Exposing PseudoAstronomy

January 25, 2009

Planet X and 2012: The Real and Historical Story of Planet X


This is the first post in what will become a series of posts over the next few days/weeks about the oft-portrayed mysterious, dangerous, possibly alien-harboring, Earth-destroying object touted as “Planet X.”

This being a blog about pseudo-astronomy, you should not be surprised to learn by reading it that there is no dangerous Planet X out there that’s going to cause a pole shift as Earth goes through the “dark rift” of our galaxy in 2012. However, in this first post, I’m going to describe what the real Planet X was in astronomy, a mystery that was created with the discovery of the planet Uranus in 1781, and didn’t end until we precisely calculated the mass of Neptune in 1993.

All posts in this series:

Finding Uranus

Until 1781, the solar system was known to consist of Earth, Venus, Mercury, Sun, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn, along with the moon, some other moons, and some unexplainable and unpredictable comets. That was it, and it wasn’t until William Herschel observed a ball-like object (not star-like) moving among the fixed background stars.

It took two years for Herschel to admit that he had really discovered the first planet in recorded history. But since it was discovered after Newton created Calculus and Kepler the Laws of Planetary Motion, various astronomers and mathematicians were able to observe it and predict its orbit based on its distance from the sun and the gravitational interactions with other planets.

The First Planet X

One of these people was Alexis Bouvard, who published tables of dates and coordinates that predicted where Uranus should be at a given time. These were based on the known laws of physics. But, Uranus refused to follow Bouvard’s tables.

In 1843, John Couch Adams (from Britain) calculated the orbit of a hypothesized eighth planet that could account for Uranus’ odd orbit. But no one really seemed to care about this undiscovered Planet X.

Two years later, a Frenchman by the name of Urbain Le Verrier did the same thing, but more precisely. Again, no one seemed to care. That was until Le Verrier sent his calculations to the Berlin Observatory’s astronomer Johann Gottfried Galle. A then-student at the observatory, Heinrich d’Arrest, convinced Galle to look for it.

That evening, September 23, 1846, Galle looked for this mysterious planet, responsible for Uranus’ weird orbit, and he found the planet within 1° of where Le Verrier thought it would be (for reference, the moon on the sky is 0.5°). This was within 12° of where Adams thought it should be.

At the time, there was no real debate that this object was a “planet,” as they had been looking for it and thought it was massive enough to account for Uranus’ orbit.

The Second Planet X

However, there were still some unexplained perturbations of Uranus’ orbit. These persisted for 70 years, to the time that Percival Lowell became interested in the problem and wanted to search for a now possible ninth planet at his observatory in New Mexico. I think that he was the one who really first coined the term, “Planet X.” Lowell searched for 12 years, 1905-1916, until he died, without finding it.

The search resumed in 1929 when the then-director of the observatory assigned the task to a young, 23-year-old Clyde Tombaugh. After a year of fruitless searching, Toubaugh found an object moving against the background of stars from two photographs he had taken in January of 1930. Pluto was discovered, Planet X, that was supposed to solve all the orbital problems.

A Third Planet X? — Nope, Just Fixing Neptune’s Mass

When Pluto was initially discovered, it was assumed to weigh in at several times Earth’s mass. However, estimates over subsequent decades were refined down, not up, and it was realized that Pluto could not account for Uranus’ orbit. The present-day mass estimate is about 20% Earth’s.

The search half-heartedly didn’t really continue for a mystery object that could explain planets’ orbits.

In 1989, the space probe Voyager 2 flew by Neptune. Calculations based on the orbital changes from that gravitational interaction were published in 1993 by Myles Standish, and they revised Neptune’s mass downward by 0.5%. This revised mass, when put into the calculations for the orbits of the outer planets, was then able to precisely account for Uranus’ orbit. No mystery object was needed, nor found, and as a result, nearly all astronomers today discount its existence.

Modern-Day “Planet Xs” (The Real Ones)

To be sure, I do not mean to imply that there are no more large objects out in the solar system. But “large” is always a relative term that needs to be qualified. The proton is gigantic relative to an electron. A sequoia tree is large relative to an oak. And Neptune is large relative to Pluto.

What I mean by “large” in this context is 100s to possibly 1000s of kilometers in diameter, icy bodies much like Pluto. These are the Kuiper Belt Objects, or at least the large members of the Kuiper Belt Objects. To-date, (January 2009), 4 are large enough such that the International Astronomical Union has termed them “Dwarf Planets” (Pluto, Eris, Makemake, Haumeamea). These objects are “large,” but they are smaller than our moon (our moon is 3,474 km in diameter). And, since density is related to volume which is the cube of a linear measurement, the actual mass of these objects is much smaller than that of a planet.

But, But, But … There Could Still Be Giant Things Out There!

Maybe. But they would have to be very far away from the 8 planets and inner Kuiper Belt Objects. Remember, even with the technology over 160 years ago, astronomers were able to calculate that Uranus, an object 19x farther away from the sun than Earth was being very slightly perturbed by an object 30x farther away from the sun than Earth. And these were both objects that weigh about a dozen times more than Earth – fairly small compared with what modern-day Planet Xers are claiming (that will be addressed in future posts).

Nothing in science is locked in stone, so-to-speak, and it’s impossible to prove a negative. However, keep in mind now that we can explain all the orbits of the planets with known, observed solar system objects. For there to be another object out there, it either has to be very small, or it has to be very far away. And when things are very far away, they take a very long time to move. Even a comet out by Jupiter heading towards us would take at least a year to get to Earth. And we could see it. The idea that there is a massive, planet-sized object that will hit or pass by Earth in just 4 years is ridiculous, unless you invoke the supernatural or physics that we don’t know about that can somehow shield even gravity.

Final Thoughts

Now that you have a historic basis for the present-day Planet X claims, as well as some preliminary information on why we “know” (as far as science can know anything) that there is no doomsday planet headed for us in 4 years, I will actually address the various fear-mongering premises that have been posited about Planet X, and how it is supposed to destroy Earth (or not?!), land ETs on Earth that want all our gold, or will cause a pole shift (another ridiculous idea that has its own problems), or whatever else people have invented throughout the past few decades.



  1. sitchin makes it very clear in his book End of Days that Nibiru will return in about 900 years so it is “very far away” so what you write about is nonsense

    Comment by norman cohan — February 24, 2009 @ 11:27 am | Reply

    • Simply can he prove it the same way astronomers can prove their observations and have those confirmed by other astronomers ?

      Comment by espressofrog — February 6, 2010 @ 2:13 am | Reply

    • Does Sitchin make it very clear in his book End of Days that he was instructed by the Pope John Paul to write that book, that Planet X is an invention of the Vatican, and that he wrongly translated Nibiru as a planet when other scholars of Sumerian state the word in Babylonian astronomy refers to Marduk and a star god? And that he is a disinformer working within the Illuminati?

      Comment by Sue — February 18, 2010 @ 12:17 pm | Reply

  2. Norman – You’ll note that this post has nothing to do with Sitchin’s Nibiru. This post is purely about what actual astronomers have termed “Planet X” over the past few centuries, as well as to broadly point out how planetary bodies are discovered. Sitchin’s ideas are completely separate from this and briefly addressed in other posts on this series of Planet X and 2012, and you should note that no where do I claim he believes it will approach in 2012.

    However, Sitchin does not own the idea of a rogue “Planet X” and there are many other people with other ideas about it, and some think it will come by in 2012. These are what I address in other posts.

    In short, your comment is simply a non sequitur.

    Comment by astrostu206265 — February 24, 2009 @ 1:00 pm | Reply

  3. […] Planet X: The real and historical story of Planet X […]

    Pingback by 2012hoax: Agpage — May 14, 2009 @ 10:17 am | Reply

  4. […] Planet X: The real and historical story of Planet X […]

    Pingback by 2012hoax: Astrogeek — May 14, 2009 @ 1:33 pm | Reply

  5. […] Planet X: The real and historical story of Planet X […]

    Pingback by 2012hoax: Links — May 14, 2009 @ 10:52 pm | Reply

  6. Do normal, everyday astronomers, have access to all the high resolution telescopes? Or do they relay information and pictures they receive from NASA? I have heard the major observatories are really for the most part locked down, and their is significant waiting list to get any viewing time on them. Also NSA does control NASA, so why should I believe the information they say is “OK” for public consumption? I would like to believe you, but I am personally familiar with the inner workings of this government, and thus a little dubious of the mission of this website.
    My apologies for any spelling errors. This was done without the aid of spellcheck.

    Thank You,


    Comment by Sean — June 21, 2009 @ 8:01 pm | Reply

    • Any data collected by a public (US government) telescope, such as Hubble, is required to be released to the public within a certain period of time, usually 6 or 12 months, because it is, well, public.

      I’m not sure where you’re getting this idea that the NSA “controls” NASA. That sounds like a general conspiracy theory and I hope that I’ve shown throughout my general series on Planet X and 2012 that it is not possible for any group to “control” information about this.

      Comment by poopypants — May 11, 2010 @ 10:47 pm | Reply

  7. Sean – The simple answer is “sort of.” Almost all large, ground-based telescope facilities are owned by many different institutions and collaborations among universities and/or government agencies. Almost all of these allow astronomers to submit observing proposals, and then a board meets to determine which proposals will get time and when. Telescope time is at a premium because there are always more time requests than there is time available, But, in general, anyone can apply.

    NASA itself does not operate any telescopes that I am aware of. Even, for example, Hubble, is operated by STScI (the Space Telescope Science Institute) in Maryland (I think). NASA does not have its hand in the pot, so to speak, in terms of controlling the data.

    The data that is collected is usually the property of the astronomer who took it for a period of time. Any data collected by a public (US government) telescope, such as Hubble, is required to be released to the public within a certain period of time, usually 6 or 12 months, because it is, well, public.

    I’m not sure where you’re getting this idea that the NSA “controls” NASA. That sounds like a general conspiracy theory and I hope that I’ve shown throughout my general series on Planet X and 2012 that it is not possible for any group to “control” information about this. If you have a specific claim you want to point to, or specific evidence of concealment, let me know so that I can address it.

    Comment by astrostu206265 — June 23, 2009 @ 8:32 pm | Reply

  8. now please explain to me if you have done so much research please explain the theory that eistein said that a shift would come and he warned the us gov or u have not reseached that

    Comment by paul — December 28, 2009 @ 4:16 am | Reply

  9. ||now please explain to me if you have done so much research please explain the theory that eistein said that a shift would come and he warned the us gov or u have not reseached that||

    There’s a theory that Einstein (I think you mean) said something? No way! Could you find a legit source of verified Einstein quotes (or an actual publication by him) where he makes something approaching what you believe, in theory, he said?

    If Einstein really believed a shift (ie a shift in the poles) was going to occur in some non-geological time span, he must have believed it based on scientific evidence. He would well know besides warning the government he should actually write up a scientific paper. So he must have published such a paper. Right?

    Comment by Karl — December 28, 2009 @ 2:15 pm | Reply

    • Paul is referring to Charles Hapgood’s correspondence with Einstein by letter where Charles Hapgood proposes that the Earth’s crust suddenly shifts over the surface. He uses this to explain sudden Ice age conditions (such as 10,000 BP frozen mammoth if you know of this). Einstein suggests that this theory is well worth looking into. No peer refereed paper was ever produced by Einstein on this subject but Hapgood may have. Most of Hapgoods work was published in books due to the hostile reaction of the academic community to his theory.

      Comment by steve — December 30, 2009 @ 5:14 am | Reply

  10. Paul – In addition to what Karl said, let’s assume for a moment that you are correct. All because some seeming authority figure believes or has stated something does not make it true. My favorite example is that Newton was an alchemist, believing he could turn things like lead into gold. Or, for Einstein, Einstein fervently disbelieved (you can find many legitimate quotes, including his famous, “God does not play dice with the universe”) the implications of Quantum Mechanics. All because he was Newton, or all because he was Einstein, does not make him right.

    Now let’s get back to reality and what Karl said.

    Comment by astrostu206265 — December 28, 2009 @ 3:23 pm | Reply

  11. Astrostu
    I appologise for this apparently “random” inclusion but I have been looking for this link for months and cannot find the relevant disucussion line that it refers to.


    This is the peer refereed paper showing the 12,000 year period magnetic field reversals. Last one was 12000 years ago (Younger Dryas). The conclusions for a scientist should be clear!

    Comment by mick — December 30, 2009 @ 6:03 am | Reply

    • Mick – I tried your link but it didn’t work. Title/Author(s)/Year? I have found 1 paper on a polar SHIFT (not REVERSAL) that refers to an event around 12,000 years ago and I WILL be writing a post on that versus a reversal. Terminology is key, in that the paper I found makes a definite point of saying the last REVERSAL was the 780,000 years ago event. Also, please post these in the relevant threads … in this case the one on the magnetic pole flip. Don’t worry – I see all comments that are made and don’t just check “active” posts.

      Comment by astrostu206265 — December 30, 2009 @ 6:17 am | Reply

    • The paper you linked to is talking about secular geomagnetic variations, not pole reversals. The title was “Geomagnetic secular variations 0–12 kyr as recorded by sediments from Lake Moreno (southern Argentina).” They studied these variations from the present to 12,000 years ago. The variations occur on average every 10 years.

      Comment by Matt — May 12, 2010 @ 8:49 am | Reply

      • Sorry, when I accessed this paper it was free (it’s not now). There was a 12,000 year cycle (and longer ones). I’ll try and look for a different data source.

        Comment by Mick — May 17, 2010 @ 3:53 am

      • Matt. Interestingly the 10 year fluctuations in the field correspond to 10 year (approx 11 year actually) solar storm cycles.

        Comment by Mick — May 19, 2010 @ 3:44 am

  12. I have been following this for a short period of time. I am a marketer so I understnad the importance of data collection. I also love being ahead of the curve when it comes to trends and what have you. That being said, I am either making money from 2012 (sales) or preparing for 2012 (survivalist). As the first one implies 2012 will happen, maybe not the events associated with it but in the Y2K sense. Now as for being a survivalist, I am a marketer so I would like to think my research puts me ahead of the curve at least somewhat however I am no scientist; which leads me to my question. “How can someone with limited scientific tools or background even be able to tell if this is true?”
    I do not believe information from anyone who is sponsored including the government, mass media. I do believe there are (& have been) elitists controlling the inner workings of mankind from the dawn of time. I believe that they know more than I could possibly be able to decifer on my own given the contradictory evidence by each side of this theory surrounding an “external threat.”
    Now having said what I believe, what can you give me to prove without any doubt that there is no threat?

    Comment by rich — January 14, 2010 @ 2:21 pm | Reply

  13. so is planet x is proved to be really exist??

    Comment by techyworld — March 13, 2010 @ 9:16 am | Reply

    • What’s your definition of “Planet X?” If you mean a mysterious Earth- or larger-sized body that has yet to be discovered, then by definition, no, it has not been proven to exist. It has not been proven not to exist. If you mean a body that’s going to come by Earth in the next few years and cause death and destruction, then it’s been “proven” NOT to exist in the sense that if it were to come by in the near future, it would have been discovered.

      Comment by astrostu206265 — March 13, 2010 @ 12:48 pm | Reply

  14. go to this address:

    in the button “DSS” select you “Infrared Sky Survey (IRAS)”

    in box find object type you: spica, and click on the magnifying glass;
    then stay away from the scale on the left (up 4 times)

    What you see?
    What do you think they hiding?

    PseudoAstronomy???? haha, pathetics!! your time is running out…

    Comment by bienve — April 24, 2010 @ 4:12 pm | Reply

    • I see a black square box. Looks like a missing pixel. In a whole sky map there’s some missing data. Imagine that!

      Comment by karl — May 11, 2010 @ 1:57 pm | Reply

    • “your” time is running out? Isn’t your time running out as well? Or are you on a different planet? Physically, I mean. It’s obvious your mind isn’t on this planet.

      Comment by Matt — May 12, 2010 @ 8:36 am | Reply

  15. r u a real astronomer? send me the diploma to prove it.

    Comment by charlie — May 5, 2010 @ 10:53 am | Reply

    • Charlie, I guess it depends on what you mean by “a real astronomer”. If you click on Stuart’s “About” link (available in an obvious place on his blog) you will read, in plain english, Stuart claims “I am a graduate student in astronomy.” So other than an undergrad degree, he does not have a degree (yet) to send you. A pro tip: Before you get other people to do your research for you, it behooves intelligent people to, I dunno, click on a blogger’s about link to find out a wee little more about him. No?

      Now one can get a degree in astronomy and not be a real astronomer (I think author Crad Kilodney). Real astronomers do, you know, astronomy. That Stuart seems to do astronomy (off the top of my head: working at a planetarium, attending astronomy conferences and presenting his research, cataloging craters on Mars, spending all night awake to take photos of the moon) I would have to say he’s a real astronomer by that measure. There are, for example, lots of astronomers out there who contribute greatly to astronomy who are not degree’d astronomers. They discover asteroids and comets and record the brightness of variable stars. Maybe you have a different definition for “real astronomer” (hopefully it’s not “is not part of the secret cabal hiding the truth of 2012 and/or a 6,000 year old universe). So, other than simply having a diploma (or an advanced degree) in astronomy, could you define what you would accept as evidence Stuart is an astronomer?

      (I would wager there are a % of readers of this blog who would demand a diploma as proof and if Stuart provided it, would then shift their goal post and claim it’s a fake diploma. Surely, you’d not be one of those people, right?)

      Comment by karl — May 5, 2010 @ 11:29 am | Reply

  16. It’s not a missing pixel, it’s a missing data set.

    Comment by Shelley — May 12, 2010 @ 4:05 am | Reply

    • “It’s not a missing pixel, it’s a missing data set.”

      Yeah. I said that. “In a whole sky map there’s some missing data. Imagine that!”

      bienve claimed “What do you think they hiding?”

      Shelly, you would agree missing data is not the same as hiding something. Do you think you could do an entire sky image survey where multiple images have to be stitched together and render it online and not miss some data or poorly overlay some data sets?

      Comment by karl — May 12, 2010 @ 4:16 am | Reply

  17. Here repeat his steps. Search for “chi aquarii” (an M-type red giant). Zoom out (move the slider up 3 or 4 notches to the – ). Freak. A whole bunch of missing pixels. A whole bunch of missing data. They’ve “hidden” a whole strip of sky! OMFG! What is comin’ at us! Help me, Jesus!

    Comment by karl — May 12, 2010 @ 5:14 am | Reply

  18. I know it’s all fun but this video is more fun than usual.

    Comment by Shelly — May 14, 2010 @ 4:18 am | Reply

  19. This is an interesting video about ‘data blocking’of the sky images. I cannot confirm it, Can anyone else?


    Comment by kelly — May 17, 2010 @ 3:48 am | Reply

  20. sounds like your very closed minded. though i can be also but sometimes you just have to take anything from every view. keep believing what you do. just be ‘cool’ about your approach on things your certainly not the brightest. but who is right.

    Comment by ace spades — May 23, 2010 @ 9:29 pm | Reply

  21. I’m an astrophysicist an i can prove that one. I don’t believe in science, science PROVES itself to me. thats what your asking for, proof of my knowledge. well here’s something that can also be proved. our planet ‘earth’ is very vulnerable. do you think our planet is invincible?! do you think katrina’ is the worst right? but thats only the very beginning. our planet likes to change, as proven over all of the last ‘civilizations’ its does and sometimes in ‘big’ changes and all at once. Basically the big point you need to get from this is- A WARNING TO ALL- [moderator removed language] HAPPENS…ARE YOU PREPARED FOR IT.
    our planet hasn’t changed in awhile, there are a few signs(email me we’ll talk more)of the planet preparing itself for these types of events. Fact: the galactic plane has been approved by NASA. (this plane weakens our heliosphere) and overall weakens our planet to a more of a fragile state. It [moderator removed language] the sun off creating more solar flares(ever since 1998) we are more likely to be hit by a flare(when we are very fragile) then most of any other external force. hinting on planet x or nibiru.
    don’t email me unless you have facts.

    Comment by ace spades — May 23, 2010 @ 10:27 pm | Reply

    • “I’m an astrophysicist an i can prove that one. ”

      What can you prove? I didn’t seem to see any proof of anything in your reply. Could you return and state what you can prove and reference the literature to support your claim?

      “do you think our planet is invincible?!”

      Not sure anyone claimed that. Please don’t argue a straw man.

      “our planet likes to change”

      Likes? Well, our planet changes all the time. Certainly.


      I prepare for things logic and evidence tells me are coming. If a psychic tells me Toronto is going to be swallowed up by an earthquake, I don’t prepare for that. I know an asteroid is going to hit earth one day and wipe out a lot of human life. But logic and evidence tells me the odds of this happening in my life time are low. So I’m not preparing for that.

      “our planet hasn’t changed in awhile”

      You’re going to need to define “changed”. Astrophysicists are usually very precise in their language. You seem to keep making vague sweeping claims. Where do you work as an astrophysicist exactly?

      “the galactic plane has been approved by NASA”

      I can only guess at what you’re saying here. Could you provide a link to NASA’s “approval” of this “galactic plane”.

      “we are more likely to be hit by a flare(when we are very fragile) then most of any other external force. hinting on planet x or nibiru.”

      Sorry, how does an increase in solar activity hint at planet x? It doesn’t follow in my mind. The sun is going through a well documented 11 year cycle that’s not unexpected or surprising.

      Comment by karl — May 25, 2010 @ 7:42 am | Reply

  22. Facts? Now there is a interesting word.

    Of course there is always the “I know something you don’t know” approach. Well, Double “I know something you don’t know” on you. That beats your “I know something you don’t know”. If you want to ‘prepare for it’ try a foil hat.

    Comment by Steve — May 25, 2010 @ 4:19 am | Reply

  23. > Pluto could not account for Uranus’ orbit. The present-day mass estimate is about 20% Earth’s.

    I think it’s more like 0.2% Did you mean diameter?

    Comment by Joakim Rosqvist — June 30, 2010 @ 5:59 am | Reply

  24. […] Planet X and 2012: The Real and Historical Story of Planet X […]

    Pingback by Planet X and 2012: My Posts So Far « Exposing PseudoAstronomy — November 6, 2010 @ 12:49 pm | Reply

  25. Is interesting that the 2012 loonies forget that there are tens of thousands of astronomers, amateur and professional, around the globe with their own, often very advanced equipment, keenly hungering for a discovery. It doesn’t matter about orbiting telescope data that might be missing because any large chunk of the universe that could be called planet X or Niburu would already be screamingly obvious to any nine-year old with a decent telescope. Or has the NSA kidnapped/assassinated every nine-year old with a telescope?

    OK: possibility two: Niburu/Planet X is a dark, non-reflective body and so cannot be seen in any part of the electromagnetic spectrum. Its mass would effect planetary orbits, and there are no planets that have suddenly acquired odd orbits. This would be apparent even if it was hiding behind the Sun.

    Answer Three: Niburu/Planet X has no mass, which would explain the lack of perturbation of planetary orbits.

    Therefore the impact of Niburu/Planet X would have considerably less impact on the survival of human life that dropping a cotton bud on your bathroom floor.

    Ergo: if it doesn’t exist, you’ve got nothing to worry about, if it does exist, you’ve got nothing to worry about.

    Its existence is therefore irrelevant.

    Comment by Bob Couttie — December 12, 2010 @ 10:50 am | Reply

  26. First off I am not a scientist nor do I have any scientific proof of anything, except that our moon is a lot hotter than any place on Earth. Which leads me to think just how much should we trust NASA? Over the past several years, it seems to me that there has been an increased amount of 7.0 earthquakes or larger. It almost seems as if every other week now there is a earthquake or 7.0 hitting some where in the world, just as it happened today in Pakistan. Now I’ve also seen proof of under water pyramids off the coast of Japan. What happened to the people who built those pyramids, if it was humans who built them in the first place. So could there be something real out there effecting gravity on earth causing Earth Quakes, or are we still having the same number of earthquakes we had 35 years ago? I hope to God that the people who say Planet X is just a hoax are right and the rest of us are just going over board with this stuff. Let me leave you with this, I will believe Planet X is real until Mat 21st, 2011 and December 21st, 2012 come and go.

    Comment by me — January 18, 2011 @ 5:18 pm | Reply

  27. Wonderful blog, providing an excellent public service! For more on the discovery of Pluto in 1930 by Clyde Tombaugh (at Lowell Observatory, in Flagstaff) check out http://www.plutovian.wordpress.com.

    Comment by plutovian — January 20, 2011 @ 8:32 am | Reply

  28. Under, Modern-Day Planet X’s,

    Please fix errata on moon diameter.

    Comment by sciencebeatsreligion — December 28, 2011 @ 1:10 am | Reply

    • Fixed.

      Comment by Stuart Robbins — December 28, 2011 @ 10:37 am | Reply

  29. So isn’t it like this way- Sun Mercury Venus Earth Moon Mars Ceres Jupiter Saturn Uranus Neptune Pluto Haumea MakeMake Eris Nibiru

    Comment by Brianna Benson — February 3, 2012 @ 3:02 pm | Reply

  30. Then why does everything I’m reading add up to this planet x passing by every 3600 years. Roughly 3600 years ago Egypt was going through the plagues which are similar problems to this planet x passing by and roughly 7200 years Noah’s flood occured, the great lakes of Michigan are recorded as being 3500 years old and so on etc. etc.. Why does all these things and many others seem to fit so well every 3600 or so, and well known scientists are going on record connecting all this to planet x (or nibiru) and also showing the path it will take and when it will be in our solar system. Please give me an educated answer with some details to verify, I have to believe one. Either its true or its not which is it?

    Comment by Larry — November 15, 2012 @ 7:16 pm | Reply

    • You are relying on stories that may or may not be true that different people have tried to fit into a historical framework. You are relying on “well known scientists” — name them please. I can 99.99% guarantee you that they might be well known but are not scientists.

      I have many, many posts on this blog about Planet X and (a) why there isn’t one that these people claim, and (b) why it cannot be on a 3600-year orbit. The top of this post has a few (why the 3600-year planet doesn’t exist, why it’s not coming in 2012, etc.), while I have six separate podcast episodes detailing different proposals of Planet X and why none of them are right.

      Comment by Stuart Robbins — November 15, 2012 @ 7:27 pm | Reply

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: