Has Niburu Planet X Been Sighted Pt II by Laura Knight-Jadczyk Article - Laura Knight-Jadczyk Support Cassiopaea! Cassiopaea relies completely on individual reader contributions. This allows us to keep our independence. Contributing Editors Laura Knight-Jadczyk Sam Montgomery Joe Quinn Henry See Susan Jesson-Ward Signs of the Times Articles Esoteric Christianity To Be or Not To Be Splitting Realities OPs: The Other Race The Bogdanov Singularity Quantum Future School Support The Quantum Future School Has Nibiru/Planet X Been Sighted? Immanuel Velikovsky demonstrated rather convincingly that there was massive evidence of both a literary and scientific nature that great catastrophic earth changes had occurred during the second millennium BC due to cometary showers and the close passage of Venus. He settled on a date of 1450 BC, but more recent scientific evidence points to the date actually being 1628 BC. There is also evidence for a disruption circa 5200 BC, 8,800 BC, 12,400 BC, 16,000 BC, 19,600 BC, and by logical extension every 3,600 years previously for an indefinite and unknown period of time. What is more, if the last "return" was in 1628 BC, we are not just due, we are overdue for the next one. The theories about Nibiru do not take into account many of the literary reports from the ancients regarding these great bombardments of comets. Velikovsky tried to account for this by suggesting that a cometary Venus was hauling around a tail of rocks. It seems that Velikovsky and his supporters, and Sitchin and his supporters, although recognizing serious worldwide catastrophes, have failed to recognize the true nature of such events. Velikovsky proposed that Venus out of orbit was a more or less one-time event rather than a symptom of a long term cycle. Sitchin came closer with his understanding of the cycle, but he failed to consider all the variables in his solution. What is more, once he settled on his idea as the one and only solution, his efforts to make the mythical elements fit the hypothesis became almost as absurd as the efforts of mainstream science to avoid them! 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] What Hills is clearly saying is this: If it is out there, it never enters the Inner Solar system. Thus, we understand that it is not this Twin sun that makes its "appearance" at each period of catastrophe. Nevertheless, the analyses of the periodic comets suggests that it does, at very long periods, again and again, crash through the Oort cloud like a bowling ball through rows of pins, sending a new collection of them spinning into a periodical orbit, and because of the laws of celestial mechanics, they establish an orbit of 3,600 years. This idea has some support from SCIENTIFIC STUDIES, which the theory of the Planet Nibiru as a visitor to the inner solar system does NOT. Discovering the details requires research. And research requires a hypothesis. And a hypothesis requires admitting possibilities and making observations that are not predicated on assumptions that have proven again and again to be inadequate to explain the order of the universe. At present, there are very few "experts" who are even looking into the matter of our sun having a companion. You can count them on the fingers of one hand. There are more "experts" on Brown Dwarfs, but most of them seem to be limited by the same conventions that restrict science in general. For example: A group of summer students making a long-shot astronomical gamble with the National Science Foundation's (NSF) Very Large Array (VLA) have found the first radio emission ever detected from a brown dwarf, an enigmatic object that is neither a star nor a planet, but something in between. Their surprising discovery is forcing experts to re-think their theories about how brown dwarfs work. "Many astronomers are surprised at this discovery, because they didn't expect such strong radio emission from this object," said Shri Kulkarni, a Caltech professor who was on the team that first discovered a brown dwarf in 1995, and advisor to one of the students. "What is so cool is that this is research that probably nobody else would have tried to do because of its low chance of success. That made it ideal for summer students -- we had almost nothing to lose," said Kate Becker, a student at Oberlin College in Ohio. "The radio emission these students discovered coming from this brown dwarf is 10,000 times stronger than anyone expected," said Dale Frail, an astronomer at the National Radio Astronomy Observatory (NRAO) in Socorro, NM. "This student project is going to open up a whole new area of research for the VLA," Frail added. Brown dwarfs are too big to be planets but too small to be true stars, as they have too little mass to trigger hydrogen fusion reactions at their cores, the source of the energy output in larger stars. With roughly 15 to 80 times the mass of Jupiter, the largest planet in our Solar System, brown dwarfs had long been thought to exist. Actually finding them, however, proved difficult. After decades of searching, astronomers found the first brown dwarf in 1995, and a few dozen now are known. The strong radio emission was unexpected because brown dwarfs, according to conventional theories, are not supposed to have magnetic fields strong enough to generate the radio emission. "The presumed internal structure of a brown dwarf will not permit a strong enough magnetic field," said Frail. "It looks like we're going to have to re-examine how we believe brown dwarfs work," he said. (National Radio Astronomy Observatory, http://www.nrao.edu) Imagine, students discovered something that, according to the standard theories, had no right to exist. Note that the emission is 10,000 times stronger than "expected." Not 10 times, not 100 times, not even 1000 times! It is 10,000 times stronger! Ark: In 1985 Los Alamos scientist J.G. Hills published a paper [1] analyzing possible consequences of a passage of a hypothetical stellar companion, ‘Nemesis’. He estimated the probability for its orbit to be perturbed by a passing star to be 15%. Judging by the lack of evident damage to the planetary orbits (all orbits being nearly circular, with some irregularities for Neptune and Pluto), Hills concluded that that no black dwarf more massive than 0.02 of the mass of the Sun has entered the planetary system from interstellar space. That does not preclude the possibility that Nemesis can cyclically send cometary showers towards the internal solar system. Moreover, his conclusions are based on the assumption that there are no corrections to the standard laws of gravitation, which assumption may change in the future, when more data become available from the deep space probes, and when we learn more about the role of electric and magnetic interactions of cosmic bodies and of space plasma. LBL (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory) physicist Richard Muller devised the Nemesis theory [2] to account for regularity of the mass extinctions discovered by Raup and Sepkowski [3] According to this theory a companion star, called also cosmic terrorist Nemesis, orbiting the Sun, perturbs the Oort comet cloud every 26 millions years causing comet showers in the solar system. Muller believes Nemesis is most likely a red dwarf star, magnitude between 7 and 12, that should be visible with binoculars once localized. In 1999 Matese, Whitman and Whitmire published a paper [4] in which they came to a similar conclusions by statistical analysis of 82 new class I Oort cloud comets. The next paper, entitled Supportive Evidence for a Brown Dwarf Solar Companion, [5] uses an extended database which has increased the number of comets from 82 to 89. The putative brown dwarf is expected to be located somewhere along the arc of 135 and 135+180=315 degrees of galactic longitude: Figure 11 Graph by Matese showing cometary scatter patterns which may suggest the orbit of the “Perturber.” By permission. When we look at the mythology of the "Winged Disc" that occurs in both Mesopotamia and Ancient Egypt, we begin to realize that this symbol does not refer to a "Tenth Planet, " but to the presence in our own solar system of the Sun's dark sister, a failed star classified as a "brown dwarf." It also seems to be the one hypothesis that encompasses all the "sub-hypotheses" of the many researchers who have attempted to deal with different aspects of the problems of the past and future of the earth. Sitchin proposed that a "10th Planet" caroms through the inner solar system. Scientific evidence does not support a body the size he suggests, entering into the inner solar system. However, science can support a cluster of comets spread out in space that returns at 3,600 year intervals. Sitchin suggests that his 10th planet is inhabited by the Annunaki/Nefilim. He claims that they are our creators and masters. His ideas are tremendously out of synch with the strong circumstantial evidence about the alien presence on this planet. Sitchin's ideas are also flawed for the other reasons we have already mentioned, though he has certainly produced inspired work in his interpretations of the Sumerian texts as being related to "alien interactions" and the periodic return of something! Other theorists suggest that the Dark Companion of the Sun has its own habitable planetary system, home to the mythical 'gods' of the ancient world. This theory, that a brown dwarf with its own planetary system, is able to pass through the Oort cloud and the Kuiper belt, keeping its own mini-solar system intact, is obviously extremely problematical. In the same way that Sitchin simply passes right over the problems of Nibiru seeding life on earth, forgetting that evolutionary processes that are being postulated must apply to both bodies, the creator of the "Dark Star: Have Planets; Will Travel" theory also does not consider the fundamental problem of such an idea. The two great themes of myth are the yearning for the golden age and a terror of a world destroying catastrophe. And the two ideas are inextricably linked to each other. In virtually all of the stories about the Fall from Eden and the Flood of Noah, the great celestial bodies in the heavens were said to have been out of control. Kochab is an obscure Arabic name that might simply mean "star." It is just barely the second brightest, and appropriately the Beta, star in Ursa Minor, and represents the top front bowl star of the Little Dipper. Only 15 degrees from the north celestial pole, middle northerners can see it every night as it follows its small circular path. Together with the other bowl star (Pherkad, the Gamma star), it makes a small asterism called the "Guardians of the Pole." In myth, it seems that the function of these stars is to "protect" the pole star. (This star has run out of hydrogen fuel and is an evolving orange giant star running on helium, giving off infrared light). The importance of this star is that it was referred to as the `Mill Peg' and with the other stars surrounding the North Pole, was called the "hole of the mill peg because they represent as it were, a hole (the axle ring) in which the mill axle turns since the axle of the equator (the polar axis) is to be found in this region, fairly close to the star Al-jadi (Polaris). There is a myth associated with this that the Mill Peg which held the earth upright had broken loose and the polar axis had tilted. Now the serpent connected to the Garden of Eden story and Draconis was the old, evil serpent. The constellation Draco and Hercules and Ophiuchus and Serpens are associated in ancient mythology, illustrating the struggle between mankind a… truncated (33,375 more characters in archive)