Andrew Lloyd’s representation of the Dark-Star
This is going to come to you as somewhat of a rant rather than a coolly drawn out and logical argument in the debate about Nibiru and Planet X.
Nibiru doesn’t exist, and Planet X is not what you think it is.
Zecharia Sitchin be damned, he is a fool spreading fools gold around the internet all in the name of cheap sensationalism, and his growing army of Sitchin-ites are at the ready to twist any scientific finding into their own perverted conformity, heralding Sitchin’s irrational and wrong ideas as evidence that the end is nigh!
Nibiru doesn’t exist, yes, I’ve already said that, but it remains worthy of repeating over and over again. It is a figment of one man’s overactive imagination, fuelled by his incomplete understanding of Sumerian spiritual history. I have covered this before, though none, it seems, saw fit to refute my claims, they simply walked around them in favour of something more fantastic and completely untrue.
Sitchin claims, among his evolving and inconsistent ethos, that Nibiru is a long lost sister planet to Earth, that it is the home of the Annunaki, and the origin of the Biblical Nephilim. He claimed that Nibiru is a planet, analogous to Earth, whose elliptical orbit sends it on a 3600 year journey out of our solar system and into the deep, dark (and freezing) voids of space, eventually returning this frozen waste of a planet back to our system for just enough of a visit to let the Annunaki hop-the-pond so-to-speak, and bring about an Earthly apocalypse. To be fair, Sitchin doesn’t claim that last part, but many of his his disciples do; no Sitchin just claims that Nibiru will collide with Earth in it’s orbit and end all life as we know it.
Apparently as a function of Sitchin-itus, his many devout and seemingly impaired followers champion his work citing historical astronomical observation work and the decades old (and since resolved) issue of Planet X as proof (somehow) that Sitchin is correct. Let me point out now that Sitchin is not an astronomer, nor is he an astrophysicist (nor for that matter, are his followers).
So, what is Planet X then?
Strictly speaking, Planet X is a hypothetical astronomical body used in mathematical equations by astrophysicists and astronomers to account for the orbital fluctuations of the gas giants Uranus and Neptune. This work was made famous by Percival Lowell at the start of the 20th century, but has since been resolved. The problem was essentially that the orbit of Uranus had shown certain slight fluctuations and wobbles and it was believed at the time that there could have been a large, as yet unseen, planetary body lying just outside the visual capabilities of space telescopes of the day. A Planet “X”, whose mass (hence gravitational pull) could account for this wobble. The discovery of Pluto seemed to validate Lowell’s theory for a short while, as Pluto itself was thought to have been the “Planet X” in question, but Pluto was eventually found to be too small to account for the gravitational distortion observed.
Argument and speculation about the existence of a heretofore unseen planet lying beyond Pluto raged on until the early part of the 1990’s, when the Voyager 2 mission enabled precise measurements of Neptune’s mass and provided the answers everyone was looking for. Early estimations had been too generous with the mass, and in turn, the gravitational pull of Neptune on Uranus, and in the end, it turns out that these two gas giants are locked in a perpetual tug of war over their relative positions in the solar system. This discovery had the unfortunate effect of proving that there is, in fact, no Planet X.
Now, the above is a telling of the real history of the Planet X enigma, though Sitchin and his followers would have you believe that there is another mystery afoot, and have stolen the term Planet X to fit their unfounded suppositions. Every single bit of Sitchin’s theory is based on his interpretations of ancient religious texts and not on any iota of astronomical understanding, though there are those who refute his academic ability to even translate simple Babylonian ideology. He has taken enormous liberties with the translation of ancient texts and derived his own, unsupported etymologies from these works.
What Zecharia Sitchin has done, is superimpose the theology of the Babylonian creation myth over made up astronomical history, though his current theories barely resemble even that. There is no factual basis for his assertion that Nibiru or Tiamat exist as planets, for they were simply Sumerian deities.
As we move forward from here, to the further perversion of Sitchin’s own perversion of history, it becomes painfully clear that through Sitchin’s mistranslation and deliberate attempts to create his own flawed etymology, he has contributed to the polluting of popular culture with untold numbers of variations on his original idea. It seems everyone with a pen and the ability to listen to Internet radio is following suit and forming some ill-informed idea of what Nibiru is and what it means.
Recently, there has been a rash of blog articles, presentations and videos suggesting that Nibiru is soon to be arriving in the solar system, though none care to find out the truth about Nibiru to begin with. The most recent and most fantastic new theory, is one based wholly on Zecharia Sitchin’s “work”, and is presented by Andrew Lloyd; in it suggests that there is a dwarf-star orbiting our own star as a binary to the sun, and it is within the gravitational orbit of this dark star that Nibiru rests; though along side a respectable skill with graphic design software, I’ve not been able to find one spec of notable, peer-reviewed and verifiable science in his theory.
Our galaxy is littered with asteroids, meteors, comets and gasses, as well as a host of other real phenomenon that we haven’t yet discovered. It is amazing enough without making up ideologies about planet gods and dates with galactic destiny.
Nibiru doesn’t exist, and Planet X is not what you think it is.