Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 1,927 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 926,693
Pageviews Today: 1,160,417Threads Today: 266Posts Today: 4,418
09:34 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.

 
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 36671025
United States
03/28/2013 08:58 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
Psalm 17:8
Keep me as the apple of the eye, hide me under the shadow of thy wings,
Psalm 36:7
How excellent is thy lovingkindness, O God! therefore the children of men put their trust under the shadow of thy wings.

Psalm 57:1
Be merciful unto me, O God, be merciful unto me: for my soul trusteth in thee: yea, in the shadow of thy wings will I make my refuge, until these calamities be overpast.

Psalm 63:7
Because thou hast been my help, therefore in the shadow of thy wings will I rejoice.


David praying for gods kingdom to return

Gods kingdom has "wings" and casts a shadow on the earth


(Gods kingdom is a CYCLE)
Psalm 19:6
His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.
ShillsRUs

User ID: 21887410
United States
03/28/2013 09:16 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
bump
for pure entertainment value. this is going to be classic.

what is the estimated date of its close approach to Mars?
Dr. AstroModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 33360181
United States
03/28/2013 09:30 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
bump
for pure entertainment value. this is going to be classic.

what is the estimated date of its close approach to Mars?
 Quoting: ShillsRUs


October 1st :)
astrobanner2
glauco

User ID: 3296470
United States
03/28/2013 09:59 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
I did not put any words in your mouth. I explained why you are wrong and I asked you a question which you still have not answered.
McCanney said: "it is huge, so we may expect atmospheric and orbital changes". If you can bring informations regarding small to large orbital changes, that would be great, I didn't knew you're a professional.
 Quoting: glauco

 Quoting: Dr. Astro

Yes, you did. I said (McCanney said) that if the comet is large, the atmosphere and surface changes could occur and probably minor to large orbital changes, but you ignore the first part that is easier to detect, you consider only the second which is hardest and I can't do by myself. What kind of scientist are you that only consider a small part of an scientific claiming?

I'm not a professional but it does not require a professional astronomer to accurately measure the position and orbit of Mars.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro

Alright, but I don't know how to do that and I will not be able to check it twice. That is scientific: you claim something, get the data, and permit other people to confirm it. How would I check your data if I don't know how to do that nor I have equipment? If the changes occurring at that time are minor I would only realize Mars out of his orbit almost one year later!

Atmospheric changes are not confirmation that the comet is massive, atmospheres change all the time in the absence of comets.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro

Give me only one example of a planet getting or losing large amount of atmosphere, or getting dozens of vulcans erupting, or getting new moutains by itself in one-week period and I do the bet in your conditions.

Orbital changes or the lack thereof are direct proof that the comet is either massive or is not massive regardless of what the atmosphere does. I will look for perturbations in the orbit of Mars and if they do not appear then the comet was not massive as McCanney claimed. You can either ignore that empirical data or accept it, which will it be? Answer the question.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro

You *must* consider all the claimings, not just one that I can't check! You want to ignore such empirical data, not me.
Listen to McCanney: [link to jmccsci.com]
glauco

User ID: 3296470
United States
03/28/2013 10:01 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
Yes, correct. The problem was not with the theoretical work itself, because if you read them you will find out that it is theoretically correct. Understand it: the theoretical work (the model) may be well done, but the observations may not match with the model. So the model could be wrong, but theoretically correct. The problem with the University, as stated by him, is that his model was completely against the official model prepared by own Carl Sagan, the chief of the Astro Institute, his chief. You must consider it as a hard situation for the staff to keep McCanney theories being used and published just where something familiar had been debunked a few years before. No conspiracy needed, only politics.

 Quoting: glauco


Really?

LMAO
 Quoting: So What I Smoke Weed


Yes, really. Any coments on that, or will you just talk in codes?
Listen to McCanney: [link to jmccsci.com]
glauco

User ID: 3296470
United States
03/28/2013 10:02 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
Now I have *FIVE* in my back! Is not enough yet, I can do better.
Listen to McCanney: [link to jmccsci.com]
Dr. AstroModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 33360181
United States
03/28/2013 10:18 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
I did not put any words in your mouth. I explained why you are wrong and I asked you a question which you still have not answered.
McCanney said: "it is huge, so we may expect atmospheric and orbital changes". If you can bring informations regarding small to large orbital changes, that would be great, I didn't knew you're a professional.
 Quoting: glauco

 Quoting: Dr. Astro

Yes, you did. I said (McCanney said) that if the comet is large, the atmosphere and surface changes could occur and probably minor to large orbital changes, but you ignore the first part that is easier to detect,
 Quoting: glauco

The first part is not confirmation of the claim. I did not put words in your mouth, I explained why you are wrong and asked you a question. I addressed the issue of "atmospheric changes." Atmospheric changes happen all the time in the absence of comets, it means nothing with respect to the claim. If NASA detects something new about the atmosphere of Mars after comet ISON it will not serve as confirmation that it had anything to do with ISON or that ISON was a massive object as McCanney claims. If what McCanney claims is true then it would produce a detectable perturbation of the orbit. If there is no perturbation then it was not the massive object he claimed it was. Will you ignore that empirical data if indeed it proves that McCanney was wrong, yes or no? Answer the question.
Alright, but I don't know how to do that and I will not be able to check it twice.
 Quoting: Glauco

Your ignorance is your problem, not mine.
That is scientific: you claim something, get the data, and permit other people to confirm it. How would I check your data if I don't know how to do that nor I have equipment?
 Quoting: Glauco

I don't give a damn. It is not up to me to teach you astronomy so that you can confirm it for yourself. I will show my data and you can work on your own at studying astronomy and acquiring the equipment or access to equipment needed to repeat it for yourself if you like, but that is not my problem if you are incapable or unwilling to do it. You clearly don't understand science at all if you think the onus is on me to do that for you.
Give me only one example of a planet getting or losing large amount of atmosphere, or getting dozens of vulcans erupting, or getting new moutains by itself in one-week period and I do the bet in your conditions.
 Quoting: Glauco

I do not agree to your terms. Either you will accept the empirical data or you will ignore the empirical data, which is it?
You *must* consider all the claimings, not just one that I can't check!
 Quoting: glauco

Nope. You have until October to learn how to do astronomy and astrometry for yourself if you want to be able to do it for yourself. That is not my problem. Atmospheric changes etc are not confirmation of ISON being a massive object, particularly in the face of a lack of perturbations in the orbit of Mars.

If NASA's probes detect something new about the atmosphere of Mars that they hadn't noticed before (entirely possible, maybe even likely given the rate of new discoveries), that would meet your arbitrary and incorrect goalpost and allow you to claim you were right when in fact it wouldn't be confirmation at all. I will present astrometric data showing the presence or absence of perturbations in Mars' orbit. You can either choose to accept it or ignore empirical data. Your choice.

Last Edited by Dr. Astro on 03/28/2013 10:18 AM
astrobanner2
glauco

User ID: 3296470
United States
03/28/2013 10:49 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
The first part is not confirmation of the claim. I did not put words in your mouth, I explained why you are wrong and asked you a question. I addressed the issue of "atmospheric changes." Atmospheric changes happen all the time in the absence of comets, it means nothing with respect to the claim. If NASA detects something new about the atmosphere of Mars after comet ISON it will not serve as confirmation that it had anything to do with ISON or that ISON was a massive object as McCanney claims.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro

Sure it is! I will say that again, bring here one planet (only one, man!) that has had large atmospheric and surface changing like mountains building and volcanos going off and in one week period and you will be correct! What is the difficulty to bring the name, if you're claiming such thing could happen any time by the planet itself??
I know you don't have, I'm still waiting for scientists names who desagrees with McCanney's model.

If what McCanney claims is true then it would produce a detectable perturbation of the orbit. If there is no perturbation then it was not the massive object he claimed it was.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro

Sure would be detectable, but not by me without knowledge nor equipment!

Will you ignore that empirical data if indeed it proves that McCanney was wrong, yes or no? Answer the question.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro

You would ignore data if something occurs. You only focus on gravitational interactions, where the big part of the McCanney model are electric interactions! You want to escape from the bet! You are the chicken here! YOU answer the question.

Alright, but I don't know how to do that and I will not be able to check it twice.
 Quoting: Glauco

Your ignorance is your problem, not mine.
That is scientific: you claim something, get the data, and permit other people to confirm it. How would I check your data if I don't know how to do that nor I have equipment?
 Quoting: Glauco

I don't give a damn. It is not up to me to teach you astronomy so that you can confirm it for yourself. I will show my data and you can work on your own at studying astronomy and acquiring the equipment or access to equipment needed to repeat it for yourself if you like, but that is not my problem if you are incapable or unwilling to do it. You clearly don't understand science at all if you think the onus is on me to do that for you.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro

Alright, that's the way you do:
"Oh, let's do a car racing to decide who will take the girl. Lemme bring my Ferrari."
"Man, I don't have a car. I don't know even how to drive a car! We could run using our legs, as we are young and strong!"
"Well, that's your problem, not mine. I will pass my car over you while you are running, piss on you, take the girl, burn your house and of your fellowers and call the police to put you on the jail to the rest of your life. I don't give a damn. Decide, YES or NOT!".

Man, you sooooooo disonest that I can't even believe!

I do not agree to your terms.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro

Nether me.

Either you will accept the empirical data or you will ignore the empirical data, which is it?
 Quoting: Dr. Astro

Either you will accept *ALL* the empirical data or you will ignore the empirical data, which is it?

You *must* consider all the claimings, not just one that I can't check!
 Quoting: glauco

Nope. You have until October to learn how to do astronomy and astrometry for yourself if you want to be able to do it for yourself. That is not my problem. Atmospheric changes etc are not confirmation of ISON being a massive object, particularly in the face of a lack of perturbations in the orbit of Mars.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro

I'm still waiting for the list of mutants planets you claim that exists.


If NASA's probes detect something new about the atmosphere of Mars that they hadn't noticed before (entirely possible, maybe even likely given the rate of new discoveries), that would meet your arbitrary and incorrect goalpost and allow you to claim you were right when in fact it wouldn't be confirmation at all.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro

I'm talking about BIG VISUAL CHANGES, mountains building, volcanos going off, not signs of water or sulfur!

I will present astrometric data showing the presence or absence of perturbations in Mars' orbit. You can either choose to accept it or ignore empirical data. Your choice.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro

Ok, you present your telemetric data and I present photos of easy to see visual changings in Mars atmosphere got through amateur equipment. I would be able to say why you got no telemetric changings with your procedures (even known that you are disonest), but *YOU* will never be able to explain my data. Let's do that way?
Listen to McCanney: [link to jmccsci.com]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 36882140
United States
03/28/2013 11:03 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
great now you tards have decided its a comet now.

Its a planet...

Its a solar system..

Its an Asteroid..

Now its a Comet..

Way to stay credible nirribooboo tards
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 24999671


Your retort was brilliant!









ASSHAT.
Skyking
User ID: 19276606
United States
03/28/2013 11:05 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
I did not put any words in your mouth. I explained why you are wrong and I asked you a question which you still have not answered.
McCanney said: "it is huge, so we may expect atmospheric and orbital changes". If you can bring informations regarding small to large orbital changes, that would be great, I didn't knew you're a professional.
 Quoting: glauco

 Quoting: Dr. Astro

Yes, you did. I said (McCanney said) that if the comet is large, the atmosphere and surface changes could occur and probably minor to large orbital changes, but you ignore the first part that is easier to detect,
 Quoting: glauco

The first part is not confirmation of the claim. I did not put words in your mouth, I explained why you are wrong and asked you a question. I addressed the issue of "atmospheric changes." Atmospheric changes happen all the time in the absence of comets, it means nothing with respect to the claim. If NASA detects something new about the atmosphere of Mars after comet ISON it will not serve as confirmation that it had anything to do with ISON or that ISON was a massive object as McCanney claims. If what McCanney claims is true then it would produce a detectable perturbation of the orbit. If there is no perturbation then it was not the massive object he claimed it was. Will you ignore that empirical data if indeed it proves that McCanney was wrong, yes or no? Answer the question.
Alright, but I don't know how to do that and I will not be able to check it twice.
 Quoting: Glauco

Your ignorance is your problem, not mine.
That is scientific: you claim something, get the data, and permit other people to confirm it. How would I check your data if I don't know how to do that nor I have equipment?
 Quoting: Glauco

I don't give a damn. It is not up to me to teach you astronomy so that you can confirm it for yourself. I will show my data and you can work on your own at studying astronomy and acquiring the equipment or access to equipment needed to repeat it for yourself if you like, but that is not my problem if you are incapable or unwilling to do it. You clearly don't understand science at all if you think the onus is on me to do that for you.
Give me only one example of a planet getting or losing large amount of atmosphere, or getting dozens of vulcans erupting, or getting new moutains by itself in one-week period and I do the bet in your conditions.
 Quoting: Glauco

I do not agree to your terms. Either you will accept the empirical data or you will ignore the empirical data, which is it?
You *must* consider all the claimings, not just one that I can't check!
 Quoting: glauco

Nope. You have until October to learn how to do astronomy and astrometry for yourself if you want to be able to do it for yourself. That is not my problem. Atmospheric changes etc are not confirmation of ISON being a massive object, particularly in the face of a lack of perturbations in the orbit of Mars.

If NASA's probes detect something new about the atmosphere of Mars that they hadn't noticed before (entirely possible, maybe even likely given the rate of new discoveries), that would meet your arbitrary and incorrect goalpost and allow you to claim you were right when in fact it wouldn't be confirmation at all. I will present astrometric data showing the presence or absence of perturbations in Mars' orbit. You can either choose to accept it or ignore empirical data. Your choice.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro


WOW. After reading this argument i have come to this conclusion.

I FEEL you have nothing to contribute to this discussion.

Glauco just proved to me that your insights have no meaning.

He asked simple questions, 1 example to share your knowledge in astronomy. Which I think should not be hard for an any astronomer.

and all he gets is....

Your (Mccanney's) ignorance is your problem, not mine.
I don't give a damn.
I don't agree to your terms.
Nope.


Thanks for clearing up YOUR ignorance for me.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 36882140
United States
03/28/2013 11:08 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
OP remember ASStro still argues that we went to the Moon!

And lets not mention 911, his program is evident.

tra la la.
Dr. AstroModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 4211721
United States
03/28/2013 11:12 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
The first part is not confirmation of the claim. I did not put words in your mouth, I explained why you are wrong and asked you a question. I addressed the issue of "atmospheric changes." Atmospheric changes happen all the time in the absence of comets, it means nothing with respect to the claim. If NASA detects something new about the atmosphere of Mars after comet ISON it will not serve as confirmation that it had anything to do with ISON or that ISON was a massive object as McCanney claims.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro

Sure it is! I will say that again, bring here one planet (only one, man!) that has had large atmospheric and surface changing like mountains building and volcanos going off and in one week period and you will be correct!
 Quoting: glauco

I do not agree, I am correct regardless of your irrelevant goalpost.
What is the difficulty to bring the name, if you're claiming such thing could happen any time by the planet itself??
 Quoting: glauco

It's irrelevant to the question of whether or not ISON is as massive as McCanney claims.
I know you don't have, I'm still waiting for scientists names who desagrees with McCanney's model.
 Quoting: glauco

It's called empirical evidence. I'm a scientist and I disagree with his model, but that's irrelevant; what matters is that the empirical evidence disagrees with his claims and will continue to do so as I predicted.
If what McCanney claims is true then it would produce a detectable perturbation of the orbit. If there is no perturbation then it was not the massive object he claimed it was.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro

Sure would be detectable, but not by me without knowledge nor equipment!
 Quoting: glauco

Not my problem and not relevant. Your ignorance is not an excuse. The fact is that the empirical data will show that you are wrong. That you are incapable of collecting it yourself is irrelevant whining.
Will you ignore that empirical data if indeed it proves that McCanney was wrong, yes or no? Answer the question.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro

You would ignore data if something occurs.
 Quoting: glauco

Answer my question. I would not ignore data if something occurs, but what you posited would not indicate that it was a massive comet as claimed, it's unrelated silliness. What is realistic is that more modest atmospheric changes over time will be detected by NASA's probes and you will inevitably try to use that to claim he was right. In fact it is not confirmation of his claim and the data I collect will directly refute his claim. Now answer the question, will you ignore the empirical data if it shows that Mars' orbit was not perturbed? Yes or no. I will keep repeating this question until you answer it.
Alright, that's the way you do:
"Oh, let's do a car racing to decide who will take the girl. Lemme bring my Ferrari."
"Man, I don't have a car. I don't know even how to drive a car! We could run using our legs, as we are young and strong!"
"Well, that's your problem, not mine. I will pass my car over you while you are running, piss on you, take the girl, burn your house and of your fellowers and call the police to put you on the jail to the rest of your life. I don't give a damn. Decide, YES or NOT!".

Man, you sooooooo disonest that I can't even believe!
 Quoting: Glauco

This is not a competition, it is the validation or refutation of a claim that comet ISON is massive. It is not a car race. It does not matter that you do not have the equipment needed to do it yourself. I do and I will present the data. If you claim I am dishonest and faking the data then it is up to you to prove it. For the record, I'm not dishonest and I will not fake the data, I always report my data honestly whether it supports my initial hypothesis or not. I will provide the raw data files and you can feel free to inspect them for their integrity and confirm for yourself that I am being honest.
Ok, you present your telemetric data and I present photos of easy to see visual changings in Mars atmosphere got through amateur equipment.
 Quoting: glauco

So in other words, you'll grab some poor amateur's image of Mars showing chromatic aberration and color fringes and claim it's proof of "atmosphere changes" according to your self-admitted layman ignorant interpretation and that you were right even though the astrometric data shows that Mars was not perturbed and that McCanney was wrong. That's even more pathetic than I expected, but it just goes to show that you will ignore empirical data and instead engage in confirmation bias out of complete ignorance latching onto any unrelated nonsense you can find that you think supports McCanney's claims.
I would be able to say why you got no telemetric changings with your procedures (even known that you are disonest),
 Quoting: Glauco

Wow, that's quite the defamatory claim. Prove I am dishonest. Now.

And no, you will not have a rational explanation for why I showed no perturbations. I will also be showing along with my data proof that I should have seen changes in the orbit of Mars. I've already started calculating the latter based on McCanney's claims regarding ISON and the changes are quite detectable.
astrobanner2
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1573574
United States
03/28/2013 11:19 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
OP remember ASStro still argues that we went to the Moon!

And lets not mention 911, his program is evident.

tra la la.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 36882140


You just ruined your credibility with this bullshit statement.
Your the one thats still riding the short bus BRO...
Dr. AstroModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 4211721
United States
03/28/2013 11:22 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
I did not put any words in your mouth. I explained why you are wrong and I asked you a question which you still have not answered.
...

 Quoting: Dr. Astro

Yes, you did. I said (McCanney said) that if the comet is large, the atmosphere and surface changes could occur and probably minor to large orbital changes, but you ignore the first part that is easier to detect,
 Quoting: glauco

The first part is not confirmation of the claim. I did not put words in your mouth, I explained why you are wrong and asked you a question. I addressed the issue of "atmospheric changes." Atmospheric changes happen all the time in the absence of comets, it means nothing with respect to the claim. If NASA detects something new about the atmosphere of Mars after comet ISON it will not serve as confirmation that it had anything to do with ISON or that ISON was a massive object as McCanney claims. If what McCanney claims is true then it would produce a detectable perturbation of the orbit. If there is no perturbation then it was not the massive object he claimed it was. Will you ignore that empirical data if indeed it proves that McCanney was wrong, yes or no? Answer the question.
Alright, but I don't know how to do that and I will not be able to check it twice.
 Quoting: Glauco

Your ignorance is your problem, not mine.
That is scientific: you claim something, get the data, and permit other people to confirm it. How would I check your data if I don't know how to do that nor I have equipment?
 Quoting: Glauco

I don't give a damn. It is not up to me to teach you astronomy so that you can confirm it for yourself. I will show my data and you can work on your own at studying astronomy and acquiring the equipment or access to equipment needed to repeat it for yourself if you like, but that is not my problem if you are incapable or unwilling to do it. You clearly don't understand science at all if you think the onus is on me to do that for you.
Give me only one example of a planet getting or losing large amount of atmosphere, or getting dozens of vulcans erupting, or getting new moutains by itself in one-week period and I do the bet in your conditions.
 Quoting: Glauco

I do not agree to your terms. Either you will accept the empirical data or you will ignore the empirical data, which is it?
You *must* consider all the claimings, not just one that I can't check!
 Quoting: glauco

Nope. You have until October to learn how to do astronomy and astrometry for yourself if you want to be able to do it for yourself. That is not my problem. Atmospheric changes etc are not confirmation of ISON being a massive object, particularly in the face of a lack of perturbations in the orbit of Mars.

If NASA's probes detect something new about the atmosphere of Mars that they hadn't noticed before (entirely possible, maybe even likely given the rate of new discoveries), that would meet your arbitrary and incorrect goalpost and allow you to claim you were right when in fact it wouldn't be confirmation at all. I will present astrometric data showing the presence or absence of perturbations in Mars' orbit. You can either choose to accept it or ignore empirical data. Your choice.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro


WOW. After reading this argument i have come to this conclusion.

I FEEL you have nothing to contribute to this discussion.

Glauco just proved to me that your insights have no meaning.
 Quoting: Skyking 19276606

Your feelings are irrelevant.
He asked simple questions, 1 example to share your knowledge in astronomy. Which I think should not be hard for an any astronomer.
 Quoting: skyking

I keep asking 1 simple question, not a trick question either, just 1 simple question to see how intellectually honest or dishonest he is willing to be. I keep getting nothing but dodging from him. His request is inherently dishonest, he knows there is no planet (maybe you could make a case for Io, but that's a moon not a planet) in our solar system that currently undergoes changes that extreme that rapidly, so why exactly do YOU claim it should not be hard for an astronomer to produce an example of something that does not exist?

But ok, if you two are going to be like that and ask dishonest questions you already know the answer to, I'll give you an example to work with whether you like it or not. Io. Io is an example of a solar system body that undergoes massive amounts of volcanism, rapid turnover of surface material, and atmospheric density changes.

Last Edited by Dr. Astro on 03/28/2013 11:22 AM
astrobanner2
Halcyon Dayz, FCD
Contrarian's Contrarian

User ID: 31033756
Netherlands
03/28/2013 11:26 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
So when you said 'any other country' it was just something you imagined to be the case, not something you actually know.

Such admiral dedication to The Truth™.
 Quoting: Halcyon Dayz, FCD

No, I just consider the most oficial sources we may have for this subject, which is wikipedia and my own observations in South America. If you think I'm wrong, so please prove it.
 Quoting: glauco

First, Wikipedia is NOT an official source on anything.
Second, you should really actually READ it.

Hydra says you're wrong about Germany. I bet he could quote the relevant paragraph of the civil code.
I say you're wrong about the Netherlands. A nephew of mine is an Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering at the University of Twente. Nobody calls him professor, they call him doctor.

So your statement that 'in any other country' every teacher can be called professor is wrong.

Thirdly, YOU made a claim, YOU must proof it.

If your idea doesn't match observed reality it is wrong.
 Quoting: Halcyon Dayz, FCD

Yes, correct, but please specify which observation regarding McCanney science does not match with observations.
 Quoting: glauco

Excuse me?
None of the predictions made by McCanneyism that differs from the predictions of real physics have ever been observed to be true.
Even when they should have been.

You're missing the point.
 Quoting: Halcyon Dayz,FCD

Why? Nobody needs rows and columns of PhDs to tell the people about the true. People recognizes it by themselves.
 Quoting: glauco

People can intuit the truth of complicated physical ideas?

Well, let's close down the universities than.
Who needs them?

So WHY is Mr. McCanney unwilling to expose these ideas to academic scrutiny?
The only papers he's actually published in peer-reviewed journals are rather pedestrian compared with these ideas.
 Quoting: Halcyon Dayz, FCD

You didn't read them, how could you claim that? Are you a person able to read scientific papers? If so, you should read these publications before claiming.
 Quoting: glauco

YOU made the claim that McCanneyism was published in peer-reviewed papers.
YOU need to proof it.

Yet you deny the supremacy of empirical evidence.
 Quoting: Halcyon Dayz, FCD

Empirical evidence of what? That comets are made of dirty and ice? No ice or water was found in any comet's flyby.
 Quoting: glauco

So you are willing to lie.

How are you not a cultist?

BTW, none of these probes got electrocuted, or had their orbits changed by these comets.
McCanney wrong again!

Sometimes a scientists gets an idea s/he thinks is brilliant (and very well might be) and falls in love with.
An obsessive pathological love that bides not critique, after all the idea is so beautiful it must be true.
That is the first step to crankhood.
 Quoting: Halcyon Dayz, FCD

I know it.
 Quoting: glauco

Than why are you a cultist in the Church of McCanneyism?

Don't make me laugh.
Are you a woman? If so I may continue.
 Quoting: glauco

I will presume that remark wasn't sexist.
 Quoting: Halcyon Dayz, FCD

Yeah, talks like a girl hf
 Quoting: glauco

Cut it out.

I did the exact opposite!
 Quoting: Halcyon Dayz, FCD

Don't looks so. You bring Phil's and cosmofear page but never check their statements.
 Quoting: glauco

I did not.

What I did is point out that it doesn't matter who claims what.
They still need to present the evidence.

I said even Hawking, in spite of his authority, would be called out on crap like this.
 Quoting: Halcyon Dayz, FCD

Why is Hawking so important for you?
 Quoting: glauco

Just an example of a scientist of considerable reputation.
Yes, Hawking too would have to present evidence.

Only McCanney and woo-peddlers like him ever try to pull the "trust me, I'm a scientist" shtick.


Who? Phil Plait? Give me names. Nobody goes to AGU meetings and publishes there without being formally invited.
ALL OF THEM.
 Quoting: Halcyon Dayz, FCD

Do you represent ALL OF THE SCIENTISTS IN THE WORLD? Prove your claimings or go away, bring real names to this discussion, please.
 Quoting: glauco

Are you confused?

IF you claim there's a single scientist in the world familiar with McCanneyism who doesn't think it is a bunch of woo I'd really like to know who it is.

Evidence for this?
book
 Quoting: Halcyon Dayz, FCD

Why would a so important institute to the space sciences to hire, publish papers, fire, hire again, and then publish again for two years a guy who don't have any clue of physicist or math?
 Quoting: glauco

Do you understand the difference between evidence and speculation?

Your claim: McCanney got canned for this and this reason.
So YOU need to provide evidence for:
A - McCanney DID get canned, rather than walked away.
B - The reason McCanney got canned.
book
Hatred is a cancer upon the world.
It rots the mind and blackens the heart.


Hi! My name is Halcyon Dayz and I'm addicted to morans.
glauco

User ID: 3296470
United States
03/28/2013 11:58 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
I will not quote you, instead will start over:
McCaney said that this comet is big and said that atmospheric, surface and orbit changings may occur due to that large comet size.

You said: I will focus on orbit changings.

I said: I will focus on atmospheric and surface changings.

You said: No, we must focus on orbit changings.

I said: I can't bet this way, I don't know how to calculate it nor I have equipment to do so.

You said: So fuck off you poor idiot without telemetric equipment, I will drink your blood next October!

I said: So I can't bet, you will ignore my data even if Olympus get off and the planet turns to blue!


I can't imagine a scientist doing science this way. Sorry man, you are a moron.
Listen to McCanney: [link to jmccsci.com]
Jah Booty
User ID: 975341
United States
03/28/2013 12:07 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
So the big question is, when will this thing arrive? I have heard November, and it will be visible in June? Correct?
Dr. AstroModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 4211721
United States
03/28/2013 12:07 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
I will not quote you,
 Quoting: glauco

I see, so you asked for an example showing massive and rapid volcanism, surface changes, and atmosphere changes, I provide it, you ignore it and want a complete do-over of the entire argument with you getting to put words in my mouth right at the start.
instead will start over:
McCaney said that this comet is big and said that atmospheric, surface and orbit changings may occur due to that large comet size.
 Quoting: glauco

Regardless of what he said, atmospheric changes are not proof of the comet's size. Orbital perturbations of Mars or the lack thereof are.
You said: I will focus on orbit changings.

I said: I will focus on atmospheric and surface changings.

You said: No, we must focus on orbit changings.

I said: I can't bet this way, I don't know how to calculate it nor I have equipment to do so.

You said: So fuck off you poor idiot without telemetric equipment, I will drink your blood next October!
 Quoting: glauco

Excuse me, I never said that. This is not a competition, a bet, or a race to see who has telescopic equipment and who does not. I will provide the data and the empirical data are all that matter, not who it came from. If you wish to do it yourself as well you're welcome to, you have until October to learn how to do so. You can buy or rent a telescope as needed. You do not have to do so and it is really irrelevant to the matter, the question is whether you will ignore empirical data when it is presented. I have asked this over and over and you still refuse to give an answer. Instead you ignore what I said and put words in my mouth. Answer the question, will you ignore the empirical data if it shows that Mars' orbit was not perturbed and the mass of the comet was low contrary to what McCanney claimed. Yes or no?
astrobanner2
Dr. AstroModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 4211721
United States
03/28/2013 12:09 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
You would ignore data if something occurs.
 Quoting: glauco

Answer my question. I would not ignore data if something occurs, but what you posited would not indicate that it was a massive comet as claimed, it's unrelated silliness. What is realistic is that more modest atmospheric changes over time will be detected by NASA's probes and you will inevitably try to use that to claim he was right. In fact it is not confirmation of his claim and the data I collect will directly refute his claim. Now answer the question, will you ignore the empirical data if it shows that Mars' orbit was not perturbed? Yes or no. I will keep repeating this question until you answer it.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro

Still waiting on an answer.
I would be able to say why you got no telemetric changings with your procedures (even known that you are disonest),
 Quoting: Glauco

Wow, that's quite the defamatory claim. Prove I am dishonest. Now.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro

Still waiting on you to prove that I am dishonest.

Last Edited by Dr. Astro on 03/28/2013 12:09 PM
astrobanner2
Dr. AstroModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 4211721
United States
03/28/2013 12:10 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
So the big question is, when will this thing arrive? I have heard November, and it will be visible in June? Correct?
 Quoting: Jah Booty 975341


Define "arrive." According to current projections it will reach naked eye magnitude sometime in early November.
[link to www.aerith.net]
astrobanner2
Skyking
User ID: 19276606
United States
03/28/2013 12:16 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
...

Yes, you did. I said (McCanney said) that if the comet is large, the atmosphere and surface changes could occur and probably minor to large orbital changes, but you ignore the first part that is easier to detect,
 Quoting: glauco

The first part is not confirmation of the claim. I did not put words in your mouth, I explained why you are wrong and asked you a question. I addressed the issue of "atmospheric changes." Atmospheric changes happen all the time in the absence of comets, it means nothing with respect to the claim. If NASA detects something new about the atmosphere of Mars after comet ISON it will not serve as confirmation that it had anything to do with ISON or that ISON was a massive object as McCanney claims. If what McCanney claims is true then it would produce a detectable perturbation of the orbit. If there is no perturbation then it was not the massive object he claimed it was. Will you ignore that empirical data if indeed it proves that McCanney was wrong, yes or no? Answer the question.
Alright, but I don't know how to do that and I will not be able to check it twice.
 Quoting: Glauco

Your ignorance is your problem, not mine.
That is scientific: you claim something, get the data, and permit other people to confirm it. How would I check your data if I don't know how to do that nor I have equipment?
 Quoting: Glauco

I don't give a damn. It is not up to me to teach you astronomy so that you can confirm it for yourself. I will show my data and you can work on your own at studying astronomy and acquiring the equipment or access to equipment needed to repeat it for yourself if you like, but that is not my problem if you are incapable or unwilling to do it. You clearly don't understand science at all if you think the onus is on me to do that for you.
Give me only one example of a planet getting or losing large amount of atmosphere, or getting dozens of vulcans erupting, or getting new moutains by itself in one-week period and I do the bet in your conditions.
 Quoting: Glauco

I do not agree to your terms. Either you will accept the empirical data or you will ignore the empirical data, which is it?
You *must* consider all the claimings, not just one that I can't check!
 Quoting: glauco

Nope. You have until October to learn how to do astronomy and astrometry for yourself if you want to be able to do it for yourself. That is not my problem. Atmospheric changes etc are not confirmation of ISON being a massive object, particularly in the face of a lack of perturbations in the orbit of Mars.

If NASA's probes detect something new about the atmosphere of Mars that they hadn't noticed before (entirely possible, maybe even likely given the rate of new discoveries), that would meet your arbitrary and incorrect goalpost and allow you to claim you were right when in fact it wouldn't be confirmation at all. I will present astrometric data showing the presence or absence of perturbations in Mars' orbit. You can either choose to accept it or ignore empirical data. Your choice.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro


WOW. After reading this argument i have come to this conclusion.

I FEEL you have nothing to contribute to this discussion.

Glauco just proved to me that your insights have no meaning.
 Quoting: Skyking 19276606

Your feelings are irrelevant.
He asked simple questions, 1 example to share your knowledge in astronomy. Which I think should not be hard for an any astronomer.
 Quoting: skyking

I keep asking 1 simple question, not a trick question either, just 1 simple question to see how intellectually honest or dishonest he is willing to be. I keep getting nothing but dodging from him. His request is inherently dishonest, he knows there is no planet (maybe you could make a case for Io, but that's a moon not a planet) in our solar system that currently undergoes changes that extreme that rapidly, so why exactly do YOU claim it should not be hard for an astronomer to produce an example of something that does not exist?

But ok, if you two are going to be like that and ask dishonest questions you already know the answer to, I'll give you an example to work with whether you like it or not. Io. Io is an example of a solar system body that undergoes massive amounts of volcanism, rapid turnover of surface material, and atmospheric density changes.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro


Glauco: Give me only one example of a planet getting or losing large amount of atmosphere, or getting dozens of vulcans erupting, or getting new moutains by itself in one-week period and I do the bet in your conditions.

Astro: I'll give you an example to work with whether you like it or not. Io. Io is an example of a solar system body that undergoes massive amounts of volcanism, rapid turnover of surface material, and atmospheric density changes.

ok. Let me rephrase this. Not I FEEL but IMO.

Your right...my feelings are irrelevant but my OPINION might not be.


I like it! know why? Its an example! Now if its a planet or not doesnt matter to me. The fact there is a object out there that shows atmospheric changes (with in a week or not)
tells me that this has been observed before and is not enough evidence FOR ME that this comet IS the reason for said changes.

Astro: so why exactly do YOU claim it should not be hard for an astronomer to produce an example of something that does not exist?

Now was that hard?

Thanks for the reply Astro my OPINION of you just got better!
glauco

User ID: 3296470
United States
03/28/2013 12:23 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
First, Wikipedia is NOT an official source on anything.
Second, you should really actually READ it.

Hydra says you're wrong about Germany. I bet he could quote the relevant paragraph of the civil code.
I say you're wrong about the Netherlands. A nephew of mine is an Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering at the University of Twente. Nobody calls him professor, they call him doctor.

So your statement that 'in any other country' every teacher can be called professor is wrong.

Thirdly, YOU made a claim, YOU must proof it.
 Quoting: Halcyon Dayz, FCD

Why is this so important if Professor McCanney DOES NOT uses this title? The problem here is me or Professor?

Excuse me?
None of the predictions made by McCanneyism that differs from the predictions of real physics have ever been observed to be true.
Even when they should have been.
 Quoting: Halcyon Dayz, FCD

Alright, give me an example of one prediction that Professor made that was wrong.

Well, let's close down the universities than.
Who needs them?
 Quoting: Halcyon Dayz,FCD

Yes, even people that can't read can recognize the true between the lines. This don't disregards universities nor science.

YOU made the claim that McCanneyism was published in peer-reviewed papers.
YOU need to proof it.
 Quoting: Halcyon Dayz, FCD

Isn't that journals I sent to you peer reviewed??


So you are willing to lie.
 Quoting: Halcyon Dayz, FCD

Alright, so where is the ice of the comets? Bring the data if you can.

How are you not a cultist?
 Quoting: Halcyon Dayz, FCD

Because I'm too smart to do so.

BTW, none of these probes got electrocuted, or had their orbits changed by these comets.
McCanney wrong again!
 Quoting: Halcyon Dayz, FCD

Sure their orbit had not changed, these flybys ocurred in small comets with no gravitational force.

Than why are you a cultist in the Church of McCanneyism?
 Quoting: Halcyon Dayz, FCD

What church?

Cut it out.
 Quoting: Halcyon Dayz, FCD

I know you like flowers.

I did not.

What I did is point out that it doesn't matter who claims what.
They still need to present the evidence.
 Quoting: Halcyon Dayz, FCD

Yes, Phil must present evidences that McCanney said that "All comets are large" and that "All comets gain mass". Professor never said that, but Phil likes to lie.

Just an example of a scientist of considerable reputation.
Yes, Hawking too would have to present evidence.

Only McCanney and woo-peddlers like him ever try to pull the "trust me, I'm a scientist" shtick.
 Quoting: Halcyon Dayz, FCD

What Hawking did so important? He is a theorist, almost all of his ideas are yet to be confirmed.

Are you confused?

IF you claim there's a single scientist in the world familiar with McCanneyism who doesn't think it is a bunch of woo I'd really like to know who it is.
 Quoting: Halcyon Dayz, FCD

You claim that no scientists in the world agree with McCanney, but I never said the oposite simple because I don't know. If you know such scientists who disagree, please bring them here.

Do you understand the difference between evidence and speculation?

Your claim: McCanney got canned for this and this reason.
So YOU need to provide evidence for:
A - McCanney DID get canned, rather than walked away.
B - The reason McCanney got canned.
book
 Quoting: Halcyon Dayz, FCD

I understand, but some speculations are very evidencies of the truth!
Listen to McCanney: [link to jmccsci.com]
Lindalee

User ID: 36064672
United States
03/28/2013 12:36 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
bumpy
Circling the Sun @ 63,000 MPH
<3
Dr. AstroModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 4211721
United States
03/28/2013 12:38 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
...

The first part is not confirmation of the claim. I did not put words in your mouth, I explained why you are wrong and asked you a question. I addressed the issue of "atmospheric changes." Atmospheric changes happen all the time in the absence of comets, it means nothing with respect to the claim. If NASA detects something new about the atmosphere of Mars after comet ISON it will not serve as confirmation that it had anything to do with ISON or that ISON was a massive object as McCanney claims. If what McCanney claims is true then it would produce a detectable perturbation of the orbit. If there is no perturbation then it was not the massive object he claimed it was. Will you ignore that empirical data if indeed it proves that McCanney was wrong, yes or no? Answer the question.
...

Your ignorance is your problem, not mine.
...

I don't give a damn. It is not up to me to teach you astronomy so that you can confirm it for yourself. I will show my data and you can work on your own at studying astronomy and acquiring the equipment or access to equipment needed to repeat it for yourself if you like, but that is not my problem if you are incapable or unwilling to do it. You clearly don't understand science at all if you think the onus is on me to do that for you.
...

I do not agree to your terms. Either you will accept the empirical data or you will ignore the empirical data, which is it?
...

Nope. You have until October to learn how to do astronomy and astrometry for yourself if you want to be able to do it for yourself. That is not my problem. Atmospheric changes etc are not confirmation of ISON being a massive object, particularly in the face of a lack of perturbations in the orbit of Mars.

If NASA's probes detect something new about the atmosphere of Mars that they hadn't noticed before (entirely possible, maybe even likely given the rate of new discoveries), that would meet your arbitrary and incorrect goalpost and allow you to claim you were right when in fact it wouldn't be confirmation at all. I will present astrometric data showing the presence or absence of perturbations in Mars' orbit. You can either choose to accept it or ignore empirical data. Your choice.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro


WOW. After reading this argument i have come to this conclusion.

I FEEL you have nothing to contribute to this discussion.

Glauco just proved to me that your insights have no meaning.
 Quoting: Skyking 19276606

Your feelings are irrelevant.
He asked simple questions, 1 example to share your knowledge in astronomy. Which I think should not be hard for an any astronomer.
 Quoting: skyking

I keep asking 1 simple question, not a trick question either, just 1 simple question to see how intellectually honest or dishonest he is willing to be. I keep getting nothing but dodging from him. His request is inherently dishonest, he knows there is no planet (maybe you could make a case for Io, but that's a moon not a planet) in our solar system that currently undergoes changes that extreme that rapidly, so why exactly do YOU claim it should not be hard for an astronomer to produce an example of something that does not exist?

But ok, if you two are going to be like that and ask dishonest questions you already know the answer to, I'll give you an example to work with whether you like it or not. Io. Io is an example of a solar system body that undergoes massive amounts of volcanism, rapid turnover of surface material, and atmospheric density changes.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro


Glauco: Give me only one example of a planet getting or losing large amount of atmosphere, or getting dozens of vulcans erupting, or getting new moutains by itself in one-week period and I do the bet in your conditions.

Astro: I'll give you an example to work with whether you like it or not. Io. Io is an example of a solar system body that undergoes massive amounts of volcanism, rapid turnover of surface material, and atmospheric density changes.

ok. Let me rephrase this. Not I FEEL but IMO.

Your right...my feelings are irrelevant but my OPINION might not be.
 Quoting: Skyking 19276606

An opinion is only worth what you can back it up with. Same goes for everyone, myself included.

I like it! know why? Its an example! Now if its a planet or not doesnt matter to me. The fact there is a object out there that shows atmospheric changes (with in a week or not)
tells me that this has been observed before and is not enough evidence FOR ME that this comet IS the reason for said changes.

Astro: so why exactly do YOU claim it should not be hard for an astronomer to produce an example of something that does not exist?

Now was that hard?

Thanks for the reply Astro my OPINION of you just got better!
 Quoting: skyking

In a literal sense it doesn't really count; the request was for a planet, not a moon, so that would ordinarily exclude Io from consideration. Nevertheless, I am glad it satisfied you.

Last Edited by Dr. Astro on 03/28/2013 12:38 PM
astrobanner2
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 29358702
United States
03/28/2013 12:43 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
wow how long did it take you to write those huge paragraphs of useless bullshit?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 26851286


About as long as it takes you to shill every thread on here
glauco

User ID: 3296470
United States
03/28/2013 12:46 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
I see, so you asked for an example showing massive and rapid volcanism, surface changes, and atmosphere changes, I provide it, you ignore it and want a complete do-over of the entire argument with you getting to put words in my mouth right at the start.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro

That's why I didn't quote you: it was getting so long that I did not see your example. Io is not a valid example, as it is always an inferno, I'm talking about "from heaven to hell". The big thing to realize on Io would be the contrary: to Io turns from Inferno to Heaven. Io atmosphere and activity, anyway, is a little windy day compared on what is about to occur with Mars.

Regardless of what he said, atmospheric changes are not proof of the comet's size. Orbital perturbations of Mars or the lack thereof are.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro

So how would you explain Mars getting blue, yellow, green, marble brown or gray one week after this comet passage if it is not a big one?

Excuse me, I never said that.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro

Yes, you did. You know I can't do that but you don't care, you want my blood.

This is not a competition, a bet, or a race to see who has telescopic equipment and who does not.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro

No this is a bet to see if the comet is large or not.

I will provide the data and the empirical data are all that matter, not who it came from.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro

What matter is that I should be able to check if your data is correct or not. Would not you take a picture by yourself from Jupiter if NASA says that it begun to light like a star?

If you wish to do it yourself as well you're welcome to, you have until October to learn how to do so.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro

Could do, but can't guarantee, so I can't bet.

You can buy or rent a telescope as needed.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro

Man, this is not America, this is Brazil.

You do not have to do so and it is really irrelevant to the matter, the question is whether you will ignore empirical data when it is presented.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro

You say that is not important to check if the other guy really won the bet? I don't think so!

I have asked this over and over and you still refuse to give an answer. Instead you ignore what I said and put words in my mouth.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro

Don't try to turn the game.

Answer the question, will you ignore the empirical data if it shows that Mars' orbit was not perturbed and the mass of the comet was low contrary to what McCanney claimed. Yes or no?
 Quoting: Dr. Astro

Depends on. Will you ignore if Mars get Olympus and other volcanos going off, turns its atmosphere to blue, yellow, green, marble brown or gray one week after this comet passage?

Last Edited by glauco on 03/28/2013 12:48 PM
Listen to McCanney: [link to jmccsci.com]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 36029089
Canada
03/28/2013 12:52 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
i dont think anyone read that OP, you stupid fuck.

we have already been over this nibiru crap, it doesnt exist, let it go you delusional retard.

GLP has not predicted a single doom or conspiracy event, this website is filled with the biggest trolls and tinfoil hat morons in history.

P.S - OP, kill yourself. stupid fuck.
YankeeRose555

User ID: 29801624
United States
03/28/2013 12:54 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
Here's the obscure amateur image I've managed to find of Comet C/2012 S1 ISON taken in January 2013 for all the ADD/Demonic/Chaotic types so they don't have to read anything more than a few words and can quickly right it off with BS flags and make inane comments about Uranus.

[link to i791.photobucket.com]

I feel like the stripper who puts her jinger back on and walks down in to the audience to have a drink with the boys. Here's the back ground.

After the CometC/2010 X1 Elenin fizzle out last year, I lost interest in the whole PX/Nibiru/Red Dragon meme, which in hindsight we were all supposed via the to do as a result of the disinformation sown about the subject over the years, since the NASA psy-op Zetatalkby Nancy Leider brought it to prominence in the early years of 2000.

Zetatalks credibility was blown out of the water with the claim it would be seen on the 15 May 2003. When it didn't show up the Zetas confessed that date was a white lie just to get the subject in front of the public early. Just days ago Nancy then pops up claiming Zetatalk is the only authority to consider when looking for Planet X Earth Change information. Are we being set up for another round of disinformation.

A few days into the new year I became aware of a subtle energy change I found myself saying to the casual acquaintance who would quiz me about the latest doom news, "Not long to go now before the big Earth changes!" that was after the end of the Mayan Calendar came and went (another psy-op) I had no additional information yet something in me was confident the big changes were just around the proverbial corner.

I religiously check Space Weather's near Earth Object reports and noticed an influx of new asteroids all discovered in the new year. I threaded it on LOP and got a bit of interest.

Then the Pope resigned followed quickly by the Russian Meteorite and I was off the spidey senses were tingling.
I combed the news releases about the ISS and comets noticed the articles about the three for this year,

Comet Pan-STARRS (C/2011 L4)
Comet Lemmon (C/2012 F6)
Comet ISON (C/2012 S1)

Saw the official images which were just highly magnified images of feeble looking light smudges against the sea of streaked stars. Comet Lemmon was the brightest and best formed its luminescent blue/green colour I decided makes it a great candidate for the blue Kachina of the Hopi prophecy.
I checked the orbit diagrams noted none were coming from under the elliptic as we have been programmed to believe about PX. Why else were they racing to build infrared telescopes in Antarctica I reasoned. Comet C/2012 S1 ISON was coming from the opposite direction above the elliptic. So I moved on to other areas of Earth monitoring.

I picked up on a rumour started by a major Electric Universe Scientist that he was hearing chatter about an incoming mini solar system type object spotted just outside Jupiter's orbit. I remembered reading one of the comets had been discovered just outside the orbit of Jupiter.

I Combed the alternate space weather sites again but could find nothing. Then articles appeared about C/2012 S1 ISON could be a candidate for a major spectacle as its orbit was following that of the Great Comet of1680. No sooner had that article appeared then another one came out disputing that saying Comet displays are highly unpredictable and listing all the comets that were hyped up but fizzled out.

This piece of cognitive dissonance annoyed me. I had read C/2012 S1 ISON's core was a big as a mountain at least twice as big as Comet Lovejoy and hadn't started out gassing yet. It's orbit would start above the elliptic lit up by the Sun and it would swing close by Mars in plain view from the Earth before dipping below the elliptic at around 1 AU from the Sun (Great View from Antarctica) rip around the Sun's South Pole inside the orbit of Mercury before screaming out of the solar system from the Sun up and out above Earths North Pole in high arc. If that wasn't going to look pretty neat I don't know what was.

It then occurred to me they don't want us looking at it. Comb the internet again, despite all the high profile, main stream telescopes out there as usual we have to rely on the amateurs for any images. Like our tax money pays for these big toys and we have to wait years to get images that have been purged of any anomalies likely to dispute the Newtonian Physics world view.

Trying to find the mass of any comet is a difficult thing, for years now that information is classified like they don't want us know how big are these things that are increasingly blasting though our solar system.

They don't need to know the mass to calculate an orbit. Remember the old school physics video when they drop a wooden ball and a iron ball of a tower and see which on hits first. They both hit at the same time its Newtons Law the force of gravity is a constant.

They use observations to plot the objects movement and extrapolate the orbit based on Keplers laws which predict freely falling Solar bodies move in a conic orbit with the Sun at one of the foci that sweeps equal areas in equal time periods according to a known constant.

None of the Ephemerides of the Near Earth Objects have a value for mass. They calculate mass using other methods active and passive to measure density, so arriving at an estimated value.

Pulling up obscure academic PDF articles which is about as exciting as reading a reserve bank annual report. The authors report little evidence of cometary activity. ( No Out Gassing) blah jargon blah, meaningless graphs, obligatory comment dirty snowball blah blah..Then I came across this image buried in the document.

[link to i791.photobucket.com]

First impression its spherical, icy objects need to be over 400 km in diameter to reach hydrostatic equilibrium with gravity and take on a spherical shape. That's a big mountain!

Then I notice the angular diameter scale in arc seconds. C/2012 S1 is 15 arc seconds wide! That's 50,000 kilometres at 5.22 AU distance from the Sun. Jupiter at the same distance is 30 arc seconds the same width as the scale line. Its half the size of Jupiter! The Earth's average diameter is 12,742 kilometres so its four times as big as the Earth!

I rush off looking up astronomy tables to compare the sizes. Then come back for a third look at the image and do my second double take of the evening I can make out the companion moons right beside it!

Here's some later images with internal processed images and one I jacked up the red hue saturation to reveal the cold detail.

[link to i791.photobucket.com]

[link to i791.photobucket.com]
 Quoting: indigowiz


I think there's something to the Nibiru 'conspiracy'. However, since I am not personally qualified on the subject, we will just have to wait and see.
“I’m just your average horny little devil.”
Jah Booty
User ID: 975341
United States
03/28/2013 12:58 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
So the big question is, when will this thing arrive? I have heard November, and it will be visible in June? Correct?
 Quoting: Jah Booty 975341


Define "arrive." According to current projections it will reach naked eye magnitude sometime in early November.
[link to www.aerith.net]
 Quoting: Dr. Astro


Thanks for responding back. So sounds like it will be visible in November? I heard that NASA said it will be as bright as the moon? I guess by arrive I meant closest to Earth. I'm not very knowledgable about this area, I am an engineer though, so I have a science and math background.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 37038959
Fiji
03/28/2013 12:59 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
What an excellent thread!
Thanks for your observations OP........
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1512463


OP -- well done in your assertions. I agree the "Comet" is much more than your average comet, and thank you for the images of the surrounding moons. Couple this with the ME TEL U thread, and we have some interesting times ahead.

The thread would be better (as most would be) if it would not degenerate into scientific drivel and argument with "Dr." Astro. He does this to all threads and it really takes away from the content, which, I am sure he knows and does on purpose.

Having said that, perhaps we could just ignore him? There is no need to answer his questions or even acknowledge him for that matter. It would improve the thread immensely.

News