science fiction and fantasy. Mister Spock et al.

Covered by Sitchin, Adamu and Tia Mat weren't fertile at first. Further modification was required.

Quote:
Regarding the skull, it is a matter of recorded fact that Mitchell-Hedges used to display it to the paying public. For an additional fee, she would offer a one-to-one viewing. Just the customer, the skull and herself. This was paid for, on a per view basis.

Anyway, the offer was made to examine the object scientifically, under her supervision. She turned it down. She and her successors are therefore hiding something. Probably the 'Made in USA' stamped on the base.

Perhaps we read 2 different things, but personally I wouldn't let something so expensive out of my sight either.

Quote:

Quote:
I think again you are not doing your research. Signs of nuclear waste and signs of nuclear explosions are two different things.


I think you are failing to read my points in enough detail. Read what I write, not what you wish I had written, its much more effective.

I addressed the nuclear explosions, pointing out that the 'evidence' the cranks concocted is actually evidence of meteorite strike. And dates back some twenty million years, as well. Which, by the way, is well beyond the period in which humanity has been around.

You fail to read about the greenish glass. Meteors don't do that.

Quote:
Then I proceeded to pre-empt a related but separate nutty theory, that of the radiation at Rajasthan. Which is from the modern power station, not the Goa'uld. Klingons. Whoever.

see above

Quote:

Quote:
So Hewlitt Packard is not peer review? As for Sitchin, he doesn't own the Sumerian tablets...


Hewlett-Packard lost access to the skull as soon as they disproved the first of the made-up claims about it. Nobody else with a shred of credibility is allowed anywhere near it. Its a fake.

That's not how I read the HP review at all.

Quote:

Quote:
...anyone else is free to come to their own conclusions. As I said, I like his story better than everyone else's. Regardless, the pyramids and monolisk could not have been built by the perceived technology of the time. They are the greatest ooparts there is and you can't deny their existence.


Could not have been built? Citation needed, I'm afraid. I maintain that they could have been built. Experimental archaeology has shown how with nothing more than some A-frames and some rope, Stonehenge was built. It has also shown how a simple arrangement involving water and sisal string cut the blocks for the Pyramids. And so on.

You cannot prove that the ancient civilisations couldn't have built their monuments themselves, and you cannot provide a shred of evidence for aliens doing it, either.

Look back a few pages. I quoted exactly what they'd need to do.

Quote:
Now, if you're willing to admit that your belief in this Nibiru business amounts to nothing more scientific than an expression of religious faith in the Prophet Sitchin, I will happily leave you to your delusion as there's no point arguing with devoted cultists.

But as soon as you start trying to pass it off as science, you tread on my turf.

I think you just need to realize that you'll convince me of nothing.
It's an open forum and you can keep reciting rhetoric from skeptics as often as you'd like.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BrianK 
Re: [Poll] Nibiru: What if?
Posted on 8-Apr-2011 5:25:30
#159 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 30-Sep-2003
Posts: 8111
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA

@Lou

Quote:
Heck most of the paper airplanes I built as a kid were horrible, but the point is I knew I was basing them on a plane
We had a small garden that had lots of butterflies and birds. So I made paper replicas of them. I made paper airplanes too but not as many as animals. There were even a few bats.

Quote:
You fail to read about the greenish glass. Meteors don't do that.
Well except for Moldavite.



 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Kronos 
Re: [Poll] Nibiru: What if?
Posted on 8-Apr-2011 6:47:19
#160 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 8-Mar-2003
Posts: 2553
From: Unknown

@Lou

Quote:

Lou wrote:


Quote:
And giants. Humans can occasionally end up around 3m tall in extreme cases. Any bigger than this and the physics doesn't work - the body literally crushes itself under its own weight. Any proposed species of giants simply couldn't live on Earth over any significant length of time, because they would not survive to reproductive age.

And where do you suppose that these genes came from? This is where you see corroboration with Sitchin's translations (as well as biblical references) of cross-breeding.



"Giants" are created when their bodies fail to stop producing growth-hormons at the end of puberty. Easy to be treated today and surley not anymore alien than any other gene-defect.

You just have to remember that the human gene still carries around trash accumulated over 1 billion years.

But the real question has stayed unanswered, why ?

If you believe in all that conspiracy mumbo-jumbo, black-helicopters, Roswell, Area51, Bilderberg, NWO etc etc ..... WHY are they keeping it secret ?

And what of those reasons do apply to a freak planet/brown dwarf orbiting the sun ?

Crystal-skulls were easily made with 19th century (probraly even older) technology so aslong as the don't find one in an Pharaos unopened tomb.....

What these theories really do is what all religions have done for the past 4000 years, take what you don't understand make up some nonsense to connect the dots, don't forget to add in some popular fears and hopes and than shout everybody down raising doubt.

_________________
- We don't need good ideas, we haven't run out on bad ones yet
- blame Canada

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 Next Page )

[ home ][ about us ][ privacy ] [ forums ][ classifieds ] [ links ][ news archive ] [ link to us ][ user account ]
Copyright (C) 2000 - 2019 Amigaworld.net.
Amigaworld.net was originally founded by David Doyle