Planet X Nibiru the Shocking Scientific Proof
This blog is loaded with the latest on the Planet X system
John Ale
Is Planet-7X Real & Is It Biblical?
Gil
Broussard “My main focus is to inform viewers of new findings in the
field of Biblical astronomy and how these resulting anomalies correlate
to biblical records.
Three
years of research along with astronomical software models of each event
that have a repeating overlay to a depth and degree to which the data
cross-validated itself was beyond expectations!
Videos
Include Charts, graphs and other data supporting the existence of a
“mystery planet” which I call Planet-7X (for 7 times Earth’s diameter).”
The Scientific Evidence
James M. McCanney‘s book, Planet X, Comets and Earth Changes is
sub-titled: a scientific treatise on the effects of a new large planet
or comet arriving in our solar system, and expected earth weather and
earth changes.
In his book McCanney makes a strong case for, (1) the fact that the new electrodynamic paradigm in astronomy and astrophysics has already been established.
(2) that it is being vehemently opposed and denied by the scientific, academic establishment, including and especially NASA.
(3) that
there is overwhelming evidence for the reality of and existence of a new
large planet or comet arriving in our solar system and that
(4) NASA and a majority of the astronomic and astrophysical establishment, have a vested interest in completely denying all these points
(5) that he has written his book in order to place before the public the truth as he sees it.
(6) that
the reason for the urgency is that the new “intruder” into the solar
system is going to cause massive earth changes. The question, he states,
is not whether the changes will occur, but when.
The authors of this review have written it in the spirit of point (5) above. That
is to say, for them there is only one reason for writing the review. It
is to pass on, as best they can, the evidence that McCanney presents,
in order that readers may make up their own mind, and draw their own
conclusions.
THE OLD PARADIGM
The old
paradigm for understanding the origin and functioning of the solar
system is overwhelmingly dominated by gravitational mechanics. It dates
back to Newton when little was known about electricity. Similarly, theKant-Laplace hypothesis
concerning the nebular original of the solar system knows only
gravitation; electro-magnetism plays no part in either the origin or
functioning of the system.
The same is true of the next major step in the history of scientific cosmology – Einstein’s 1917 “Cosmological Considerations Concerning the General theory of Relativity”.
In the
1940’s and 1950’s, Velikovsky championed the importance of
electromagnetic phenomena in the solar system, both in his books, and in
his correspondence and discussions with Einstein, in which Velikovsky
insisted that, “celestial mechanics …without taking into account the
electromagnetic fields…is in conflict with the facts.” (1952)
At about the
same time, this theme was taken up by the mathematical physicist Hannes
Alfven, in great experimental and theoretical detail as described below.
HANNES ALFVEN
The nature and importance of “the fourth state of matter”, and specifically of matter in an electrically charged state, has a history that goes back to Crookes in the 19th century. Crookes realized that gasses through which an electrical current has been passed, themselves acquire a charge.
In 1928, Langmuir coined the term ‘plasma’
to describe that mixture of gas, charged ions and electrons. The advent
of plasma physics has created a revolution in science which has not yet
been fully recognized. Indeed, partly by accident, and partly with cold
deliberation, the reality of the plasma revolution in cosmology has
been utterly played down.
The
groundwork for the new electromagnetic dimension of cosmology,
crystallized around a single outstanding figure – Professor Hannes
Alfven and his team at the Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm.
1942 marked the beginning of Alfven’s application of hydrodynamic theory to plasma physics. He created the magnetohydrodynamic equations describing the motion of plasma as a fluid in electromagnetic fields. He drew attention to the fact that,
“Waves of electrons and ions are found not only in laboratory plasma but also in the atmospheric and solar plasmas.”
Such waves are now known as Alfven waves, and for this work, Alfven shared the 1970 Nobel Prize in Physics.
In 1946,
Landau formulated the equations that describe the interaction between
particles and waves in plasma, and about the same time Bohm used the
term plasmons to refer to the concerted behavior of electrons in a plasma.
Let us take a brief look at the first two editions of Alfven’s
Cosmical (sic) Electrodynamics, published by the Clarendon Press,
Oxford, in 1950 and 1962 respectively. The second edition was
co-authored by Falthammar, and the English of both editions has an
interesting Scandinavian flavor. In 1954, Alfven published On the origin of the Solar System which, in 1975, was expanded as Structure and Evolutionary History of the Solar System, co-authored with Gustaf Arrhenius.
In the Preface (written in 1948) to the first edition of Cosmical Electrodynamics, Alfven spoke softly, but already sounded a big drum:
“Recent
discoveries have revealed that electromagnetic phenomena are of greater
importance in cosmic physics than used to be supposed. The time now
seems to be ripe for an attempt to systematically trace the
electromagnetic phenomena in the cosmos…”
In the General Survey, Alfven continued : “It
seems very probable that electromagnetic phenomena will prove to be of
great importance in cosmic physics. Electromagnetic phenomena are
described by classical electrodynamics which, however, for a deeper
understanding, must be combined with atomic physics. This combination is
especially important for the phenomena occurring at the passage of
current through gaseous conductors which are treated by the complex
theory of ‘discharges’ in gas. No definite reason is
known why it should not be possible to extrapolate the laboratory
results in this field to cosmic physics.” (op.cit. p.1)
What emerges
from a comparison of the two editions is the consolidation of the
densely mathematical and cosmological arguments of the first, into the
virtual certainty of the new paradigm in the second.
As the authors point out in the preface to the second edition: A
The purpose of the first edition…was to draw attention to a field of
research in an early state of development…to the fundamental principles
of plasma physics and magneto-hydrodynamics…the
magnetosphere…interplanetary space, to solar physics and to cosmic
radiation. During the 15 years that have elapsed since the first edition
was written, the subject has been developed by two of the largest
research efforts of our time: thermonuclear research has increased our knowledge of magneto-hydrodynamics and plasmas, and… space research has been devoted to the exploration of the magneto-hydrodynamic conditions around the Earth.
Consequently,
the second edition incorporates all the relevant findings from these
new fields of research – plasma physics as developed in thermonuclear
research etc., along with the early space data into the consolidation of
the crucial importance of electrodynamics in astronomy and
astrophysics.
Thus Alfven states, “In
cosmic physics, electromagnetic processes have recently attracted a
rapidly increasing interest, and it is now generally realized that they
are of fundamental importance…In the interior of the Earth there exist
electromagnetic processes by which the earth’s general magnetic field is
generated. In the ionosphere electric currents change the earth’s
magnetic field, especially during magnetic storms, and also produce
luminous phenomena, aurorae, in certain regions around the geomagnetic poles…
In the
magnetosphere, a complicated and rapidly varying system of currents
[were] found by space research measurements. In certain regions (the
radiation or Van Allen belts) there is also a flux of high-energy charged particles trapped in the magnetic field.” (Cosmological Electrodynamics, 2nd edition, p.1)
Furthermore,
“The conditions in the ionosphere and the magnetosphere of the earth are
influenced by the electromagnetic state in interplanetary space, which
in turn is affected by the sun. There are a number of solar
electromagnetic phenomena …sunspots, prominences, solar flares, etc. In
other stars electromagnetic phenomena are of importance, most
conspicuously in the magnetic variable stars.” (ibid., p.1.)
Alfven goes
on to point out that it was not “until classical electrodynamics had
been combined with hydrodynamics to form magneto-hydrodynamics, which
further must be combined with plasma physics in order to allow a deeper
understanding of electromagnetic phenomena in cosmic physics.” (ibid.,
p.2.)
The term ‘plasma’
refers to an ionized gas, an ensemble of neutral molecules, electrons,
positive and often also negative ions, together with the energy released
from the excited atoms.
Alfven stresses the crucial importance of plasmas for cosmology. “The
properties of plasmas are of paramount interest in cosmic physics
because most of the matter in the universe is in the plasma state. In
the interior of stars, the gas is almost completely ionized. In the
photosphere of the sun (and other stars) the degree of ionization is not
very high, but above the photosphere, in the chromosphere and the corona, the ionization is …again almost 100%.
Vast
regions of interstellar space, particularly around the hot stars of
early spectral type, are highly ionized…In the sun and interplanetary
space, probably also in interstellar and intergalactic space, the plasma
is penetrated by magnetic fields…As a consequence, the astrophysicist’s
interest in plasma physics is mainly concentrated on magnetic
plasmas.” (Alfven, op.cit. p. 134)
In their volume Structure and Evolution of the Solar System ,
(published in 1975 by Reidel), Alfven and Arrhenius continue to refine
their astrophysical model. In their Introduction, they assert that “Many
of the ‘generally accepted’ theories [in this field] lack a valid
foundation” (p.xv) One such theory “which cannot stand critical
examination is the Laplacian concept of the formation of the sun and the solar system by non-hydromagnetic processes”. (p. xv)
They go on to criticize the fact that whereas, “[I]n
most other fields of cosmic physics it was realized already 25 years
ago that electromagnetic processes have a dominating influence on the
dynamics of cosmic gas clouds (plasmas), the majority ofcosmogonic papers published today are still based on the assumption that such forces can be neglected” (p. xv)
This is only marginally less true today than when it was stated by Alfven in 1975.
Alfven and Arhenius insist that, “The
processes involved in the formation of celestial bodies in our solar
system requires us to use not only the methods of ordinary chemistry and
ordinary celestial mechanics, but also those of plasma chemistry and
magnetohydrodynamics …generally ignored or incorrectly applied…” (op.cit., p. 4)
Here is how Falthammar, a colleague of Alfven described the situation in 1988: “
It was widely believed that cosmic plasma would have negligible
resistivity…From that it was [mistakenly] concluded that the electric
field would be a secondary parameter, of little importance…Therefore,
electric fields, and especially magnetic-field-aligned electric fields,
which we now know to be of crucial importance, were long disregarded.
Even today, only a few space missions in the outer magnetosphere have
included measurements of electric fields.”
“It is a
sobering fact”, adds Falthammar, “that even after hundreds of satellites
had circled the earth, the concept of our space environment was still
fundamentally wrong in aspects as basic as the existence and role of
electric fields…of the near Earth plasma itself.”
Leaving these
earlier, but absolutely essential contributions to our understanding of
the fundamental electromagnetic component of the solar system, which
complement, and certainly do not exclude, the classical
gravitation/inertia view of celestial dynamics, let us see how and where
McCanney fits into the picture.
ENTER JAMES McCANNEY
McCanney took up the baton in 1979 and the early 1980′s at the Physics and later the Math departments at Cornell.
Given the retardation effect with respect to the electromagnetic
component, that Alfven has made clear, it is easy to understand, yet
utterly lamentable that McCanney was not given tenure at by either
department.
The other
side of that coin is that McCanney was free to take up the role of “an
independent scientist, not subject to the pressures of the scientific
community, peer pressure or governmental non-disclosure agreements and
funding.” (ibid. p. 32)
Cornell had
certain advantages: the Library was part of the Library of Congress
network, so if a book was in print, it was available. Even more
importantly, it was a repository of data from NASA. As we read in the introduction to his book, Armed
with his existing theoretical work, and this incredible source of
information and with the timing that coincided with the daily arrival of
new data from the Voyager and other space craft, he [McCanney] was in a
totally unique position to do what he has done (loc.cit. p.iii)
In other words, schematically speaking, McCanney took over where Alfven left off. Here is the core of McCanney’s position with respect to the electromagnetic part of the paradigm.
THE ELECTROMAGNETIC COMPONENT OF THE SOLAR SYSTEM
(1) “Our
solar system acts like a large electrical circuit… Our sun forms an
electric capacitor (a separation of electrical charge as done by a
simple DC battery in a flashlight)
(2) This
solar capacitor has its negative pole at the surface of the sun, and
also has a negative pole far out beyond the outer planets in the form of
a sparse nebular cloud of dust and gasses.
(3) “An
excess current of protons… continually generates and supports the solar
capacitor by way of the ‘solar wind’ (literally a wind of such
particles leaving the sun and blowing outwards into space)
(4) All
stars and galactic nuclei, and even unlit small stars such as our
‘planets’ Jupiter and Saturn are producing …cosmic batteries around
themselves.
(5) This
is a natural by-product of the nuclear fusion process (the burning of
nuclear fuel such as hydrogen, helium, etc.) in the atmospheres of these
celestial objects.” (McCanney, op.cit. p.10)
(6) “The sun is powered at its atmospheric surface by an electrical fire of hydrogen and helium that we call ‘fusion’
that is constantly ignited by energetic lightning bolts in its
turbulent atmosphere. It is the local electric field at the outer
surface of the sun (the solar corona of high energy electrons) that
hurls the vast solar flares out into the far reaches of the solar
system. The positively charged protons are accelerated outwards, while
the negatively charged electrons are retarded, thus causing what I have
called the excess current of protons in the solar wind. The sun produces
far more energy in the form of electrical energy than it does in the
form of light energy.” (ibid. p.13)
(7) To
give an idea of the stupendous magnitude of solar flares, they “release
the force of 10 million volcanic eruptions in a matter of minutes.
Furthermore, a single coronal mass ejection (CME)
can carry “more than 10 billion tons of hot, electrically charged gas”
[i.e. plasma] from the sun’s corona into space, “ a mass equivalent to
that of 100,000 battleships” packing a punch “comparable to that of
100,000 hurricanes” and traveling at “between 1-5 million miles an
hour.”
(8) “The
power of CME lies in its ability to drive currents in the Earth’s
magnetosphere” and “if the magnetic field carried by The CME has a
southward orientation (opposite Earth’s northward-flowing magnetic field
lines) the magnetosphere gets a major jolt…transferring…millions of
amperes of electric current to the magnetosphere.” (Carlowicz and Lopez,
op.cit. p.89) This can knock out power lines and electric generators,
and disrupt all forms of electronic communication.
(9)
That is as far as the establishment position goes – and Carlowicz &
Lopez represent the establishment viewpoint which McCanney denounces,
because it deliberately fails to warn against the far
greater dangers which the solar storms hold – namely their capacity,
when triggered by comets or planets intruding into the solar system, to
produce major earth changes such as polar shifts, flash freezing of
continents, which certainly occurred in the past. That Carlowicz &
Lopez do in fact mislead their readers is evident from their statement, on p.91, that “storms from the sun cannot harm life on the surface of the Earth.”
(10) “In the summer of 2001, at the recommendation of a panel of space and solar physicists, NASA announced the cancellation of the International Solar-Terrestrial Physics (ISTP) program. The Agency decided that ‘official co-ordination of the international missions was a scientific luxury it could no longer afford.’ NASA withdrew its support for the (solar) Wind mission, and for participation in Japan’s Geotail mission.
Funding for some of the key elements of the ISTP success
story – the theory and modeling programs, the data centers, the
ground-based observatories – was almost entirely cut off.”
Why?
Because the co-ordination of the data from all of those sources would
have let the cat out of the bag and made it a lot more difficult to
sustain the two illusions that, (1) electromagnetism plays a negligible part in solar physics and (2) there is no real, imminent threat of major catastrophic Earth changes.
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN A CELESTIAL OBJECT ENTERS THE ELECTRIC FIELD OF THE SOLAR SYSTEM
When celestial body such as an asteroid, a comet or a planet enters the solar capacitor, “it
will cause a localized and then more extended electrical discharge of
the capacitor. This much like the backyard bug killer or ‘zapper’ that discharges when a bug flies between the high voltage screens.” (p.14)
What happens next is that, “the
increased electrical activity imparted to the solar atmosphere ignites a
higher level of nuclear fusion causing the sun to become excited above
its normal levels and may ignite small to very large solar flares. Small
comets have many times been observed to directly cause solar flares as
they pass near the sun.” (ibid., p.16)
“Small
comets generally discharge only the small localized regions of the solar
capacitor, whereas the very large ones can discharge up to and
including the entire capacitor… These are the ones (such as the
anticipated Planet-X) which are growing much larger and pose a serious threat to the existing planets including Earth.” (p.12)
Planet X being pulled into our solar system
Now here is the crux of the matter: “The
sun is currently at levels never experienced before and it is
increasing to record levels of activity every day. We were supposed to
have peaked in the year 2000 with the ‘solar maximum’… We are currently
over two years beyond that, and there is no end to the increases in
sight. It definitely indicates that the sun is currently interacting
with a large intrusion into the solar capacitor.” (p.21)
The intruder is capable of “action at a distance” in the following manner. “The
comet would discharge to the solar surface causing a significant solar
flare that could blow a huge wall of high energy protons our way,
causing an alteration of [Earth’s] magnetic field structure [which under ordinary circumstances, acts as a protective shield] and cause electrical and cyclonic storms at the surface of the earth.” (pp.21-22)
This in turn could trigger massive Earth changes of the kind that are known to have already occurred in the geological record.
PLANET-X
“Earth
has been subjected to a close encounter by at least one massive new
comet becoming a planet in the time frame of no more than 10,000 years
ago. The time frame that clearly makes] sense for the last event is
approximately 3,500 years ago, the time we see a dramatic transition
between ‘pre-history’ and the digging of ‘modern man’ out of the
devastation. There is no longer any other possible scenario and modern
science is impeding progress each day that it holds the reins of power
and prevents this reality from blossoming forth.” (op. cit., p.100)
It was Velikovsky who fifty years ago pioneered the above hypothesis and McCanney has a special tribute to Immanuel Velikovsky in which McCanney insists on the value of Velikovsky’s insight: says McCanney:
“NASA scientists have been repeating…for 25 years that ‘Velikovsky has been proven wrong.’ It is time to set the record straight. It was NASA that was [and is still] wrong. Velikovsky single-handedly did more for the advancement of true science than all of the NASA scientists in the last 3 decades combined.” (p. 102)
The proceedings of the Second IEEE International Workshop (published
in Astrophysics and Space Science Vol. 227, 1995, and reprinted in book
form the same year by Kluwer Academic Publishers as Plasma Astrophysics and Cosmology ed. Peratt, A.L.) fully support the immense importance of electromagnetism in the practical and theoretical study of cosmology.
The most
obvious reason for this importance lies in the fact that 99% of the
matter in the universe is in the form of plasma –which is composed,
precisely, of electromagnetically charged gas, ions and electrons.
McCanney goes
on to assert that, on the basis of the electromagnetic theory of solar
system and planetary formation, the solar system was not born at a
single point in time. It began with the Sun and Jupiter. All the other planets were integrated into the solar system by capture.
They began as
comets in elliptical orbit, but as they accreted more and more debris
by virtue of their electrical charge and attraction, they slowed down
and their orbits settled into circular motion around the sun. “We clearly know today that the pre-planet comet [that became Venus] was CAPTURED by Jupiter,
a process that is very common, and well understood mathematically, and
has been observed as every one of the major planets…have associated families of comets that were captured. …Venus is a hot new planet.” (p.101)
A similar process of capture is happening with Planet X.
The perturbations of the solar corona bear witness to its entry into
the solar system. The question is not whether it is there or not, the
question is when will its presence cause major earth changes.
The Sun is currently at levels never experienced before, and it is increasing to record levels of activity every day… It definitely indicates that the sun is currently interacting with a large intrusion into the solar system” (op.cit.p.21)
However,
McCanney states that the timing of the earth changes cannot be
accurately predicted because “even if a large new object were known
about today with exact location and orbital information, its orbit will change on a daily basis and
the true orbit and location will elude prediction… although rough
estimates can be made if an actual candidate is identified.” (McCanney, op.cit., p. xii)
NASA AND THE ASTRONOMY/ASTROPHYSICAL ESTABLISHMENT
It is a major contention of McCanney’s that NASA and
the academic astronomy and astrophysical establishment have been, and
still are, engaged, not only in peddling the antiquated pre-electrical
paradigm of celestial functioning, but also that they are engaged in a
massive cover-up. He says, therefore, “ It is imperative that the public
turn to the truth of what is really going on, and force NASA to release any data regarding new planets or other large objects.”
However, McCanney fears that the opposite is going to happen: “NASA will
work harder and harder to put their name, and their incorrect and
borrowed information (mixed with their outdated and incorrect theories)
in the public eye through news releases, TV and weather specials and
newspaper articles.” (McCanney, op.cit. p. xii)
“It is
essential that the public recognize them for who they are and what they
are. It is also important that the public understand the correct
information so they’re not lead down the wrong path by what appear to be
well-educated scientists who stand behind their Ph.D.’s and government
funding”
“It is safe to say that the NASA scientists
are in complete denial. They hide behind a news release system in which
no one can ask them questions, they hide behind their own referee
system in which they referee their own articles, or, as in the case of
automatic publication in SCIENCE or NATURE journals, articles are not refereed at all.” (p.8)
What really is at stake, according to McCanney, is that “for every day that NASA sits
back, says nothing and collects an ill-gotten paycheck, it is…another
day that the human civilization on this planet goes unprepared for a
critical time of survival as a species.” (p.9)
McCanney brings before the bar of public opinion the following statements: “NASA was caught lying and producing doctored photos to prove that the comet Hale-Bopp did not have a companion…NASA began blatantly hiding data from many space investigating facilities including the Hubble Space Telescope, the SOHO solar observatory…NASA developed
public relations offices whose …function was to…fend off problematic
people like myself with planned disinformation campaigns.” (McCanney, p.44)
“The NASA news release system is strict and comes only from designated NASA news
points in Goddard Space Center, and Jet Propulsion Labs. Individual
scientists are under strict non-disclosure agreements…These scientists
…cannot discuss or admit publicly any event that might cause ‘public
alarm’. That is why the data regarding a new arrival like Planet X will not be allowed from the halls ofNASA. They are under strict contract NOT to tell the public.” (McCanney, op.cit. p.49)
“ [It] is clear…that NASA has observed such objects [as Planet X] and is hiding the data from the public.” (p.32) Similarly: “There is clear evidence that NASA is
now hiding data that would prove that there is another massive object
inbound into the solar system with potential for devastating effects on
planet Earth.”
ALMA Astronomers Publish Planet X Papers Before USA Can Suppress
Located in Northern Chile, the Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA) is the largest single telescope in the world and is located at an altitude of 5,000 meters.
Because this observatory is not under full or majority financial control of the United States government, the USA was unable to suppress the publication of these papers.
American resentment of this legitimization of Planet X theory was clearly evidenced on December 11, 2015 in a Washington Post article by Sarah Kaplan titled Scientists claimed they found elusive ‘Planet X.’ Doubting astronomers are in an uproar.
In this vitriolic response, Sarah Kaplan of The Washington Post and astronomer Mike Brown of Caltech clearly intend to smear astronomers looking for Planet X.
Notably, the ALMA astronomers who posted their findings, Percival Lowell, founder of the Lowell Observatory in Flagstaff, Arizona, and Clyde Tombaugh of the Lowell Observatory, who is credited with the discovery of Pluto.
At one level, this is a disappointing character assassination by The Washington Post, but on another, it portends a more serious agenda.
Perhaps to warn other astronomers that Planet X is a death topic, and should they collaborate with the ALMA astronomers in conducting further observations of these two distant objects, they will do so at the risk of their own careers, and perhaps even at their own peril.
Therefore I am asking my readers to evaluate the following information regarding this Washington Post article with a specific request in mind.
After reading this article and the full text of the Washington Post article, should you have reason to believe that Sarah Kaplan has shown unprofessional conduct in the authoring of this December 11, 2015 article, then I implore you to contact The Washington Post.
Select “Journalism” from the drop-down list, then select “Comments About Articles” from the second drop down list. Paste the URL for the article into the box. Then in your message demand that they retract Sarah Kaplan’s article and immediately terminate her for unprofessional conduct. If you believe — be heard!
They are chilling because the subtext clearly refers to Dr. Robert S. Harrington, whom many in the field believe was assassinated for his work on Planet X, as noted in our May 2008 article.
The point here is that when Sarah Kaplan states in the very first paragraph of her Washington Post article, “some say it even destroyed one,” it is logical to those who are intimately familiar with Planet X research to assume that she is sending a coded message to the astronomical community at large. A veiled death threat if you will. That if you know what’s good for you, you’ll treat Planet X like a “third rail” topic, or risk becoming the next Harrington.
For those of who are less familiar, this may seem a bit presumptuous, the logic being, “while snakes are found under rocks, not all rocks have snakes lying under them.” With this in mind, let’s turn over the rocks in Sarah Kaplan’s December 11, 2015 Washington Post attack article, Scientists claimed they found elusive ‘Planet X.’ Doubting astronomers are in an uproar.
In a January 16, 2015 announcement, The Washington Post tells us, “Sarah is a 2014 graduate of Georgetown with a degree in International Culture and Politics. She previously interned at NPR and Washington City Paper.”
In other words, it can be argued that this young reporter is looking to ingratiate herself into Washington, DC power circles. It could likewise be argued that when presented with a “we’ll owe you one,” opportunity contingent on smearing the reputations of a few dead astronomers, why not?
After all, she has no background in the field she is reporting on in this article, as we can clearly infer from the January 16, 2015 announcement where the The Washington Post lists her degree and her previous work experience.
With this in mind, let’s view some snippets from her own article:
SARAH KAPLAN: “Though both studies were submitted to the prestigious journal Astronomy & Astrophysics, neither has been peer-reviewed or formally published.”
YOWUSA: This statement by Sarah Kaplan shows her ignorance regarding how the astronomical community actually works. The papers published by the ALMA observatory astronomers announcing their observations are:
SARAH KAPLAN: “They’re both based on limited observations — just two spottings apiece for each odd object. And even after just 48 hours online, they have garnered a great deal of skepticism within the astronomy community.”
YOWUSA: Instead of reporting that other astronomers have responded skeptically after having used the coordinates in the papers to observe the same area of space, she’s reporting that, “they have garnered a great deal of skepticism within the astronomy community.”
This vague, unsubstantiated statement begs the question, where did Sarah do her reportage garnering? At lunch at a restaurant in Washington D.C.? This is not a joke. If you’re meeting with someone who is offering you that “we’ll owe you one,” opportunity contingent on smearing the reputations of a few dead astronomers, it’s exactly where you meet them — at a restaurant, or somewhere similar.
Next comes a sly bit of wordcraft:
SARAH KAPLAN: “ ‘We specifically wanted to reach the community that could tell us if we overlooked something, in which case we fully intend to withdraw the papers,’ Wouter Vlemmings, an astronomer at Chalmers University of Technology in Sweden and co-author on both studies”
YOWUSA: What Vlemmings is saying is actually good science. That is, if someone can respond to him with real science invalidating these discoveries, he’ll withdraw the papers. However, what most readers will clue in on is, “we fully intend to withdraw the papers.”
Why readers will clue in on that becomes clear with the introduction of Cal Tech astronomer Mike Brown, the other half of this Planet X suppression tag team.
SARAH KAPLAN: “All of which sounds pretty cool — unless you’re Mike Brown, a Caltech astronomer who has spent the majority of his career scanning the farthest reaches of the solar system for just these kinds of objects.
YOWUSA: Vlemmings is not attempting to sound “pretty cool,” as Kaplan phrases it. Vlemmings is asking colleagues in the astronomical community to view the reported data with a critical and impartial review. “All of which sounds pretty cool” is unfairly demeaning, and at this point in the article, Kaplan is only clearing her throat, so to speak.
Before delving into what Mike Brown has to say, let’s jump ahead in the article to Kaplan’s remarks about astronomers Percival Lowell and Clyde Tombaugh:
SARAH KAPLAN: “…no Planet X researcher was more beleaguered than Percival Lowell, who launched into the search for the distant object in an attempt to redeem himself after he became a laughing stock for suggesting that aliens might be building canals on Mars.”
“Lowell spent years photographing the night sky with nothing more than a primitive camera and borrowed telescope, searching for evidence of a planet whose existence was still only a theory. He died of a stroke in 1916, his search unsuccessful. A lifelong friend said that the failure ‘virtually killed him.’ ”
YOWUSA: Lowell actually imaged Pluto in 1915, but failed to recognize it as a planet. However, Clyde Tombaugh of the Lowell Observatory correctly observed it in 1930.
Sarah Kaplan offers the reader smoking-gun proof of not only her ignorance of astronomy, but also of her disregard for ethical journalism, with the smear, “Lowell spent years photographing the night sky with nothing more than a primitive camera and borrowed telescope.”
For the record, Lowell was a wealthy Bostonian who had no need to borrow anything. In fact, Lowell funded and established the Lowell Observatory in 1894 in Flagstaff, Arizona. Lowell also funded the observatory’s original telescope, a custom-made 24-inch Alvan Clark & Sons Telescope, one of several still in use today.
But more to the point, the ALMA astronomers are reporting on observations of objects at the far edge of our own solar system, not on Mars. So how does a man who died in 1916 become part of this story and what is the point of needlessly smearing him?
It is because Lowell is the American father of Planet X research, and because he is an easy, cheap shot for a scientifically illiterate reporter looking to feather her own nest by besmirching him.
Ergo, Kaplan’s article is not about what has happened in Chile. It’s about what has been happening since the discovery of Uranus — the search for Planet X. What the ALMA papers have done is to remove the tarnish smeared all over the field of Planet X research by the American government. For this the astronomers of ALMA are smeared by Sarah Kaplan, as is Clyde Tombaugh.
SARAH KAPLAN: “Pluto would become ‘Planet X’ a decade later, when a farm kid named Clyde Tombaugh working at the Flagstaff, Ariz., laboratory that Lowell founded came across a small moving speck in his own photos of the sky.”
YOWUSA: For the record. Tombaugh discovered a planet using a 13 inch telescope and was no “kid” when he did it. Calling him “a farm kid” is unwarranted and demeaning, but that is to be expected of someone who has no respect for achievement.
Even so, Kapan’s dismissive disrespect of dedicated astronomers who spent their lives in the pursuit of truth pales in comparison to that of Caltech astronomer, Mike Brown.
In the same vein, when it comes to Planet X our government has long used a simple propaganda attack strategy that I call “The Three D’s” — deny, dismiss and demean.
In order for this strategy to work you need an egotistical “expert” to carry it out, as those who are kind and ethical experts are unwilling to participate in such attacks.
In this case, Sarah Kaplan of The Washington Post found Caltech astronomer Mike Brown to be the perfect egotistical “expert” for her smear article. Brown is not known as the father of anything, but rather as the “Pluto Killer.” A designation he so admires that he uses it for his Twitter handle (@plutokiller).
So, do the math. If you’re a power player in Washington DC and you want to discredit a Planet X story coming out of an observatory you do not control, what do you do? You find a scientifically illiterate reporter looking to feather her nest, match her up with an egotistical “expert,” and let them do your dirty work for you.
With this in mind, read the following excerpts from Sarah Kaplan and Mike Brown and as you do, test each against “The Three D’s” — deny, dismiss and demean.
Why is Brown’s white whale bombast pure propaganda? Because ALMA is not only the largest observatory in the world, it is one that America propagandists cannot suppress or compromise.
The Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA) is a radio telescope with an array of 66 antennas. It is situated on the Chajnantor plateau at an elevation of 5,000 meters in the high desert of northern Chile.
Presently the most powerful telescope on Earth, it is designed to further the search for our cosmic origins. Astronomers use it to study the universe in a range of wavelengths between infrared light and radio waves.
More importantly, it is a global collaboration and the international partners include:
If you cannot kill it, smear it. Or as they say in Hollywood, “You have a great name. He [Emperor Commodus] must kill your name before he kills you.”
It’s obvious that a rookie reporter looking to feather her nest is being used for a government propaganda smear campaign to crush a newsworthy story and to smear honest, dedicated astronomers, both living and dead. Unlike a more seasoned reporter with a reputation to protect, she’s been played for a stooge because of her own naive, blind ambition.
Dear reader, if you look the other way now that you know all this and do nothing, are you any better than Sarah Kaplan?
Again, after reading this article and the full text of the Washington Post article, should you have reason to believe that Sarah Kaplan has shown unprofessional conduct in the authoring of this December 11, 2015 article, then I implore you to contact The Washington Post.
Select “Journalism” from the drop-down list, then select “Comments About Articles” from the second drop down list. Paste the URL for the article into the box. Then in your message demand that they retract Sarah Kaplan’s article and immediately terminate her for unprofessional conduct. If you believe — be heard!
As a follow-up to my interview with Clyde Lewis, on December 17, 2015 I published my analysis on Sarah Kaplan’s article titled, ALMA Astronomers Publish Planet X Papers Before USA Can Suppress. In my article I referenced a yowusa.com article co-authored by Planet X researchers John DiNardo and Janice Manning in 2008.
Given that John’s 2008 article has been a long-standing favorite, and the passion which he put into his email and audio editing, I’m now sharing them as-is with our readers.
Hi Clyde and Marshall,
I listened to and edited the first half of Marshall Masters’s recent interview on The Ground Zero radio show, regarding The Washington Post’s ostensible hatchet job of the A.L.M.A. Observatory’s sightings of what may likely be Planet X. Marshall’s analysis is accurate and is an evidentiary breakthrough for our cause, which is to alert folks to prepare to get away from danger zones prior to the great Earth cataclysms, and to start storing essentials now, since the likelihood of great storms is increasing dramatically (recall the French Foreign Minister’s warning that Earth will see “total climate chaos by Sept 2015”).
Here is more evidence to bolster Marshall’s assertion that the elite who own the Washington Post as their chief organ of disinformation (recall that Katherine Graham and her CFR family own that newspaper), indeed attacked the report of the ALMA Observatory’s sightings, because the ruling elite are afraid that public attention to the sightings might cause the public herd to shift from a mood of drowsy compliance to a mode of unmanageable social and economic independence.
So, in a duplicitous move to discredit the ALMA observatory’s sightings, amidst growing Planet X public awareness, the ruling elite (who, according to the London Daily Mail and other news sources, are now descending into their subterranean cities) had their “poison pen” reporter, Sarah Kaplan publish in The Washington Post her sloppy distorted critique of the astronomers’ reports.
I add the following analysis of the report, (and you can look this up) that several years ago, even before the A.L.M.A. observatory was completely constructed, its chief astronomer, Dr. Morita, was beaten to death. Now, the following realization is important to our cause of convincing people that Planet X is indeed out there and is now being sighted — and that is this fact that, when the diabolical ruling elite want to not only silence a credentialed credible whistleblower, while aiming to terrorize all other credentialed credible whistleblowers, in one stroke, they will have the leading whistleblower beaten to death.
And here is a striking example of their vicious tactics, which suggests that the elite were — from the very beginning of the ALMA Observatory project — desperate to destroy the entire program and purpose of the ALMA observatory and its independent team of astronomers, just as they murdered the chief astronomer of the U.S. Naval Observatory, Dr. Robert S. Harrington, as he was about to announce his sighting of the inbound Planet X. My example of these vicious bloody tactics of the diabolical ruling elite is this: Several years ago, Dr. Thomas Manton (you can look him up) was one such credentialed person who was giving speeches and alerting scientists and other concerned and influential types as to the real reason for BP’s Corexit-masking of the Gulf of Mexico sea floor.
Well, they arrested Dr. Manton on zero charges; they imprisoned him, and while he was in prison, they had him beaten to death in order to terrorize all the others who were exposing BP’s secret. So, this Washington Post hatchet job against the ALMA astronomers’ sightings of Planet X is typical of the diabolical ruling elite’s treacherous tactics.
Folks, the evidence of Planet X’s approach is now coming into view, so de-mesmerize yourself from wishful denial, and get yourselves and your families prepared to experience major Earth cataclysms! I’m preparing!
John DiNardo
http://planetxnews.com/2016/01/08/washington-post-flip-flops-on-planet-x-nibiru/
Because this observatory is not under full or majority financial control of the United States government, the USA was unable to suppress the publication of these papers.
American resentment of this legitimization of Planet X theory was clearly evidenced on December 11, 2015 in a Washington Post article by Sarah Kaplan titled Scientists claimed they found elusive ‘Planet X.’ Doubting astronomers are in an uproar.
In this vitriolic response, Sarah Kaplan of The Washington Post and astronomer Mike Brown of Caltech clearly intend to smear astronomers looking for Planet X.
Notably, the ALMA astronomers who posted their findings, Percival Lowell, founder of the Lowell Observatory in Flagstaff, Arizona, and Clyde Tombaugh of the Lowell Observatory, who is credited with the discovery of Pluto.
At one level, this is a disappointing character assassination by The Washington Post, but on another, it portends a more serious agenda.
Perhaps to warn other astronomers that Planet X is a death topic, and should they collaborate with the ALMA astronomers in conducting further observations of these two distant objects, they will do so at the risk of their own careers, and perhaps even at their own peril.
Therefore I am asking my readers to evaluate the following information regarding this Washington Post article with a specific request in mind.
After reading this article and the full text of the Washington Post article, should you have reason to believe that Sarah Kaplan has shown unprofessional conduct in the authoring of this December 11, 2015 article, then I implore you to contact The Washington Post.
Select “Journalism” from the drop-down list, then select “Comments About Articles” from the second drop down list. Paste the URL for the article into the box. Then in your message demand that they retract Sarah Kaplan’s article and immediately terminate her for unprofessional conduct. If you believe — be heard!
A Veiled Death Threat?
In the very first paragraph of Sarah Kaplan’s article she writes:“For centuries, it [Planet X] has eluded some of the most brilliant minds in astronomy — some say it even destroyed one. It’s the subject of endless calculations and rampant speculation, crackpot theories and countless hours spent gazing, fruitlessly, at the night sky.”To those outside the field of Planet X research, there is nothing usual in these typically cynical statements, however for the few who know, there are six chilling words: “some say it even destroyed one.”
They are chilling because the subtext clearly refers to Dr. Robert S. Harrington, whom many in the field believe was assassinated for his work on Planet X, as noted in our May 2008 article.
YOWUSA.COM, 22-May-2008
Planet X and the Mysterious Death of Dr. Robert Harrington
Dr. Robert S. Harrington, the chief astronomer of the U.S. Naval Observatory, died before he could publicize the fact that Planet X is approaching our Solar System.Our March 2012 article regarding media coverage of Planet X shows a clear correlation between Harrington’s death and the complete collapse in Planet X research at that time, along with the complete collapse of Planet X reporting by the mainstream media following Harrington’s death in 1993. In other words, this is not coincidental.
Many feel his death was part of a cover-up, one in which government agencies quickly moved to conceal the most earth-shaking discovery in history. If so, the search for truth begins in New Zealand. Read more…
Yowusa.com, 18-March-2012
The Planet X Cover-up in the Mainstream Media
On December 30th, 1983, NASA’s Chief Scientist of the Infra-Red Astronomical Satellite telescope (IRAS) announced that NASA had discovered Planet X.
Just one week after the story of Planet X was released, the magazine US News and World Report ran a story retracting the announcement and NASA has been silent ever since.
That didn’t stop Dr. Robert S. Harrington who was the chief astronomer of the US Naval Observatory until his mysterious death in 1993.
Planet X transformed from almost certain existence to the evaporation of Planet X evidence in a mere six months and immediately following the death of Harrington.
There is no other explanation for the stunning reversal of Planet X reporting in the mainstream media than NASA, the US Naval Observatory, and ultimately the US Government launching an all-out cover up and disinformation campaign. Read more…
The point here is that when Sarah Kaplan states in the very first paragraph of her Washington Post article, “some say it even destroyed one,” it is logical to those who are intimately familiar with Planet X research to assume that she is sending a coded message to the astronomical community at large. A veiled death threat if you will. That if you know what’s good for you, you’ll treat Planet X like a “third rail” topic, or risk becoming the next Harrington.
For those of who are less familiar, this may seem a bit presumptuous, the logic being, “while snakes are found under rocks, not all rocks have snakes lying under them.” With this in mind, let’s turn over the rocks in Sarah Kaplan’s December 11, 2015 Washington Post attack article, Scientists claimed they found elusive ‘Planet X.’ Doubting astronomers are in an uproar.
Attack Phrases by Author, Sarah Kaplan
According to The Washington Post, “Sarah Kaplan is a reporter-of-all-trades for Morning Mix, The Post’s overnight news blog” and is based in Washington, D.C.In a January 16, 2015 announcement, The Washington Post tells us, “Sarah is a 2014 graduate of Georgetown with a degree in International Culture and Politics. She previously interned at NPR and Washington City Paper.”
In other words, it can be argued that this young reporter is looking to ingratiate herself into Washington, DC power circles. It could likewise be argued that when presented with a “we’ll owe you one,” opportunity contingent on smearing the reputations of a few dead astronomers, why not?
After all, she has no background in the field she is reporting on in this article, as we can clearly infer from the January 16, 2015 announcement where the The Washington Post lists her degree and her previous work experience.
With this in mind, let’s view some snippets from her own article:
SARAH KAPLAN: “Though both studies were submitted to the prestigious journal Astronomy & Astrophysics, neither has been peer-reviewed or formally published.”
YOWUSA: This statement by Sarah Kaplan shows her ignorance regarding how the astronomical community actually works. The papers published by the ALMA observatory astronomers announcing their observations are:
- The serendipitous discovery of a possible new solar system object with ALMA
- A new submm source within a few arcseconds of Centauri; ALMA discovers the most distant object of the solar system
SARAH KAPLAN: “They’re both based on limited observations — just two spottings apiece for each odd object. And even after just 48 hours online, they have garnered a great deal of skepticism within the astronomy community.”
YOWUSA: Instead of reporting that other astronomers have responded skeptically after having used the coordinates in the papers to observe the same area of space, she’s reporting that, “they have garnered a great deal of skepticism within the astronomy community.”
This vague, unsubstantiated statement begs the question, where did Sarah do her reportage garnering? At lunch at a restaurant in Washington D.C.? This is not a joke. If you’re meeting with someone who is offering you that “we’ll owe you one,” opportunity contingent on smearing the reputations of a few dead astronomers, it’s exactly where you meet them — at a restaurant, or somewhere similar.
Next comes a sly bit of wordcraft:
SARAH KAPLAN: “ ‘We specifically wanted to reach the community that could tell us if we overlooked something, in which case we fully intend to withdraw the papers,’ Wouter Vlemmings, an astronomer at Chalmers University of Technology in Sweden and co-author on both studies”
YOWUSA: What Vlemmings is saying is actually good science. That is, if someone can respond to him with real science invalidating these discoveries, he’ll withdraw the papers. However, what most readers will clue in on is, “we fully intend to withdraw the papers.”
Why readers will clue in on that becomes clear with the introduction of Cal Tech astronomer Mike Brown, the other half of this Planet X suppression tag team.
SARAH KAPLAN: “All of which sounds pretty cool — unless you’re Mike Brown, a Caltech astronomer who has spent the majority of his career scanning the farthest reaches of the solar system for just these kinds of objects.
YOWUSA: Vlemmings is not attempting to sound “pretty cool,” as Kaplan phrases it. Vlemmings is asking colleagues in the astronomical community to view the reported data with a critical and impartial review. “All of which sounds pretty cool” is unfairly demeaning, and at this point in the article, Kaplan is only clearing her throat, so to speak.
Before delving into what Mike Brown has to say, let’s jump ahead in the article to Kaplan’s remarks about astronomers Percival Lowell and Clyde Tombaugh:
SARAH KAPLAN: “…no Planet X researcher was more beleaguered than Percival Lowell, who launched into the search for the distant object in an attempt to redeem himself after he became a laughing stock for suggesting that aliens might be building canals on Mars.”
“Lowell spent years photographing the night sky with nothing more than a primitive camera and borrowed telescope, searching for evidence of a planet whose existence was still only a theory. He died of a stroke in 1916, his search unsuccessful. A lifelong friend said that the failure ‘virtually killed him.’ ”
YOWUSA: Lowell actually imaged Pluto in 1915, but failed to recognize it as a planet. However, Clyde Tombaugh of the Lowell Observatory correctly observed it in 1930.
Sarah Kaplan offers the reader smoking-gun proof of not only her ignorance of astronomy, but also of her disregard for ethical journalism, with the smear, “Lowell spent years photographing the night sky with nothing more than a primitive camera and borrowed telescope.”
For the record, Lowell was a wealthy Bostonian who had no need to borrow anything. In fact, Lowell funded and established the Lowell Observatory in 1894 in Flagstaff, Arizona. Lowell also funded the observatory’s original telescope, a custom-made 24-inch Alvan Clark & Sons Telescope, one of several still in use today.
But more to the point, the ALMA astronomers are reporting on observations of objects at the far edge of our own solar system, not on Mars. So how does a man who died in 1916 become part of this story and what is the point of needlessly smearing him?
It is because Lowell is the American father of Planet X research, and because he is an easy, cheap shot for a scientifically illiterate reporter looking to feather her own nest by besmirching him.
Ergo, Kaplan’s article is not about what has happened in Chile. It’s about what has been happening since the discovery of Uranus — the search for Planet X. What the ALMA papers have done is to remove the tarnish smeared all over the field of Planet X research by the American government. For this the astronomers of ALMA are smeared by Sarah Kaplan, as is Clyde Tombaugh.
SARAH KAPLAN: “Pluto would become ‘Planet X’ a decade later, when a farm kid named Clyde Tombaugh working at the Flagstaff, Ariz., laboratory that Lowell founded came across a small moving speck in his own photos of the sky.”
YOWUSA: For the record. Tombaugh discovered a planet using a 13 inch telescope and was no “kid” when he did it. Calling him “a farm kid” is unwarranted and demeaning, but that is to be expected of someone who has no respect for achievement.
Even so, Kapan’s dismissive disrespect of dedicated astronomers who spent their lives in the pursuit of truth pales in comparison to that of Caltech astronomer, Mike Brown.
Mike Brown, Caltech‘s “Pluto killer”
In the movie Gladiator (2000) the character Juba tells Maximus (Played by Russell Crowe), “You have a great name. He [Emperor Commodus] must kill your name before he kills you.”In the same vein, when it comes to Planet X our government has long used a simple propaganda attack strategy that I call “The Three D’s” — deny, dismiss and demean.
In order for this strategy to work you need an egotistical “expert” to carry it out, as those who are kind and ethical experts are unwilling to participate in such attacks.
In this case, Sarah Kaplan of The Washington Post found Caltech astronomer Mike Brown to be the perfect egotistical “expert” for her smear article. Brown is not known as the father of anything, but rather as the “Pluto Killer.” A designation he so admires that he uses it for his Twitter handle (@plutokiller).
So, do the math. If you’re a power player in Washington DC and you want to discredit a Planet X story coming out of an observatory you do not control, what do you do? You find a scientifically illiterate reporter looking to feather her nest, match her up with an egotistical “expert,” and let them do your dirty work for you.
With this in mind, read the following excerpts from Sarah Kaplan and Mike Brown and as you do, test each against “The Three D’s” — deny, dismiss and demean.
- “ ‘The logical leaps are sort of astounding,’ he [Brown] said. ‘What they really saw they saw is a little blip and then six months later another little blip.’ ”
- “The evidence that the researchers offer for their findings is too scanty, Brown said, and the probability that they could have stumbled across a huge, planet-like object in a tiny patch of sky is too small.”
- “Finding Planet X in the small field of vision they studied with the ALMA telescope, he said, ‘would be like scooping a cup full of water from the ocean and pulling out the white whale.’ ”
- “ ‘There’s so many reasons why they can’t possibly be correct,’ Brown said. ‘It’s embarrassing to the field.’ ”
- “That’s because of Planet X’s ‘long and sordid history,’ as Brown put it.”
- “ ‘For those of us who actually work on this, it’s embarrassing to even say you might be looking for these sort of things in the outer solar system because there have been so many crazy theories,’ Brown said.”
- “you worry that when someone finally finds something that’s not crazy, people are going to say, ‘Oh, I heard that story three months ago and it’s not real.’ ”
Why is Brown’s white whale bombast pure propaganda? Because ALMA is not only the largest observatory in the world, it is one that America propagandists cannot suppress or compromise.
ALMA in Chile
When this story first broke we did the one thing that every independent Planet X researcher needs to do. We followed the money, and here is what we found.The Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA) is a radio telescope with an array of 66 antennas. It is situated on the Chajnantor plateau at an elevation of 5,000 meters in the high desert of northern Chile.
Presently the most powerful telescope on Earth, it is designed to further the search for our cosmic origins. Astronomers use it to study the universe in a range of wavelengths between infrared light and radio waves.
More importantly, it is a global collaboration and the international partners include:
- European Southern Observatory (ESO)
- U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF)
- National Institutes of Natural Sciences (NINS) of Japan
- National Research Council (NRC) (Canada)
- NSC and ASIAA (Taiwan)
- KASI (Republic of Korea)
- Republic of Chile
If you cannot kill it, smear it. Or as they say in Hollywood, “You have a great name. He [Emperor Commodus] must kill your name before he kills you.”
Summary
When it comes to publishing articles on the Internet we live in a 256-character world, and if you’ve made it this far, you’re that one in ten who really does care. Now the question is, do you care enough to make a difference?It’s obvious that a rookie reporter looking to feather her nest is being used for a government propaganda smear campaign to crush a newsworthy story and to smear honest, dedicated astronomers, both living and dead. Unlike a more seasoned reporter with a reputation to protect, she’s been played for a stooge because of her own naive, blind ambition.
Dear reader, if you look the other way now that you know all this and do nothing, are you any better than Sarah Kaplan?
Again, after reading this article and the full text of the Washington Post article, should you have reason to believe that Sarah Kaplan has shown unprofessional conduct in the authoring of this December 11, 2015 article, then I implore you to contact The Washington Post.
Select “Journalism” from the drop-down list, then select “Comments About Articles” from the second drop down list. Paste the URL for the article into the box. Then in your message demand that they retract Sarah Kaplan’s article and immediately terminate her for unprofessional conduct. If you believe — be heard!
The Washington Post and Planet X
On December 14, 2015 I appeared as a guest on Ground Zero with Clyde Lewis, a nationally-syndicated radio show on over 220 stations across the country.
The interview was based on Clyde’s superb article, Walking In Nibiru Wonderland, and an article published on December 11, 2015 in The Washington Post by Sarah Kaplan titled, Scientists claimed they found elusive ‘Planet X.’ Doubting astronomers are in an uproar.As a follow-up to my interview with Clyde Lewis, on December 17, 2015 I published my analysis on Sarah Kaplan’s article titled, ALMA Astronomers Publish Planet X Papers Before USA Can Suppress. In my article I referenced a yowusa.com article co-authored by Planet X researchers John DiNardo and Janice Manning in 2008.
YOWUSA.COM, 22-May-2008
Planet X and the Mysterious Death of Dr. Robert Harrington
Dr. Robert S. Harrington, the chief astronomer of the U.S. Naval Observatory, died before he could publicize the fact that Planet X is approaching our Solar System.On December 18, 2015 I received a lengthy email from John DiNardo addressed to both Clyde and myself, regarding my December 14, 2015 appearance on Ground Zero with Clyde Lewis. Attached was an MP3 file John created using the show archive, which included those aspects of the interview John found most interesting.
Many feel his death part of a cove-up? One in which government agencies quickly moved to conceal the most earth-shaking discovery in history. If so, the search for truth begins in New Zealand. Read more…
Given that John’s 2008 article has been a long-standing favorite, and the passion which he put into his email and audio editing, I’m now sharing them as-is with our readers.
—Marshall Masters, Publisher
John DiNardo’s Email
December 18, 2015Hi Clyde and Marshall,
I listened to and edited the first half of Marshall Masters’s recent interview on The Ground Zero radio show, regarding The Washington Post’s ostensible hatchet job of the A.L.M.A. Observatory’s sightings of what may likely be Planet X. Marshall’s analysis is accurate and is an evidentiary breakthrough for our cause, which is to alert folks to prepare to get away from danger zones prior to the great Earth cataclysms, and to start storing essentials now, since the likelihood of great storms is increasing dramatically (recall the French Foreign Minister’s warning that Earth will see “total climate chaos by Sept 2015”).
Here is more evidence to bolster Marshall’s assertion that the elite who own the Washington Post as their chief organ of disinformation (recall that Katherine Graham and her CFR family own that newspaper), indeed attacked the report of the ALMA Observatory’s sightings, because the ruling elite are afraid that public attention to the sightings might cause the public herd to shift from a mood of drowsy compliance to a mode of unmanageable social and economic independence.
So, in a duplicitous move to discredit the ALMA observatory’s sightings, amidst growing Planet X public awareness, the ruling elite (who, according to the London Daily Mail and other news sources, are now descending into their subterranean cities) had their “poison pen” reporter, Sarah Kaplan publish in The Washington Post her sloppy distorted critique of the astronomers’ reports.
I add the following analysis of the report, (and you can look this up) that several years ago, even before the A.L.M.A. observatory was completely constructed, its chief astronomer, Dr. Morita, was beaten to death. Now, the following realization is important to our cause of convincing people that Planet X is indeed out there and is now being sighted — and that is this fact that, when the diabolical ruling elite want to not only silence a credentialed credible whistleblower, while aiming to terrorize all other credentialed credible whistleblowers, in one stroke, they will have the leading whistleblower beaten to death.
And here is a striking example of their vicious tactics, which suggests that the elite were — from the very beginning of the ALMA Observatory project — desperate to destroy the entire program and purpose of the ALMA observatory and its independent team of astronomers, just as they murdered the chief astronomer of the U.S. Naval Observatory, Dr. Robert S. Harrington, as he was about to announce his sighting of the inbound Planet X. My example of these vicious bloody tactics of the diabolical ruling elite is this: Several years ago, Dr. Thomas Manton (you can look him up) was one such credentialed person who was giving speeches and alerting scientists and other concerned and influential types as to the real reason for BP’s Corexit-masking of the Gulf of Mexico sea floor.
Well, they arrested Dr. Manton on zero charges; they imprisoned him, and while he was in prison, they had him beaten to death in order to terrorize all the others who were exposing BP’s secret. So, this Washington Post hatchet job against the ALMA astronomers’ sightings of Planet X is typical of the diabolical ruling elite’s treacherous tactics.
Folks, the evidence of Planet X’s approach is now coming into view, so de-mesmerize yourself from wishful denial, and get yourselves and your families prepared to experience major Earth cataclysms! I’m preparing!
John DiNardo
http://planetxnews.com/2016/01/08/washington-post-flip-flops-on-planet-x-nibiru/
