| Users Online Now: 1,746 (Who's On?) | Visitors Today: 824,646 | |
| Pageviews Today: 1,415,125 | Threads Today: 546 | Posts Today: 10,170 |
| 03:47 PM | ||
| Users Online Now: 1,746 (Who's On?) | Visitors Today: 824,646 | |
| Pageviews Today: 1,415,125 | Threads Today: 546 | Posts Today: 10,170 |
| 03:47 PM | ||
THE RETURN OF THE DESTROYER, NIBIRU, PLANET X, DRAGON, DARK STAR, BROWN DWARF, ECT... | |
Ratboy  User ID: 1527938  United Kingdom02/29/2012 10:01 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 3555102  United States02/29/2012 10:01 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: Anonymous Coward 3555102 Earthquakes have no relation to a brown dwarf, especially if it is as far out as the "sources" lucus posted are even remotely true. Regardless, there isn't a brown dwarf. We would see it by now and it would be one of the brightest objects in the sky. Bull... Dark objects do not shine and it would not be bright in fact the darker the object the more light it would absorb. That's why it's called the BLACK SUN or DARK STAR. That is simply untrue, a brown dwarf does not magically absorb light. If they are so blatant then surely they would have been officially discovered long before 1988??? If they are only really visible in the infra-red spectrum we would not see it unless we all had the means to do so. And apparent fact it is coming from the south of the planet no one really has much hope of catching it coming. They are not blatant at all...but you have to understand why they aren't and why it took so long for us to find them. 1. Telescope and detection technology was not advanced enough to detect them. 2. The brown dwarfs we have found are hard to see because of how far away they are. If there was one anywhere near our solar system it would be one of the brightest objects on the sky. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 4313926 United States02/29/2012 10:04 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | A reason an object is black is because of what the color of materials it is made from are not because it absorbs light. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 3555102 Bullshit... what are you 12? Idiot... You have no freaking idea what you are talking about. Seriously, anybody that knows anything about color and light knows this. Now you are just sounding stupid. Black is the color of objects that do not emit or reflect light in any part of the visible spectrum; they absorb all such frequencies of light. Although black is sometimes described as an "achromatic", or hueless, color, in practice it can be considered a color, as in expressions like "black cat" or "black paint". [link to en.wikipedia.org] |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 3555102 United States02/29/2012 10:06 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | A reason an object is black is because of what the color of materials it is made from are not because it absorbs light. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 3555102 Bullshit... what are you 12? Idiot... You have no freaking idea what you are talking about. Seriously, anybody that knows anything about color and light knows this. Now you are just sounding stupid. Black is the color of objects that do not emit or reflect light in any part of the visible spectrum; they absorb all such frequencies of light. Although black is sometimes described as an "achromatic", or hueless, color, in practice it can be considered a color, as in expressions like "black cat" or "black paint". [link to en.wikipedia.org] Exactly, but there is no "true black". Black doesn't make something invisible...especially when referring to a high mass body in space. Regardless of the color, even if there was a "black dwarf" then it would still be altering the orbits of the planets by this point. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 4313926 United States02/29/2012 10:08 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Try learning about light and colors before you taste anymore of your foot. How Do We See Colors? [link to www.hhmi.org] Color Think Tank - How Do We See Color. [link to www.pantone.com] |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 3555102 United States02/29/2012 10:10 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Try learning about light and colors before you taste anymore of your foot. Quoting: LUCUS How Do We See Colors? [link to www.hhmi.org] Color Think Tank - How Do We See Color. [link to www.pantone.com] Zzzz, Regardless of the color, even if there was a "black dwarf" then it would still be altering the orbits of the planets by this point. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 4313926 United States02/29/2012 10:10 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | A reason an object is black is because of what the color of materials it is made from are not because it absorbs light. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 3555102 Bullshit... what are you 12? Idiot... You have no freaking idea what you are talking about. Seriously, anybody that knows anything about color and light knows this. Now you are just sounding stupid. Black is the color of objects that do not emit or reflect light in any part of the visible spectrum; they absorb all such frequencies of light. Although black is sometimes described as an "achromatic", or hueless, color, in practice it can be considered a color, as in expressions like "black cat" or "black paint". [link to en.wikipedia.org] Exactly, but there is no "true black". Black doesn't make something invisible...especially when referring to a high mass body in space. Regardless of the color, even if there was a "black dwarf" then it would still be altering the orbits of the planets by this point. OK so now proven wrong you instantly change topics. You don't even know the basics of color and light and you think anybody should listen to your other bright ideas? :popup: |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 4313926 United States02/29/2012 10:16 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | TRY AGAIN... The presence of such a massive object in the solar system's far-flung Oort Cloud could explain a barrage of comets from an unexpected direction, according to a December article at Space.com. [link to news.blogs.cnn.com] And if you want to go down that road here is a HUGE list of news stories talking about the outer planet's orbits being disturbed. The Victoria Advocate - Jun 13, 1968 [link to news.google.com] The Nevada Daily Mail - Apr 26, 1972 [link to news.google.com] Bangor Daily News - Apr 28, 1972 [link to news.google.com] Beaver County Times - Apr 28, 1972 [link to news.google.com] The Phoenix - Apr 28, 1972 [link to news.google.com] Pittsburgh Post-Gazette - Apr 29, 1972 [link to news.google.com] Sunday Times-Sentinel - Apr 30, 1972 [link to news.google.com] The Sydney Morning Herald - May 2, 1972 [link to news.google.com] The Montreal Gazette - May 6, 1972 [link to news.google.com] Sarasota Herald-Tribune - Jul 16, 1972 [link to news.google.com] Tri City Herald - Nov 2, 1972 [link to news.google.com] The Rochester Sentinel - Feb 2, 1973 [link to news.google.com] The Times-News - Feb 19, 1980 [link to news.google.com] Anchorage Daily News - Mar 1, 1980 [link to news.google.com] Lakeland Ledger - Mar 9, 1980 [link to news.google.com] Ocala Star-Banner - Apr 9, 1980 [link to news.google.com] The Miami News - Oct 6, 1980 [link to news.google.com] The Times-News - Feb 19, 1980 [link to news.google.com] Anchorage Daily News - Mar 1, 1980 [link to news.google.com] Lakeland Ledger - Mar 9, 1980 [link to news.google.com] Ocala Star-Banner - Apr 9, 1980 [link to news.google.com] Anchorage Daily News - Feb 6, 1983 [link to news.google.com] Time Magazine Monday, Feb. 14, 1983 [link to www.time.com] Daily Leader - Mar 10, 1983 [link to news.google.com] Nature 31 March 1983 [link to www.nature.com] Anchorage Daily News - Apr 26, 1983 [link to news.google.com] NY Times May 1, 1983 [link to www.nytimes.com] The Nevada Daily Mail - May 26, 1983 [link to news.google.com] Eugene Register-Guard - May 29, 1983 [link to news.google.com] Beaver County Times - Jun 12, 1983 [link to news.google.com] Observer-Reporter - Dec 17, 1984 [link to news.google.com] NY Times December 18, 1984 [link to www.nytimes.com] The Age - Dec 19, 1984 [link to news.google.com] Record-Journal - Dec 20, 1984 [link to news.google.com] Ocala Star-Banner - Dec 30, 1984 [link to news.google.com] The Deseret News - Jan 13, 1985 [link to news.google.com] Lakeland Ledger - Jan 13, 1985 [link to news.google.com] Times Daily - Jan 13, 1985 [link to news.google.com] Daily Union - Jan 15, 1985 [link to news.google.com] The Leader-Post - Jan 16, 1985 [link to news.google.com] The Free Lance-Star - Jan 25, 1985 [link to news.google.com] NY Times July 1, 1987 [link to www.nytimes.com] Schenectady Gazette - Jul 3, 1987 [link to news.google.com] Gainesville Sun - Jul 8, 1987 [link to news.google.com] The Telegraph - Oct 4, 1987 [link to news.google.com] Spokane Chronicle - Oct 5, 1987 [link to news.google.com] The Hour - Oct 29, 1987 [link to news.google.com] Bangor Daily News - Jun 14, 1988 [link to news.google.com] The Pittsburgh Press - Jun 14, 1988 [link to news.google.com] Reading Eagle - Jun 14, 1988 [link to news.google.com] The Hour - Jun 15, 1988 [link to news.google.com] Gadsden Times - Aug 12, 1988 [link to news.google.com] The Modesto Bee - Sep 15, 1988 [link to news.google.com] Schenectady Gazette - Sep 15, 1988 [link to news.google.com] Gadsden Times - Jan 11, 1990 [link to news.google.com] New Straits Times - Jan 12, 1990 [link to news.google.com] Lawrence Journal-World - Apr 22, 1990 [link to news.google.com] The Free Lance-Star - Apr 26, 1990 [link to news.google.com] Record-Journal - May 1, 1990 [link to news.google.com] Kentucky New Era - Dec 10, 1990 [link to news.google.com] Toledo Blade - Dec 23, 1990 [link to news.google.com] Bangor Daily News - Jan 4, 1991 [link to news.google.com] New Scientist, 07 September 1991 [link to www.newscientist.com] New Scientist, 30 November 1991 [link to www.newscientist.com] DER SPIEGEL, 30.12.1991 [link to www.spiegel.de] Bangor Daily News - Jan 1, 1992 [link to news.google.com] NY Times, September 20, 1992 [link to www.nytimes.com] NY Times, January 27, 1993 [link to www.nytimes.com] New Scientist, 30 January 1993 [link to www.newscientist.com] NY Times, June 01, 1993 [link to www.nytimes.com] Lakeland Ledger - Jun 6, 1993 [link to news.google.com] The Times-News - Jun 27, 1993 [link to news.google.com] DTE - Aug 31, 1993 [link to www.downtoearth.org.in] Discover - September 1, 1993 [link to discovermagazine.com] Independent - Tuesday, 24 October 1995 [link to www.independent.co.uk] Time Magazine - Feb. 05, 1996 [link to www.time.com] The Economist - May 15th 1997 [link to www.economist.com] The Madison Courier - Jul 12, 1997 [link to news.google.com] New Scientist, 18 October 1997 [link to www.newscientist.com] The Atlantic - Feb 1998 [link to www.theatlantic.com] MSNBC - Oct. 7, 1999 [link to www.msnbc.msn.com] The Economist - Oct 14th 1999 [link to www.economist.com] Science - 15 October 1999 [link to www.sciencemag.org] Space Daily - Dec. 4, 2000 [link to www.spacedaily.com] |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 1639930 02/29/2012 10:16 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Big fan of your work lucus. I have a I'm a little confused though about your explanation as to what the Norway spiral was. If it truly. was the destroyer star and it was close enough to see, how come nothing happened? |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 1639930 02/29/2012 10:16 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Big fan of your work lucus. I have a I'm a little confused though about your explanation as to what the Norway spiral was. If it truly. was the destroyer star and it was close enough to see, how come nothing happened? |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 3555102 United States02/29/2012 10:17 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | A reason an object is black is because of what the color of materials it is made from are not because it absorbs light. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 3555102 Bullshit... what are you 12? Idiot... You have no freaking idea what you are talking about. Seriously, anybody that knows anything about color and light knows this. Now you are just sounding stupid. Black is the color of objects that do not emit or reflect light in any part of the visible spectrum; they absorb all such frequencies of light. Although black is sometimes described as an "achromatic", or hueless, color, in practice it can be considered a color, as in expressions like "black cat" or "black paint". [link to en.wikipedia.org] Exactly, but there is no "true black". Black doesn't make something invisible...especially when referring to a high mass body in space. Regardless of the color, even if there was a "black dwarf" then it would still be altering the orbits of the planets by this point. OK so now proven wrong you instantly change topics. You don't even know the basics of color and light and you think anybody should listen to your other bright ideas? :popup: But it is actually you that is changing topics. First its a brown dwarf, then its a black dwarf which is only a hypothetical object and not invisible nor undetectable (assuming it even existed). Then you disregard the fact that gravity has a role in this and can't understand that if there was a high mass body near our solar system then the planets orbits would be perturbed (which they are not). None of this is off-topic technically, it is all related to your claim of a brown/black/bullshit dwarf coming our way. Let me guess what's next, a cloaked dwarf? an inter-dimensional dwarf? Grasp at those straws Lucus, you are pretty good at using the god of the gaps arguments. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 4313926 United States02/29/2012 10:19 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Big fan of your work lucus. I have a I'm a little confused though about your explanation as to what the Norway spiral was. If it truly. was the destroyer star and it was close enough to see, how come nothing happened? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1639930 I don't know what that spiral was. I do know that the ancients were very clear about the spiral though. All those petroglyphs associating the spiral with floods and dead birds and fish is pretty amazing. The spirals could be some electrical interaction but I can't even begin to imagine what it really is. With all this holographics technology these days it could have been some sort of display. Remember all the world leaders were there so maybe they were being shown what to look for when it happens. Who knows. |
| John Everytard User ID: 5027429 United States02/29/2012 10:23 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: LUCUS Bullshit... what are you 12? Idiot... You have no freaking idea what you are talking about. Seriously, anybody that knows anything about color and light knows this. Now you are just sounding stupid. Black is the color of objects that do not emit or reflect light in any part of the visible spectrum; they absorb all such frequencies of light. Although black is sometimes described as an "achromatic", or hueless, color, in practice it can be considered a color, as in expressions like "black cat" or "black paint". [link to en.wikipedia.org] Exactly, but there is no "true black". Black doesn't make something invisible...especially when referring to a high mass body in space. Regardless of the color, even if there was a "black dwarf" then it would still be altering the orbits of the planets by this point. OK so now proven wrong you instantly change topics. You don't even know the basics of color and light and you think anybody should listen to your other bright ideas?  But it is actually you that is changing topics. First its a brown dwarf, then its a black dwarf which is only a hypothetical object and not invisible nor undetectable (assuming it even existed). Then you disregard the fact that gravity has a role in this and can't understand that if there was a high mass body near our solar system then the planets orbits would be perturbed (which they are not). None of this is off-topic technically, it is all related to your claim of a brown/black/bullshit dwarf coming our way. Let me guess what's next, a cloaked dwarf? an inter-dimensional dwarf? Grasp at those straws Lucus, you are pretty good at using the god of the gaps arguments. I guess you missed the dozens of links for the 50+ past years from articles that discuss the outer planets orbits being perturbed. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 4313926 United States02/29/2012 10:24 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Quakes are picking up again near Japan 5.7 2012/02/29 14:32:46 35.218 141.006 9.8 NEAR THE EAST COAST OF HONSHU, JAPAN 4.8 2012/02/29 11:31:37 39.642 143.324 31.4 OFF THE EAST COAST OF HONSHU, JAPAN 5.2 2012/02/29 09:00:05 37.309 141.632 35.0 NEAR THE EAST COAST OF HONSHU, JAPAN |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 3555102 United States02/29/2012 10:27 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: Anonymous Coward 3555102 Exactly, but there is no "true black". Black doesn't make something invisible...especially when referring to a high mass body in space. Regardless of the color, even if there was a "black dwarf" then it would still be altering the orbits of the planets by this point. OK so now proven wrong you instantly change topics. You don't even know the basics of color and light and you think anybody should listen to your other bright ideas? :popup: But it is actually you that is changing topics. First its a brown dwarf, then its a black dwarf which is only a hypothetical object and not invisible nor undetectable (assuming it even existed). Then you disregard the fact that gravity has a role in this and can't understand that if there was a high mass body near our solar system then the planets orbits would be perturbed (which they are not). None of this is off-topic technically, it is all related to your claim of a brown/black/bullshit dwarf coming our way. Let me guess what's next, a cloaked dwarf? an inter-dimensional dwarf? Grasp at those straws Lucus, you are pretty good at using the god of the gaps arguments. I guess you missed the dozens of links for the 50+ past years from articles that discuss the outer planets orbits being perturbed. Except they they aren't. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 4313926 United States02/29/2012 10:28 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 3555102 United States02/29/2012 10:37 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Astromut Senior Forum Moderator User ID: 4211721 United States02/29/2012 10:41 AM  Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: Anonymous Coward 3555102 Exactly, but there is no "true black". Black doesn't make something invisible...especially when referring to a high mass body in space. Regardless of the color, even if there was a "black dwarf" then it would still be altering the orbits of the planets by this point. OK so now proven wrong you instantly change topics. You don't even know the basics of color and light and you think anybody should listen to your other bright ideas? But it is actually you that is changing topics. First its a brown dwarf, then its a black dwarf which is only a hypothetical object and not invisible nor undetectable (assuming it even existed). Then you disregard the fact that gravity has a role in this and can't understand that if there was a high mass body near our solar system then the planets orbits would be perturbed (which they are not). None of this is off-topic technically, it is all related to your claim of a brown/black/bullshit dwarf coming our way. Let me guess what's next, a cloaked dwarf? an inter-dimensional dwarf? Grasp at those straws Lucus, you are pretty good at using the god of the gaps arguments. I guess you missed the dozens of links for the 50+ past years from articles that discuss the outer planets orbits being perturbed. Thread: Robert Harrington's Planet X Does Not Exist  |
| Dutchguy User ID: 1259147  China02/29/2012 10:42 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Big fan of your work lucus. I have a I'm a little confused though about your explanation as to what the Norway spiral was. If it truly. was the destroyer star and it was close enough to see, how come nothing happened? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1639930 Actually,,,, something did happen, The Norway Spiral!? But to add, i've got a little confusion myself about this subject. If it really was a low mass object or a dark star that had created the Norway Spiral, why haven't we seen any more things like it. Do you expect their will be more spirals like the Norway spiral to be seen this year?? I stil find it hard to believe there is a massive object lurking around our solar system wich we don't know of (at least not known mainstream). If it would be true, and also the myths are true, than it has to travel at an enormous speed if it has to pass our planet this year. I'm talking almost speed of light, speed, if it stil is not seen in our skies as a distant star or anything!! What is your view on this? I know there is a large portion of Orions constellation blacked out on google sky, but if it has to come from that direction, we on earth would already have seen a new dot/star in or around the Orion constellation, maybe not visseble with the naked eye, but surely it would have been visseble for quite some time now with telescopes around the world (and in orbit around our planet). I've been busy with this subject for a couple of years now and most of the prophecies that were done in line with these predictions have not come true as of yet. (Like the one where people predicted "planet-X" to be seen from the northern hemisphere about 2 years ago (when i started touching this subject)), only thing i could notice so far was that Jupiter was super bright in the skies the last couple of years. JUPITER,,, not Planet-X like what most youtubers believe.. So if it still has to come our way, in what kind of a time span should i think, like astronomical terms (somewhere between now and the next million years), or in some real time span like this year/next year maybe within a decade?? Can i maybe get a link to the info you have stated in your vids. I would like to read up on all the magnificent info you have gathered.. Would greatly appreciate it :P The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently. F. Nietzsche There is no way of fixing Stupid. Politicians: You need to do what we say, Not say what we do.. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 4313926 United States02/29/2012 10:43 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| Astromut Senior Forum Moderator User ID: 4211721 United States02/29/2012 10:44 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Earthquakes have no relation to a brown dwarf, especially if it is as far out as the "sources" lucus posted are even remotely true. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 3555102 Regardless, there isn't a brown dwarf. We would see it by now and it would be one of the brightest objects in the sky. Bull... Dark objects do not shine and it would not be bright in fact the darker the object the more light it would absorb. That's why it's called the BLACK SUN or DARK STAR. Yawn. [link to www.godlikeproductions.com] |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 8389252 02/29/2012 10:54 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Big fan of your work lucus. I have a I'm a little confused though about your explanation as to what the Norway spiral was. If it truly. was the destroyer star and it was close enough to see, how come nothing happened? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1639930 I don't know what that spiral was. I do know that the ancients were very clear about the spiral though. All those petroglyphs associating the spiral with floods and dead birds and fish is pretty amazing. The spirals could be some electrical interaction but I can't even begin to imagine what it really is. With all this holographics technology these days it could have been some sort of display. Remember all the world leaders were there so maybe they were being shown what to look for when it happens. Who knows. Yeah, all of them there says it all. One thing is for sure, it wasn't a failed Russian rocket. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 3555102 United States02/29/2012 10:57 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Earthquakes have no relation to a brown dwarf, especially if it is as far out as the "sources" lucus posted are even remotely true. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 3555102 Regardless, there isn't a brown dwarf. We would see it by now and it would be one of the brightest objects in the sky. Bull... Dark objects do not shine and it would not be bright in fact the darker the object the more light it would absorb. That's why it's called the BLACK SUN or DARK STAR. Yawn. [link to www.godlikeproductions.com] I love how, in that thread, Lucus somehow manages to link giant whirlpools and earthquakes with a high mass body. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 2313576 United States02/29/2012 11:00 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Earthquakes have no relation to a brown dwarf, especially if it is as far out as the "sources" lucus posted are even remotely true. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 3555102 Regardless, there isn't a brown dwarf. We would see it by now and it would be one of the brightest objects in the sky. Bull... Dark objects do not shine and it would not be bright in fact the darker the object the more light it would absorb. That's why it's called the BLACK SUN or DARK STAR. Yawn. [link to www.godlikeproductions.com] Have you seen the interview with Harrington stating that "we have found it"...not hypothetical. I believe he was on the way to review the final data to confirm. |
| Astromut Senior Forum Moderator User ID: 4211721 United States02/29/2012 11:01 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Earthquakes have no relation to a brown dwarf, especially if it is as far out as the "sources" lucus posted are even remotely true. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 3555102 Regardless, there isn't a brown dwarf. We would see it by now and it would be one of the brightest objects in the sky. Bull... Dark objects do not shine and it would not be bright in fact the darker the object the more light it would absorb. That's why it's called the BLACK SUN or DARK STAR. Yawn. [link to www.godlikeproductions.com] I love how, in that thread, Lucus somehow manages to link giant whirlpools and earthquakes with a high mass body. Yup, it somehow shakes the planets, even slows down their rotations, but it doesn't move the planets... |
| ExoPoliChick User ID: 11332363  Canada02/29/2012 11:01 AM  Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | So if some big earthquake happens today - leap day - does it mean the anniversary would be only every 4 years?  Sorry, just being silly...  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Resident Led Zeppelin Expert (ask me anything!) Traveler of both time and space Fuck Trudeau. mRNA-Free and Proud. "The essence of the independent mind lies not in what it thinks, but in how it thinks.' ~ Chris Hitchens |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 4313926 United States02/29/2012 11:07 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Oh someone is bringing up that 2 star Harrington thread? Good for you... you just keep chuggin along sport. Maybe with some hard work and effort you can get it up to 2 1/4 stars. I really do appreciate all the bumps. It really helps. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 3555102 United States02/29/2012 11:11 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Oh someone is bringing up that 2 star Harrington thread? Quoting: LUCUS Good for you... you just keep chuggin along sport. Maybe with some hard work and effort you can get it up to 2 1/4 stars. I really do appreciate all the bumbs. It really helps. Find someone more credible that Neil Tyson that supports your "theory" then maybe, just maybe you will have a valid talking point. [link to www.youtube.com] |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 1010412 United States02/29/2012 11:11 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 6345307 United States02/29/2012 11:11 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | With regards to the Norway Spiral discussion... I remember a video shortly after the spiral happened that I think you made. It was proposing that it was a black hole and our solar system was begining to cross through the plasma jets of the black hole. I remember you catching alot of astromut type ribing for that theory, but I still think it could be a plausible theory. Of course the black hole itself couldn't be anywhere near our solar system, but as far as plasma jets that stream out from them - who knows how far they could extend and possibly whomever is in the know about it knew when we on this planet would get a very tiny window to see it??? (it explains the "black sun", the weird Nobel Prize award, and the changes with all the planets. I know astromut will be able to disect this into a million small pieces. In fact I would actually like to read his thoughts on it because it seems plausible to me yet I know I'm not qualified to make any real assumptions. |
