| 2012 & astronomical facts?
Posted: 4/23/2008 2:04:34 AM |
I only said in my astrology studies it was accounted for, and yes I do still study physics however in those fields it's not unaccounted for it's just not proven.
Something with mass either has a gravitational effect, or it doesn't. So either the tenth planet has no mass and doesn't exist, or it does and should be accounted for.
So why hasn't it been observed, we found Pluto in just such a manner and it's far smaller than the tenth (or ninth planet) is theorized to be.
Did you know there was a time all the great minds including doctors included Astrology in all their practices?
I would question that *all* did. But considering the effectiveness of early doctors, I wouldn't be crowing about this.
It wasn't till the dark ages of the middle ages it's practices were banned. The Catholic church banned a great deal of things and knowledge in it's pursuit for power and wealth.
True, that doesn't mean it actually works though.
However if you do not believe in Astrology when we are speaking of 2012 (planet aside) we are passing through the plane of the ecliptic and that to me has more reference to this subject than whether there's another planet in our solar system or not.
Uh huh. So are you willing to take the "give all my stuff to Charles jan 1st 2013" challenge? | |
|
| 2012 & astronomical facts?
Posted: 4/23/2008 5:33:22 AM | NO one is saying the world is going to end in 2012. The idea is more of change then anything. If you take the word Revelations ,
revelation
"disclosure of information to man by a divine or supernatural agency," from O.Fr. revelacion, from L. revelationem (nom. revelatio), from revelatus, pp. of revelare (see reveal). General meaning "disclosure of facts" is attested from c.1375; meaning "striking disclosure" is from 1862. As the name of the last book of the New Testament (Revelation of St. John), it is first attested c.1400 (see apocalypse); as simply Revelations, it is first recorded 1691.
Apocalypse (Greek: Ἀποκάλυψις Apokálypsis; "lifting of the veil"), is a term applied to the disclosure to certain privileged persons of something hidden from the majority of humankind | |
|
| 2012 & astronomical facts?
Posted: 4/23/2008 2:57:53 PM | NO one is saying the world is going to end in 2012. The idea is more of change then anything. If you take the word Revelations ,
you need to stop using absolutes. I've heard tons of people claiming it will be the end of the world.
Which means you can't say "no one" has. how about a simple 100 dollar bet then that no 10th planet is going to come rocketing out of the sky that year? | |
|
| 2012 & astronomical facts?
Posted: 4/23/2008 5:29:29 PM | Hello charlesedm,
When sitting at your computer reading these threads do you find your hands begin to squeeze tightly? do your eyes widen with amazement? do you take deep breaths?
I love it when people use quantum physics and astrology in the same sentence. It is like trying to get the words 'George Bush' ,'common sense' and 'foresight' into the same sentence.
I think you have to accept that in 2012 we are all going to die as a result of the big planet hiding behind Neptune crashing into us. You can't see the effects of its gravity as it is hidden by Neptunes gravity.
As the prophecies of burax and telidax state - "in the year of the number of the two's and the one, a god from the skies will appear in uranus, unknown to those with blinked eyes, it will burn in the north and rest in the south"
as you can see this quite clearly is refering to Neptune and the dark planet we cannot see that will leave it's orbit in 2012 and come crashing into Earth.
So, make sure you pay off your credit card before then.
Oh, and your trick bet of 100 dollars is a no loser for you and you are not going to catch me out with that one. | |
|
| PLEASE STAY ON TOPIC!!!
Posted: 4/23/2008 8:50:33 PM | | I did hear on a NPR scientific report on global warming that by the year 2012 the polar ice cap will most likely be melted. No statement on the south pole. This action, of course, will affect coast lines around the world. | |
|
| 2012 & astronomical facts?
Posted: 4/23/2008 8:55:08 PM | | I wonder what Zecharia Sitchin would say about all of this? Don't know if he's still alive. | |
|
| 2012 & astronomical facts?
Posted: 4/24/2008 5:36:22 AM | | Well just to let you know, the flood from the bible was caused by the same kind of thing. The only difference wa a chunk of ice fell and caused the it, where the ice melting is going to have a different effect. | |
|
| 2012 & astronomical facts?
Posted: 4/24/2008 12:07:34 PM | Man I can't wait to dredge up this thread in Jan 2013
It'll be a great source of knee-slapping laughter
 | |
|
| 2012 & astronomical facts?
Posted: 4/24/2008 5:56:58 PM |
Man I can't wait to dredge up this thread in Jan 2013
sorry, but when the world ends in 2012 that means POF forums as well. | |
|
| 2012 & astronomical facts?
Posted: 4/24/2008 10:28:09 PM | if its a rogue planet why does it call past every so many years ?
does it miss saying hi to everyone ?
or is it in a very eliptical orbit ? like halleys comet ?
or was it a conjealled bit of splattered insect prob a mozzie on the lens of some poor **stards new telescope | |
|
| 2012 & astronomical facts?
Posted: 4/24/2008 11:24:47 PM | Oh the backtracking that will occure. Suddenly it will all be about the "world changing events"
you know, because something doesn't happen freaking every year. | |
|
| 2012 & astronomical facts?
Posted: 4/24/2008 11:36:05 PM | IIRC there is an Earth orbit crossing asteroid that's predicted to pass within 250,000 miles of the Earth in 2012.
However, I suspect the "killer asteroid" that makes us as extinct as the dinosaurs will be one we don't see coming. | |
|
Angde
|
Joined: 9/24/2007
Msg: 88 | |
| 2012 & astronomical facts?
Posted: 4/24/2008 11:44:09 PM |
if its a rogue planet why does it call past every so many years ? ...it just has an irregular orbit not unlike halley's, just more so.
does it miss saying hi to everyone ? I think that would be polite if it did ;) however I did miss that last time since I am mortal and all lol
or was it a conjealled bit of splattered insect prob a mozzie on the lens of some poor **stards new telescope Have you ever moved a high powered telescope around? They aren't the all seeing eye lol... planets are harder to detect out of direct light they do not emit any light of their own however it's their gravitational effect that indicates whether they are there or not.
In all my studies on the subject of 2012 this planet was not mentioned, I do know about it from astrology, can someone give me a link to info? I mostly study ancient texts theology and physics in all forms. I'm not sure why the conversation keeps returning to it. As far as anything I've been exposed to and learned about it exists however in all the documents I've read it has nothing to do with the Mayan calendar or any other. | |
|
| 2012 & astronomical facts?
Posted: 4/25/2008 12:53:30 AM |
Did you know there was a time all the great minds including doctors included Astrology in all their practices?
I would question that *all* did. But considering the effectiveness of early doctors, I wouldn't be crowing about this.
I would think the "logical" conclusion of this "Great time of Change" has been born from the civilizations as a whole. Not just the 1 aspect.
Let me give you a little train of thought to better explain.
The Mayan have a calender that ends on 2112. This calender is also still exact thousands of years after it was made. The Mayan also performed brain surgery that we "think" actually worked. This civilization did many great things so if they did so many great things, it would make "sense" that their predictions may be correct.
Same with the Chinese in ancient times. They had many inventions that we look at and say to ourselves: "No way! How in the world could they have done that in that time period!"
Same with ancient Egyptians. To this day we are still amazed at their pyramids and are still unsure as to exactly HOW they could have done this.
The point? Well if they were so darn tootin smart back then, they might have been on to something that we do not understand today. In other words, they very well -could- have been smarter [or dumber] then we are now. Is there any valid scientific facts that says the world is going to go through a "Time of great change" on this date? Maybe. I have seen yes and I have seen no.
I think this is the logic the OP is coming from and I would have to semi-agree. I think that over the course of human history we lost a little "something" we once had. Who knows. | |
|
| 2012 & astronomical facts?
Posted: 4/25/2008 1:16:28 AM |
The Mayan have a calender that ends on 2112. This calender is also still exact thousands of years after it was made. The Mayan also performed brain surgery that we "think" actually worked. This civilization did many great things so if they did so many great things, it would make "sense" that their predictions may be correct.
Same with the Chinese in ancient times. They had many inventions that we look at and say to ourselves: "No way! How in the world could they have done that in that time period!"
While it is true that there were some interesting things that they could do in that time period. We can certainly replicate everything they were capable of doing. Our tech and astronomy is far supperior to anything they could produce. | |
|
| 2012 & astronomical facts?
Posted: 4/25/2008 3:11:33 AM |
We can certainly replicate everything they were capable of doing.
I'm not too sure we can replicate everything they were. I remember reading an article in a magazine (I think National Geographic or Pop Sci but not 100% positive) and it was about an old stone house made around the time of the Mayans in South America. I believe it was in Chile.
The special interest in this stone house was that it was not only on the side of a mountain, but that it has stood for quite a long time. This house lived through all types of conditions such as major earthquakes and it still stood.
I recall that a huge undertaking was in place (the reason for the story in the magazine) to tear down and rebuild this house. They used every type of equipment they could to take apart this house stone by stone, label everything, note where it is and how it went together, then rebuild. The problem was that the next time an earthquake came through [Note: This house has been in earthquakes notably stronger] , the house fell. Science could not reproduce this house that has stood a test of time.
I'll try to find the story. It's been a few years since it was published.
Also, it's not that we can't replicate everything they did, it is that they did it so long ago when (what we think) people didn't have the capacity to know. Such as how the Egyptians were able to line up and build the pyramids. Keep in mind on the sheer massive scale of this feat and how it has barely sunk into the sand after thousands of years. Today it is still difficult to keep a building from sinking as little as the pyramids did. | |
|
| 2012 & astronomical facts?
Posted: 4/25/2008 9:26:02 AM |
- There is solid geological evidence, that the earths geo-magnetic poles have shifted/flipped SEVERAL times.
Try several hundred or more times and there is lots of evidence the shifts. They are changing now. Measurements of the Earth's magnetic fields indicate we might be nearing one now - our magnetic field is weakening indicating a shift might be near. These shifts don't happen overnight though like what I would envision for the effects of a "rogue" planet. | |
|
| 2012 & astronomical facts?
Posted: 4/26/2008 8:11:31 AM | Dear charlie edm(Effectively Disillusioned Meteorite), I just bought 3 magnifying glasses which I will align with a Schneider-Kreuznacht camera lense and show the parallax/illusion of space time. You might want to cut and paste this into your memoirs, but do not try to take credit for what I am discovering and tell others about it yet. Thank you, Daniel | |
|
| 2012 & astronomical facts?
Posted: 4/26/2008 10:31:23 AM |
Dear charlie edm(Effectively Disillusioned Meteorite), I just bought 3 magnifying glasses which I will align with a Schneider-Kreuznacht camera lense and show the parallax/illusion of space time. You might want to cut and paste this into your memoirs, but do not try to take credit for what I am discovering and tell others about it yet. Thank you, Danie
Charlie makes a lot senses to me, so I'm not sure where&why you are coming from. | |
|
| 2012 & astronomical facts?
Posted: 4/26/2008 7:15:37 PM | | I came from an uncluttered mind frame and actually would not make a comment unless it was within the scope of the subject matter of this forum . My new special theory of relativity is relevant and within the parameters of this forum. The irresponsible interruptions that are consistently made by a few individuals are not really appropriate. If you would read previous posts you would see that a reply to a comment that I had made stated that I made the comment because I am on drugs. This is totally unacceptable and a comment such as yours quiet kowboy only encourages dingbats to frequent these forums. If one has nothing informative to say than he should say nothing at all, and I think even the moderator would agree with this. Good evening to you, sir. Daniel | |
|
| 2012 & astronomical facts?
Posted: 4/26/2008 7:37:49 PM | Quietcowboy,
Actually, a friend of mine's father in Montreal developed around 40 years ago an instrument that measured the earths wobble. The guy was an inventor. Anyway, he was completely freaked out over the years measuring this situation everytime the US or someone else did nuclear testing underground. He could measure the effects on other parts fo the planet. However, he was not able to interest any country or major institution to take his project on. He kept talking about how the earth's axis was in peril. | |
|
| 2012 & astronomical facts?
Posted: 4/26/2008 9:26:45 PM |
This is totally unacceptable and a comment such as yours quiet kowboy only encourages dingbats to frequent these forums
JUST as unacceptable as stooping to the logical fallacy [and poor decorum AND debating style] of argumentum ad hominem. In layman's terms - name-calling.
Ironically, "dingbat" is often used for people who present ideas which have little or no basis in fact or logic. Thus far, your "theories", as presented, are lacking in both logic and factual evidence. You have offered observations and explanations. Your explanations, however, have not included a logical chain of support. They are as weak as "goddidit"; since you have not defined, established the existence of, or established a causal relationship between your "cause" and your observations. In that, you are completely in agreement with this thread, which began with a premise both unsupported, and contradicted by both fact and laws of physics. | |
|
| 2012 & astronomical facts?
Posted: 4/26/2008 10:44:42 PM | | Thank you for your collaboration frog o eyes, and I hope we have come to an amicable agreement that this is somewhat of a debate and new thoughts are always welcome. My theories are not supposed to follow logic or factual evidence at this time. This is why I call it a theory. However if you would read my theory very carefully, you would see that it could explain some of the problems they are having with current theories. Remember, and I will repeat this once again. Einstein himself stated that if you have to explain something in terms that only you and a select other few could understand, you really didn't understand it yourself. I am attempting to state my theory in terms presentable to a grade school student. Let the mathematicians and astronomers and every other qualified individual prove it not a fact or otherwise. I am not interested in proving it yet because it is still a general theory and the things that need to be proved or disapproved are not yet stated in completion. However the theory is, I think,d of some interest in this forum inasmuch as it could possibly show that the rogue planet previously discussed could actually be out there in one of the spheres that are loosely described in my original very generalized theory and just hasen't swung by on it's outer edge of it's sphere. It however seems, at least to me, that it could explain at least some of the mysteries that aren't qualified by our known form of logic also known as mathematics or quantum physics or whatever man made term you wish to call it. I, for one, will readily admit that math bores me immensely. And I would not be concerned with proving anything mathematically. If you get a chance, read my original theory of relativity for the new millennium, with the mind of a child at play and forget about all that you already feel you know. Even forget about gazing at the moon as I suggested as this was only something that appeared to me as a way to explain this theory in the form of an observation as opposed to a formula. It may even help us to understand what gravity actually is. I will come forth with any new thoughts in a timely manner and do not desire fame or fortune and have no title or reputation to tarnish. Any help along the way is more than welcome but derogatory remarks will not dissuade me from stating my thoughts that are not just a loose cannon that I am shooting from my hip. Many, many hours of observation, research and thinking have gone into what I have stated and I have no hidden agenda for glory or attention. No one is required to even read what I am just beginning to propose. When you see my shady face on the left hand side of this column just move on. Or perhaps it may be of some interest to you because after all, it is a fresh and novel approach to something that has puzzled mankind ever since he could process thoughts logically or illogically. I intend to refine my theory and actually have some refinement in place that has not been stated to anyone to date. I f my theory is even distantly remotely related to fact, it could explain where the mysterious earth destroying planet would come from. And maybe all the Year 2012 people would have something new to fit into their own child like thinking. That is how I learned to ride a bicycle. I thought it out and eventually was brave enough to apply my thoughts to the task at hand, faltering somewhat at first, but eventually attaining my goal. Thank you for your attention and keep up the good work. Daniel | |
|
| 2012 & astronomical facts?
Posted: 4/26/2008 11:58:57 PM |
My theories are not supposed to follow logic or factual evidence at this time. This is why I call it a theory.
Then you do not understand the scientific process. In order to BE a theory, your hypothesis MUST be supported BOTH by logic, AND by factual evidence. With neither of those, it is only an hypothesis. To be a theory, an hypothesis must ALSO provide a more stable and reliable explanation than all other alternatives [and, incidentally, still be supported by logic and evidence].
you would see that it could explain some of the problems they are having with current theories
Maybe, but it's still equal to "goddidit". You can fabricate any explanation you like without support. If you can't back it up, it could be because it's actually impossible. For instance, no-one can prove or disprove gods exist. Therefore, if gods do not exist, any "goddidit" concepts are automatically impossible, even if they sound nice. Until you have support, you're on identical ground.
Einstein himself stated that if you have to explain something in terms that only you and a select other few could understand, you really didn't understand it yourself.
Argumentum ad verecundiam/i] fallacy. Who cares what Einstein said? The fact is, there are plenty of topics which cannot be adequately or properly explained in simple terms to laymen. You can offer an explanation which "will do", at the expense of accuracy and truth, or you can spend potentially years bringing someone "up to speed". You have a choice of understandable simplicity in many cases, versus confusing accuracy. Every case has to be weighed on its merits of the moment. Einstein was wrong.
Let the mathematicians and astronomers and every other qualified individual prove it not a fact or otherwise.
The onus is on you to PROVE your case. You haven't offered anything to refute.
I am not interested in proving it yet because it is still a general theory and the things that need to be proved or disapproved are not yet stated in completion.
Back to my first point: it's a wild guess, completely unsupported, and in essence, founded in fantasy. I don't say that to be denigrating; without any kind of support, that's what you have - fantasy. Right or wrong.
However the theory is, I think,d of some interest in this forum inasmuch as it could possibly show that the rogue planet previously discussed could actually be out there in one of the spheres that are loosely described in my original very generalized theory and just hasen't swung by on it's outer edge of it's sphere.
Again - fantasy, and NOT possibility. It's not just WITHOUT actual evidence of any sort, it's strongly contra-indicated by available evidence. This fabled planet is supposed to have massive gravity and pass by every few thousand years, but there is NO evidence of such a body that close. Gravity is universal. If the mass exists, the gravity is there and detectable. If no gravity is detected, the mass does not exist. This is entirely consistant with all observations of any massive celestial body.
It however seems, at least to me, that it could explain at least some of the mysteries that aren't qualified by our known form of logic also known as mathematics or quantum physics or whatever man made term you wish to call it.
If your explanation cannot be qualified by any of these means, you WILL find that it is actually NOT a reliable and predictable explanation AT ALL. That's the nature of these methods. If they "explain", they MUST predict. At the very least, you start with a correlation between two observable facts [if A, then B]. Thereafter, you attempt to establish a causal link between one and the other, or between them and some third factor. Then you establish a mechanism for that cause. Right now - you have no correlation. You have an "A" and no "B", but you haven't shown "A" exists. So...you've technically got...nothing.
I, for one, will readily admit that math bores me immensely.
I agree ENTIRELY!
However, I know and concede its fundamental uses.
And I would not be concerned with proving anything mathematically
Fair enough, but that goes back to "fantasy". I have on occasion have similar thoughts with regard to proving my thoughts, but I can't think I have ever made a suggestion which was in obvious contradition of observable reality [which we all live in...mostly] My fantasies don't contradict the ways in which we KNOW physics works...except in my nightmares :P
it could explain where the mysterious earth destroying planet
That would be helpful...if not for the fact that there is NO EVIDENCE IT HAS ACTUALLY HAPPENED IN THE PAST! You'd have us fearing something which has NO evidence for its existence, past or present: Pascal's wager in a nutshell. | |
|
| 2012 & astronomical facts?
Posted: 4/27/2008 5:30:52 PM | I came from an uncluttered mind frame
I found my apartment was easier to keep uncluttered when it was empty. It's interesting to see somebody who applies it so personally. | |
|
Home
login 
