>>13050003 pb

>Planet X is on its way to earth from deep space, and once it collides…

the odds of a collision are on the order of winning powerball and megamillions every drawing for a year. this is the more likely scenario.

95+% of the stars we can observe are binary or even ternary. solitary stars are a rarity. so it's more than possible

that our sun has a companion star. since we haven't seen it, it's got to be either a brown dwarf (too small for fusion),

or a massive neutron star. and there is ample evidence to support this. we know the earth's axis of rotation precesses.

but that precession was measured against the fixed (distant) stars of our galaxy. we had no way to measure the precession

of earth's axis of rotation relative to bodies within our own solar system. until recently. recently this was done,

and it was discovered that the axis of earth's rotation does NOT precess relative to the sun or the other planets.

and THAT means that the ENTIRE SOLAR SYSTEM is precessing in unison, as a whole body.

and THAT means something had to set it off. something MASSIVE. something like a massive dark neutron star

companion to the sun, in a highly elliptical orbit that approaches perihelion once every 25,000 yrs, coinciding with the period

of the precession. since there is NOT a mass extinction every 25,000 yrs in the geologic record, we can safely conclude

it will NOT destroy all life on earth. but it MAY cause major disruptions to the fragile hi-tech infrastructure

upon which humans are utterly dependent. it's orbit would likely take it beyond the OORT cloud, so when it approaches,

it will in all likelihood be dragging a trail of comets behind it, and we might well see a period of comparatively

higher risk of cometary impacts, one of which MIGHT be big enough to cause more damage than say the chelyabinsk event,

or the tunguska event. an ocean impact could result in massive tidal waves. IF it's approaching soon, astronomer

SHOULD have seen it by now, and there HAVE been numerous "mysterious" deaths of prominent astronomers

around the world in the past decade. so they MIGHT have already plotted the date of the stars perihelion.

as for calculating the time and location of potential comet impacts, that is rather less likely, tho not impossible.

dig on this if you like. i am not going to respond to requests/demands for sauce. i AM the sauce. take it or leave it.

>>13050254

>mini black hole

is an oxymoron. no such animal.

>causes pole flip.

unrelated to magnetic pole flips. those are an artifact of the molten core's convection currents, and it has already begun. it's a slow process on our timescale, taking about 1000yrs. get ahold of the DVD "NOVA: Magnetic Storm" or stream it on PBS.org.

>>13050266

>Planet X could miss us by miles and

>still cause mass destruction due to

>High Tides !

pretty sure that's what i said.

it WILL almost certainly miss earth by a hundred million miles or more, not coming closer to us than the sun.

>>13050302

>Again, no confirming observations.

are you sure? this was reported back in 1993. then quite mysteriously, all discussion of it suddenly gone.

>>13050293

>If it comes closer than the moon . . .

it's FAR more massive than the moon, so it doesn't need to come as close as the moon to have a detectable effect.

but high tides are NOT the most like way that it will cause disruption to our fragile infrastructure.

>>13050332

>Did someone sayA-12?

no. no one said that.

that refers to SECTION A, PAGE 12, COLUMN 1. you must be a millennial who's never seen a newspaper.

or a 'tard making a VERY lame joke.

>>13050325

>may have ships like that

"may" LOL.

>>13050348

>huge black spot would be easy to see

FFS, the diameter of the sun is 100 times greater that the earth's. how big does it look at 93m miles? how big would it look at 100b miles? maybe you weren't paying attention recently when people were making a big deal about the apparent brightness of betelgeuse dimming for a period of weeks? betelgeuse is IN orion, skippy. think it might have been the companion dwarf and the gravitationally entrained comets getting in the way?

>>13050357

>What tripping paper was this shit from?

look closer before you type. the paper was the WaPo. and the 50m was a typo, the original report was 50b miles.

>>13050392

grown-ups are talking. children should be seen and not heard. in fact, we don't want to see you, either.

>>13050017

TYB. gonna do a double no-no and self nominate a thread…

>>13050215

>>13050320 (50m is a typo, should be 50b)

>>13050374

>>13050348

>huge black spot would be easy to see

at it's closest approach to earth, jupiter is only 370m miles away. how "huge" does jupiter look? planet x is roughly the same size as jupiter. how easy to spot would it be if it were totally black, and 50b miles away? IDIOT.

>>13050454

>Didn't CERN move us away from the timeline

put the "graphic novels" down and step away from the keyboard. adults are talking science.

>>13050472

>>13050476

>The LHC and Quantom Mechanics is similar to science.

the LHC is most definitely science. your understanding of it's operation and results are likely NOT.

QUANT__U__M mechanics is most definitely NOT science, it's pure mathematics, and a MODEL, not reality.

>>13050508

>wiki…i know better but:

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Becklin%E2%80%93Neugebauer_Object

wiki is FINE for most shit, at least as a place to find primary references.

however, that object is 1500 ly away. not planet x, which was 50b miles away in 1993.

>>13050518

>all science is theory.

WRONG. science is direct observation of reality. from that there are TWO lines of reasoning, deductive and inductive. deductive aims to understand the mechanism of something that happened. it IS provable beyond any shadow of a doubt. inductive reasoning leads to predictions about the FUTURE, and THOSE are always uncertain. read a fucking book before you waste people's time with kindergarden level posts.

>>13050522

>I Am Higgs Boson.

if you mean DENSE, i won't disagree…

>>13050541

>It's like using a hammer to open a swiss watch, to see how it works. Sure, you get to see the internal parts, but they are smushed.

actually a very apt analogy. and the VERY real question remains, at what point are we merely resolving the target into components that already existed, and when are we actually creating new bits that never existed within the target. high energy physics is on the fringe of what many consider "real" science.

>>13050577

>Don't worry, it's all run by atheists.

didn't realize you personally know every scientist in the world. i only know a few hundred, maybe a thousand if you count long-distance correspondence, and that includes a couple nobel laureates. and almost ALL of the ones i know are devout Christians.

"if you remain silent, people may think it's because you're stupid. but if you speak, you remove all doubt." - mark twain

>>13050595

>How time flies.

time flies like an arrow.

but fruit flies like bananas.

>>13050602

>"run by"

feeble attempt to walk back a stupid comment. but there is SOME truth to it, so i'll allow it.

>>13050609

>@15:34 plugs drop the N bomb

I CALL BULLSHIT! he does NOT say niggers, he says LEADERS. but he chews his words so badly because of muh alzheimers.

>>13050615

>Feeble attempt to deny that you stretched my comment way beyond its extent, just like Fake News.

i gave you an out, to allow you to save some face, but you just couldn't drop it. by all means, continue to prove mark twain right.

>>13050606

>heating them via dielectric heating.

that is terminology that is in use, but it is an unfortunate choice, because it's very misleading to the semi-literate or totally illiterate audience. a much better description is that the rf energy is absorbed and converted to molecular vibrations (heat) and leave the word "dielectric" out.

>>13050642

GFY, assbreath. you think it improbable for someone who's been a university research professor for 45 yrs to know a thousand other scientists? you're a retard.

.>>13050661

>the sun has a companion star that orbits the sun once per year so it is always hidden from view from Earth

sure it does. btw, did you know that there are multiple spacecraft that orbit the sun and observe it from multiple angles. no "hidden" star exists, sparky. now put down the "graphic novels" and step away from the keyboard.

>>13050673

it's not even bait anymore, shill.

>>13050667

trust me, i'm FAR more acquainted with the drawbacks of peer-review than you. you obviously DON'T know that scientist frequently communicate "unpopular" results directly between each other, bypassing journals completely. now why don't you stop pretending to know all about the inner workings of scientific research before you make an even bigger ass of yourself.

>>13050687

>is that why Oumuamua was only on the radar after it was already on the way out?

first off, you're comparing a rock a few meters in diameter to a planet-sized body. second, no one is disputing that many objects have simply not been observed yet. it's KINDA the whole point of all my posts. every day, dozens of previously unseen objects make a close approach to earth, or even strike it. but again, these are dark specks a few meters in diameter.

>>13050707

>science is what makes man and not what man makes

>God is in control

It was six men of Indostan

To learning much inclined,

Who went to see the Elephant

(Though all of them were blind),

That each by observation

Might satisfy his mind.

The First approached the Elephant,

And happening to fall

Against his broad and sturdy side,

At once began to bawl:

"God bless me! but the Elephant

Is very like a wall!"

The Second, feeling of the tusk

Cried, "Ho! what have we here,

So very round and smooth and sharp?

To me 'tis mighty clear

This wonder of an Elephant

Is very like a spear!"

The Third approached the animal,

And happening to take

The squirming trunk within his hands,

Thus boldly up he spake:

"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant

Is very like a snake!"

The Fourth reached out an eager hand,

And felt about the knee:

"What most this wondrous beast is like

Is mighty plain," quoth he;

"'Tis clear enough the Elephant

Is very like a tree!"

The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,

Said: "E'en the blindest man

Can tell what this resembles most;

Deny the fact who can,

This marvel of an Elephant

Is very like a fan!"

The Sixth no sooner had begun

About the beast to grope,

Than, seizing on the swinging tail

That fell within his scope.

"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant

Is very like a rope!"

And so these men of Indostan

Disputed loud and long,

Each in his own opinion

Exceeding stiff and strong,

Though each was partly in the right,

And all were in the wrong!

Moral:

So oft in theologic wars,

The disputants, I ween,

Rail on in utter ignorance

Of what each other mean,

And prate about an Elephant

Not one of them has seen.

>>13050716

this is a fairly accurate monograph… follow the references to original sources.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telomerase

>>13050740

a popular mantra among the great masses of the illiterati, too lazy to do the work of educating themselves, but eager to condemn.

you can criticize all you want, AFTER you've been there and done that. otherwise you're just a pretentious asshole.

>>13050756

<first off, you're comparing a rock a few meters in diameter to a planet-sized body.

>No. I am stating that the science "community" doesn't actually know what it it is talking about half the time

FALSE. you WERE absolutely comparing a planet to a rock. too late to walk that back.

now as far as the "science community" being wrong half the time, i never said they weren't. in fact i'd say more than half. but YOU don't seem to understand that's HOW SCIENCE WORKS. theories are discarded and replaced on a DAILY BASIS. everyone agrees with the "theory du jour" until new evidence surfaces, then they will all agree with the new theory of tomorrow. there's no contradiction, only in the tiny minds of illiterates who have no clue, and no business engaging in such discussions.

>>13050770

>riiiight… quantum physics is all theory, no lasers, no transistors, no solar cells, no quantum computers, no superconductors…

you're confusing hardware and experimental results, with the stories that are made-up to rationalize those results. go back to 5th grade.

>>13050785

THIS

>is that why Oumuamua was only on the radar after it was already on the way out?

is what you said. you compared a rock to a planet (nibiru, planet x, etc).

(You) GFY.

>>13050782

next time you want to post to 8kun, turn off your computer, disconnect your house from the grid, and pray that your message appears here.

"render unto God the things that are God's, and unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's"

when you understand that, c'mon back and spurge some more.

>>13050803

>Exceptt hat was a question, not a statement

it was a rhetorical question, which is a statement in passive-aggressive form.

they found it because it passed a mere 21m miles away, and they stumbled upon it, like finding a needle in a haystack by accidentally getting jabbed. i'll leave the red text to you, jackoff.

>>13050822

>all that you think you know is a lie.

so you, possessing no knowledge, believe you understand the difference between knowledge and wisdom BETTER

than someone who does possess knowledge? and you believe that's wisdom?

when you can explain exactly what that diagram says, i'll bow to your superior wisdom. 'til then, you're just another 'tard with a 'tude.

>>13050770

>no lasers, no transistors, no solar cells, no quantum computers, no superconductors…

lasers were postulated based on the wave nature of light, which was known hundreds of years ago, long before QM.

transistors were postulated in 1926 by an electrical engineer who never heard of QM

solar cells are an application of the photoelectric effect, first observed hundreds of years ago.

superconductors are based on the wave nature of electrons in atomic orbitals, postulated long before QM.

the quantum computer is the only thing that conceived after QM, and i've yet to see one.

>>13050850

>do you know what reliance upon ad hominem attacks signify

that you're incapable of a rational intelligent discussion? that you believe you have some innate "spiritual" superiority that gives your delusions some kind of authority? who is being the hypocrite here? me professing what i have learned thru a lifetime of hard work, or you posing as a divinely inspired omniscient being?

>>13050862

>wave nature of electrons in atomic orbitals, postulated long before QM

tired. should have read "wave nature of electrons OBSERVED long before QM."

>>13050876

>you are just wrong.

still waiting for the explanation of the diagram YOU posted….