Hubble image of so-called 'rogue' planet is actually a star :

April 7, 2000
BALTIMORE, Maryland (CNN) -- A distant object discovered two years ago and thought to be a planet is not a planet at all. It is actually a star, according to astronomers.

The Hubble Space Telescope image was originally thought to show the only planet ever directly observed outside our solar system. Astronomers now say the object is too hot to be a planet, and therefore must be a star.
"Astronomers now believe it is more likely that the strange object is a background star whose light has been dimmed and reddened by interstellar dust, giving the illusion that it is in the vicinity of the double star system in which it was initially believed to have been a planet," NASA said in a statement Thursday.

NASA released the image of the object called, "TMR-1C," to much fanfare in 1998, hailing it as the first extra-solar planet ever photographed. It showed a glowing dot at the end of a massive stream of gas, stretching back to a binary star in the consellation Taurus.

Astronomer Susan Terebey of the Extrasolar Research Corp. in Pasadena, CA, who analysed TMR-1C, announced at a NASA press conference in 1998 that she thought the object was a hot proto-planet that for some reason had been expelled from its star system and was shooting out into intersellar space all by itself. She did say at the time that scientists needed to make further observations to confirm her theory.

Now, in a paper on her re-evaluation of the object being published in the May Astronomical Journal, Tereby states, "The new data do not lend weight to the protoplanet interpretation, and the results remain consistent with the explanation that TMR-1C may be a background star."

NASA endorsed the new findings.

Nasa : Dec 14,2007
The solar physics community is abuzz this week. No, there haven't been any great eruptions or solar storms. The source of the excitement is a modest knot of magnetism that popped over the sun's eastern limb on Dec. 11th, pictured below in a pair of images from the orbiting Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO).I

t may not look like much, but "this patch of magnetism could be a sign of the next solar cycle," says solar physicist David Hathaway of the Marshall Space Flight Center.

For more than a year, the sun has been experiencing a lull in activity, marking the end of Solar Cycle 23, which peaked with many furious storms in 2000--2003. "Solar minimum is upon us," he says.

The big question now is, when will the next solar cycle begin?

It could be starting now.

"New solar cycles always begin with a high-latitude, reversed polarity sunspot," explains Hathaway. "Reversed polarity " means a sunspot with opposite magnetic polarity compared to sunspots from the previous solar cycle. "High-latitude" refers to the sun's grid of latitude and longitude. Old cycle spots congregate near the sun's equator. New cycle spots appear higher, around 25 or 30 degrees latitude.

The region that appeared on Dec. 11th fits both these criteria. It is high latitude (24 degrees N) and magnetically reversed. Just one problem: There is no sunspot. So far the region is just a bright knot of magnetic fields. If, however, these fields coalesce into a dark sunspot, scientists are ready to announce that Solar Cycle 24 has officially begun.

Many forecasters believe Solar Cycle 24 will be big and intense. Peaking in 2011 or 2012, the cycle to come could have significant impacts on telecommunications, air traffic, power grids and GPS systems. (And don't forget the Northern Lights!) In this age of satellites and cell phones, the next solar cycle could make itself felt as never before.

The furious storms won't start right away, however. Solar cycles usually take a few years to build to a frenzy and Cycle 24 will be no exception. "We still have some quiet times ahead," says Hathaway.

Meanwhile, all eyes are on a promising little active region. Will it become the first sunspot of a new solar cycle? Stay tuned for updates from Science@NASA.

Hey, guys, what about the Black Hole in the Milky Way? Is our orbit going to be close enough to that to matter?

No... The great flood, which is recounted in pretty well every religion, happened about 3600 years ago

Nibiru is said to be a very large/dense planet

ESTABLISHED FACTS:
- There was a great world wide flood, about 3600 years ago

- There is solid geological evidence, that the earths geo-magnetic poles have shifted/flipped SEVERAL times.

- There is solid archaeological evidence, that the earth was populated by advanced civilizations 10's of 1000's of years ago, although much of the evidence has been repressed by various religions/governments.

Scientific/mathematic calculations over the last 200 have been predicting/searching for an elusive 10th planet

- Nasa HAS discovered a large dense planet on the outside rim of our solar system. This was even reported on the CTV evening news a few years ago!

- 2012 has been predicated over the last several 1000 years (in dozens of cultures) as a time of great geological up-heaval & also of the coming of a great enlightenment & the 1000 years peace. Prophets do exist, whether you believe in them or not...

- *IF* there was the sort of impending disaster that this planet might imply, then the government would keep it covered up as long as it could...

- There is an on-going battle between the forces of enlightenment (good) & those who profit by keeping the truth from the masses. You don't think so? Then why does a gallon of gas cost 15 cents in Brazil? (BTW - that's a rhetorical question)

Negating the existence of something, does not cease it to exist...

I'm not here to try & convince anyone about anything, I'm just keeping an open mind (what a concept, eh?) & trying to weigh in all the facts, without being fed a pile of other stuff, ya know?

ESTABLISHED FACTS:
- There was a great world wide flood, about 3600 years ago.

Just take a peek on the net about all this & it will truly blow your little minds kiddies...

ESTABLISHED FACTS:
- There was a great world wide flood, about 3600 years ago.

- There is solid geological evidence, that the earths geo-magnetic poles have shifted/flipped SEVERAL times.

- There is solid archaeological evidence, that the earth was populated by advanced civilizations 10's of 1000's of years ago, although much of the evidence has been repressed by various religions/governments.

- Scientific/mathematic calculations over the last 200 have been predicting/searching for an elusive 10th planet

- Nasa HAS discovered a large dense planet on the outside rim of our solar system. This was even reported on the CTV evening news a few years ago!

- 2012 has been predicated over the last several 1000 years (in dozens of cultures) as a time of great geological up-heaval & also of the coming of a great enlightenment & the 1000 years peace. Prophets do exist, whether you believe in them or not...

But there's enough evidence for me to want to dig deeper.

Notice how there are more people posting on here, who happily slag on the potential implications of 2012

than would simply surf the net a little more, for more solid evidence?

So, I will not waste my time responding to some of the negative posts so far.

Ask a scientist in their respective field if there:
- never was a great flood

- what a 2000 year old battery looks like

- why their astronomical calculations are always slightly off
(explainable by a 10th planet)

The other planet(oids) that have been discovered in the last 10 years beyond Pluto, being about the same size as Pluto, are too small to be the rougue planet & do not intersect our orbital plane at about a 35% angle, as Nibiru is suppoesd to.

This planet would have to be very large/dense, about the size of Neptune or Uranus. To be able to flip poles...

Though this may sound rather un-scientific, UNLESS it was VERY small & VERY-VERY dense...

The best way to spot a black hole or collapsed star, is by observing the matter it influences around it (how can a black hole emit radio waves anyway?). But *IF* it were in a matterless region of space (like beyond the asteroid belt, beyond Uranus) then there wouldn't be a way to spot it UNTIL it moved closer to any other matter.

The confirmed linchpin for the fall of the late Bronze Age cultures, the Middle Eastern Civilizations, and other recorded disasters that are found to be "around that time," seems to be the period from 1644 BC to 1628 BC. The ice cores show the disturbances starting in 1644 (registering in 1645) and the tree rings show a big spike in 1628, though the entire period was disturbed.

Yoshiyuki Fujii and Okitsugu Watanabe's "Microparticle Concentration And Electrical Conductivity of A 700 m Ice Core from Mizuho Station Antarctic" published in Annals of Glaciology (1-, 1988) pp. 38-42, demonstrate that "large scale environmental changed possibly occurred in the Southern Hemisphere in the middle of the Holocene. (Within the last 10,000 years). Their depth profiles of microparticle concentration, electrical conductivity and Oxygen 18 at circa 1600 BC indicates a spike in readings for all of these elements. The evidence shows that this disturbance covered this designated period, but with a "huge spike" at c. 1600 BC

Similar evidence from the same source article exists at 5200 BC. This period shows a less severe but similar period. The oxygen 18 profile is close to normal, but there is a visible volcanic dirt band. The dating of this segment is less close because it is clear that nobody is really looking for this cycle, but it appears to correspond to the ash band from the Byrd station core.

It is conjectured that the cycle goes unnoticed because of long term aftereffects, such as cooling climate, as well as the fact that each cycle has greater or lesser effects on the earth depending on its relative position in the solar system at the time.

What is clear is that whatever comes at 3600 year intervals as shown by the ice cores, is capable of setting off prolonged periods of earth changes that are above the levels of ordinary uniformitarian geologic and climatalogical changes. But the evidence suggests that it is a shower of asteroids or coments that are NOT seen until it is TOO LATE.

In an article in Nature, November 1980, Hammer, Clausen and Dansgaard date a disturbance from the Camp Century core to 5470 BC +/- 120 years. This compares to the proposed Hekla eruption which was radiocarbon dated to 5450 BC +/- 190 years. There is an appreciably high acidity signal at these sections of the core which indicates a high level of volcanic activity - again, right at the 3600 year cycle mark.

Looking further: Michel R. Legrand and Robert J. Delmas of Laboratoire de Glaciologie et Geophysique de l'Environment published an article "Soluble Impurities in Four Antarctic Ice Cores Over the Last 30,000 Years" in Annals of Glaciology (10, 1988, pp 116-120). They graphed the Oxygen 18 variations and the ionic components Na = NH (sub4) and Ca (sup 2) and H and Cl and NO (sub 3) and SO (sub 4). The time scale for each ionic component level as well as the O (sup 18) levels stretches back 30,000 years. The graph shows correlations to spikes at 5,200 BC, 8,800 BC, 12,400 BC, c. 16,000 BC, c. 19,600 BC. All of these were times of great geologic stress.

When looking at the data and taking into account the acknowledged dating inaccuracies (some of the ranges of dates can go 100 years in either direction of the spike, even though the spiking is regular and rhythmic) for the more recent dates, and 3 to 600 years variance for the older dates - especially when one considers that these are broad analyses and nobody was really looking for anything specific - they just said "wow! look at that wavy line!" we find that the southern ice cores do not register the same as the northern ones. The 1628 BC event that really slammed the tree rings shows almost no registration in the Antarctic cores in terms of volcanic activity. But the northern cores show the activity beginning 1644 BC.

The evidence for the 5200 BC event is strong in the Dome C core. The 8,800 BC event is well marked - in fact, seems to be the strongest of them all... The Flood of Noah, no doubt! The oxygen 18 isotope variation is noticeable, the rise in sea-salt, elevated levels of C 1 and C1/Na. There is an extreme spike in SO (sub 4) and H readings suggesting widespread volcanic activity - great earth changes were happening at that time, and they registered in the climate, the oceans, and were preserved in ice.

The 12400 BC event is extremely pronounced in the cores. The graphs show a quick, vast change including the end of the Wisconsin Ice Age.(See: Evidence of Nuclear Activity in Paleoindian Times) There is a great Oxygen 18 isotope variation. Peaks of Na and very pronounced spikes in Ca, SO (sub 4) and H.

To ascribe all of these things to a "uniformitarian" idea that it just got cold and then got warm and got cold and warm... with such an evident cycle is sort of absurd. To ascribe it to a "galactic core explosion" is equally absurd. To ascribe it to "Galactic Alignment" is not worth consideration.

I think that, based on the observations of the ancients that what we are looking for is a recurring shower of comets that cycles through the solar system regularly, on a 3,600 year orbit. What is more, it seems that this body of comets, clustered together resembles a Fiery serpent with a mouthful of devouring teeth in the blackness of space. For this reason, it was given the name spdt, spdw, and spd-ibhw (sharp toothed), in the Pyramid Texts. It undoubtedly is a terrifying spectacle!

Of course, an important question is: what is the "initiator" of these showers, and did they begin in some interaction with an outside agent?"

According to scientific studies about the possibilities of our Sun having a companion, periodic comets were "bumped" into the solar system by a dark star, a "little brother" or "little sister" of our own Sun, which has a long, elliptical orbit measured, most likely, in millions of years.

If it is a companion star, present day science pretty clearly demonstrates that it must have a very long period, otherwise, we would notice it quite plainly in orbital perturbations of a certain type. In actual fact, the computer model that best fits the various dynamics is that of a 27 million year orbit. And this, of course, leads us to a considerable difficulty: the period of return of the Dark Star, as opposed to the period of disasters. Obviously, a body with a 27 million year orbit isn't likely to be remembered. However, an ancient advanced science may have certainly figured it out and it was remembered and passed down in fantastic myths and legends.

J. G. Hills of Los Alamos National Laboratory writes:

Two groups have recently suggested that the Sun may have a low-mass stellar or black dwarf companion, nemesis, with an orbital period of 26 million years )Davis, Hut, and Muller, 1984) Whitmire and Jackson, 1984). They note that the perihelion passage of Nemesis throught the inner comet cloud postulated by Hills (1981) would cause an intense comet shower to enter the inner planetary system. Some comets hit the Earth, causing severe environmental stress. They propose that these induced comet showers are responsible for the periodic extinctions suggested by the data of Raup and Sepkoski (1984).[1]

The work by these experts suggests that the observations of other binary systems demonstrate the model for the projected separation they have given. Such paired stars are "physically connected systems," and that these brown dwarfs are "burning," though non-nuclear.

The minimum mass needed to perturb the inner Oort cloud to produce such showers is, according to Hills, 0.01 percent of the Mass of the Sun.

Hills writes:

In the current paper, I use computer simulations to investigate the potential damage caused by the passage of a Nemesis-like object through the planetary system. I use these computer results and the apparent lack of damage to the planetary orbits to place limits on the number and masses of any other black dwarfs (or large planets) within the Oort cloud. [...]

We conclude from the lack of damage to the planetary orbits that it is extremely unlikely that any object more massive than 0.02 percent of the Mass of the Sun dwells in an orbit with a semimajor axis in the range 10,000 to 40,000 AU. [1]