Well are their actually real facts to worry about Elenin?????

OH.

Dont start about the infrared shit either thats a failed fact to.

Maybe you have to eat a dog for it to work...

This is the same video like all others i told u hes not talking about facts.

hes talking about his so called proof that aint even proof.
Again he talks about alignments but in history not one alignment has caused havoc here.

How many times people told the world would have ended ?

Remember 2000 mellenium event.we shoulda died in may this year if im right,ive heard 21 of october this year...i heard about 2012 next year.......

Hale bopp back in the 90's they told us we would die back then to.

Well the alignments versus earthquakes is a pretty good evidence of danger. Not saying it's gonna cause doom, but if you look at the alignments and how earthquakes seem to be related, there is a very probable correlation.

If that's not evidence for you (btw, that is the definition of an evidence), then I don't know what you are looking for.

Maybe you can tell me?

Oh and wanted to add...what those it do that people have been calling the end of the world many times? Does it affect Elenin? Does it make the theory invalid? No!

That's a shill technique btw

Last Edited by Gab1159 on 08/27/2011 04:19 AM

MASA has already stated that this ELENIN poses ZERO risk to earth at all its jusy those nutty americans keeping this elenin story going just like the idiots did when we were approaching Y2K they just got to believe everthing their told because their idiots, look on rense.com and you will see what NASA has stated ZERO THREAT.

Yet EVIDENCE do not support their THEORY.

NASA is not to be trusted when debating over doomsday scenario...really!

tesla was looking into the universe as electric. and at the time eistein was still working out his theories. they did not agree on much but, eistien did feel his theories were not the whloe picture.
if we look at the universe as electric. the sun as an electric source. now put comet or possible capasitor flying thru an electrical connection with the sun there can be something. but like everything timing is everything. look to solstices or equinoxes. for 2011 there is an equinox on sept 23 at 9:04 this is a fact. there will be a solsstice on dec 22 5:30 in 2012 the dec solstice is dec 21 11:12 all times are uct. this has never happened with a long period comet like c/2010x1 in between the earth and sun before. even the eclipce comet of 1948 was on holloweeen not a equinox nor solstice. this is by far not proof but should make you wounder.....
add all this together with a larger universal alignment happening. more to think about i won't say doom or proof but we should look closer at all this. there is a chance that c/2010x1 has nothing to do with any of this and maybe just the alignment themself do. the sun is what we should watch and not the unseen planet. c/2010x1 does pose some good concern during this time.

The Earth, Sun, and Elenin line up in a row twice every year. The last four have all coincided with major quakes:


Sept 1, 2009 (Sept 2 quake in Indonesia, 7.0)
Feb 25, 2010 (Feb 26 quake in Japan, 7.0; Feb 27 quake in Chile, 8.8)
Sept 3, 2010 (Sept 3 quake in New Zealand 7.0)
Mar 14, 2011 (March 11 quake in Japan: 9.0)
Sept 27, 2011 ??

Four of the last four Sun-Earth-Elenin lineups have generated quakes of 7.0 or better, and the average magnitude of these quakes was 7.8.

This is a statistically significant connection. Each of those quakes was 7.0 or better, and 7.0+ quakes only occur on an average of 16 per year. That means that the statistical probability of a 7.0+ quake occurring in any given three-day period is 16 x 3 / 365, or 13.15%.

The statistical probability of four 7.0+ quakes occurring in these four predetermined 3-day windows is therefore 13.15% x 13.15% x 13.15% x 13.15%, or 0.0299%, or roughly three chances in ten thousand, or one chance in 3300.

And recall that two of the five quakes that occurred during those lineups were much larger than 7.0 quakes. One was 8.8 and one was 9.0, so that makes the probability of this all being a mere coincidence that much more unlikely.