Horned Nibiru/Planet X object appears on NASA SOHO


A horned Nibiru / Planet X Object appears on SOHO Stereo Behind COR2  cam: Timeline from December 15 to end of the month, 2011. It is very strange but this object do not appear in the SOHO Stereo A head COR2 cam and in our opinion it is not Mercury.

The first video shows the horned Nibiru object on SOHO B. The second video is a back to back of the entire December 2011, SOHO A and SOHO B cams.

It gets even stranger, yesterday (January 4, 2012) an unidentified winged object was seen on the SOHO LASCO C2 cam


Is the horned Nibiru/Planet X object visible on NASA SOHO, a harbinger? A sign for upcoming events?

Additional information regarding the Nibiru / Planet X phenomenon.

Extract from  ‘On the anomalous secular increase of the eccentricity of the orbit of the Moon’ Cornell University:

A recent analysis of a Lunar Laser Ranging (LLR) data record spanning 38.7 yr revealed an anomalous increase of the eccentricity of the lunar orbit amounting to de/dt_meas = (9 +/- 3) 10^-12 yr^-1. The present-day models of the dissipative phenomena occurring in the interiors of both the Earth and the Moon are not able to explain it.

We examine several dynamical effects, not modeled in the data analysis, in the framework of long-range modified models of gravity and of the standard Newtonian/Einsteinian paradigm. It turns out that none of them can accommodate de/dt_meas. Many of them do not even induce long-term changes in e; other models do, instead, yield such an effect, but the resulting magnitudes are in disagreement with de/dt_meas. In particular, the general relativistic gravitomagnetic acceleration of the Moon due to the Earth’s angular momentum has the right order of magnitude, but the resulting Lense-Thirring secular effect for the eccentricity vanishes.

A potentially viable Newtonian candidate would be a trans-Plutonian massive object (Planet X/Nemesis/Tyche) since it, actually, would affect e with a non-vanishing long-term variation.

On the other hand, the values for the physical and orbital parameters of such a hypothetical body required to obtain the right order of magnitude for de/dt are completely unrealistic. Moreover, they are in neat disagreement with both the most recent theoretical scenarios envisaging the existence of a distant, planetary-sized body and with the model-independent constraints on them dynamically inferred from planetary motions. Thus, the issue of finding a satisfactorily explanation for the anomalous behavior of the Moon’s eccentricity remains open.

Nibiru, in Babylonian Astronomy

Nibiru, in Babylonian Astronomy  translates to “Planet of Crossing” or “Point of Transition”, especially of rivers, i.e. river crossings or ferry-boats, a term of the highest point of the ecliptic, i.e. the point of summer solstice, and its associated constellation. The establishment of the Nibiru point is described in tablet 5 of the Enuma Elish. Its cuneiform sign was often a cross, or various winged disc. The Sumerian culture was located in the fertile lands between the Euphrates and Tigris rivers, at the southern part of today’s Iraq.

As the highest point in the paths of the planets, Nibiru was considered the seat of the summus deus who pastures the stars like sheep, in Babylon identified with Marduk. This interpretation of Marduk as the ruler of the cosmos was identified as an early monotheist tendency in Babylonian religion by Alfred Jeremias.

Zecharia Sitchin

Zecharia Sitchin. Sitchin’s theory proposes the planets Tiamat and Nibiru. Tiamat supposedly existed between Mars and Jupiter. He postulated that it was a thriving world in a much differently shaped solar system, with jungles and oceans, whose orbit was disrupted by the arrival of a large planet or very small star (less than twenty times the size of Jupiter) which passed through the solar system between 65 million and four billion years ago. The new orbits caused Tiamat to collide with one of the moons of this object, which is known as Nibiru. The debris from this collision are thought by the theory’s proponents to have variously formed the asteroid belt, the Moon, and the current inclination of the planet Earth.

To the Babylonians, Nibiru was the celestial body or region sometimes associated with the god Marduk. The word is Akkadian and the meaning is uncertain. Because of this, the planet Nibiru is sometimes also referred to as Marduk. Sitchin hypothesizes it as a planet in a highly elliptic orbit around the Sun, with a perihelion passage some 3,600 years ago and assumed orbital period of about 3,750 years; he also claims it was the home of a technologically advanced human-like alien race, the Anunnaki, who allegedly visited Earth in search of gold. These beings eventually created humanity by genetically crossing themselves with extant primates, and thus became the first gods.

Natural disasters are accelerating exponentially without Nibiru or aliens

Credit: Stan Deyo

– but then again Nibiru takes us back to the Sumerian Gods creating a biogenetic experiment called humans (slave labor as we have no powers down here) to mine (caves, mind, consciousness) for gold (alchemy of consciousness) — returning every 3,600 years — 12 around 1 X 3 (36=9=closure) – and on and on with myth, math, and metaphor.

Creator Gods and Goddesses take us to ancient alien theory — they create human biogenetic experiments over and over again, each one more evolved -> then wipe them out with floods (collective unconsciousness) and recreate once again. We certainly seem to be living in biblical flood times now, if you believe that ever happened.

Beyond that we have the true nature of it all – the consciousness hologram which creates the aliens who create humans – the truth revealed at the end of the experience/experiment. Alas, it is the hologram that ends taking with it the knowledge of everything that has transpired within – much like the alien artifact in the Steven Spielberg’s mini-series Taken about gray aliens who created a biogenetic experiment combining their DNA with humans to create a more evolved life form. Sound familiar? It also parallels Hitler and the Nazi biogenetic experiments – the Master Plan. (credit: chrystalinks).

Source and author: arxiv.org * chrystalinks *  sohodata.nascom.nasa.gov                        * stereo-ssc.nascom.nasa.gov * disclose.tv




29 responses to “Horned Nibiru/Planet X object appears on NASA SOHO

  1. Great One !!!!!


  2. I dont know What that was.
    But I am reluctant to assume that is Nibiru.
    Objects shouldnt be named until Properly and accurately identified.

    Sure, Nibiru IS out there, some where. But its arrival date is in serious question.
    Ive no Idea what This thing is, but it does not strike me as planet like.
    And even Less Nibiru like.
    ~ V.


  3. After all our swami through his vision who predicted about 10th planet never can go wrong. He din’t talk about this because of any money making idea or profit. Now this one doesn’t look like a planet like vara said, so it remains to be confirmed whether this is the one our swami was refering to.


  4. Nicely done


    I beleive in GOD and if you do not that is ok with me. You believe what you want to and i will BELIEVE IN GOD.


  6. I have been following the worlds current path and i know without doubt that things are happing for a reason….You know what that is you can feel it deep in your gut,but the brain washing by the elete have you doubting what if they are wrong..The shelters around the world are for what i wonder…They sealed the seed cave ,Russia,China,and many other countrys are preparing for a great event…You can belive what you want but to get your information from the state run media or are goverment then you will surely perish…If you think we are the only people in the universe then your going to be really surprized as to whats coming..We know what this is ,but its hard to convince people till they can experience it up close and personal…….LIVE LONG AND PROSPER MY FRIENDS


  7. Olive Branch

    Might Not Be Horns,Could Be Angel Wings!!!
    Maybe Getting Ready To Cast The Judgements Upon The Earth,The Seven Trumpets,Seven Seven Seals,Seven Vials,Etc,Etc…….


  8. Wow !! Nice Wings……hmm.


  9. Greetings, and Happy 2012!
    Since as yet no one has commented on “ the anomalous secular increase of the eccentricity of the orbit of the Moon” or “A potentially viable Newtonian candidate”… portions of this post, or what the heck all the technical mumbo jumbo has to do with the “winged object” in the photos (if anything)… I thought I’d take a shot at it.
    I’ll start by saying “Great Photos”, and surprised SOHO/ JPL released them (sort of), and even more surprised at the first part of the dialog mentioned above linked to this story! Forgive me if I wax a bit technical…I will try to explain along the way.
    The analysis of 38.7 year LLR data stream gives…” de/dt_meas = (9 +/- 3) 10^-12 yr^-1”…which means the moons orbit is either closer to earth at its closest or further from earth at it furthest, or both…but certainly more elliptical than 39 years ago. The “d” in both sides states a “differential operator”…converting one function to another… “e” being the electric field of local space…”t” being time. A waveform…The equation states the change in the magnitude of the electric field as determined by the spatial arrangement of the magnetic field according to Ampere’s Law. This by default indicates a change in the magnetic field as the equation is mathematically identical to its reciprocal(1/either side of the =)…or by replacing “e” with “B”… dB/dt…change in magnitude of the magnetic field determined the
    spatial arrangement of the electric field according to Faraday’s Law. Again a waveform. E&M are always related in this fashion. The other side of the =sign says… 9 plus or minus 3 (from 6 to 12…a HUGE margin of error but very substantial even at 6)
    times .oooooooooooo12 year-1. “The present-day models of the dissipative phenomena occurring in the interiors of both the Earth and the Moon are not able to explain it”…well go figure! The Newtonian gravitational considers only mass…there is no “Newtonian/Einstein” model as such as they are contradictory…largely why Newtonian has been superseded by other theories. Per Newton’s theory, gravitational friction should be slowing the rotation of earth and moon and the moon should be slowly falling back to earth as the moons orbit becomes less eccentric! Newton never considered angular momentum of rotating/orbiting bodies. Einstein did, or from his theories Lens and Thirring did. This is known as the “gravitational lensing effect”. In short, light (from the sun) hits a spinning body (earth), light passing the side in the direction of spin will accelerate and light passing the side against the spin will decelerate as a result of gravitational drag…or the warping of space causes “frame-drag”. Very difficult to verify as the theoretical effect is estimated to be around
    3×10^-15. In perspective, relative to Venuses perihelion that’s 0.ooo3 arc seconds per 100 years. Let’s just say the article is more than accurate to point out that neither this or any of the above mentioned theory accounts for the” anomalous secular increase of the eccentricity of the orbit of the moon”. The math gets even worse when trying to account for the observed anomaly by a tenth planet…largely I believe as a result of erroneous assumptions. If for example a tenth planet were at a distance of 40 AU (roughly Pluto) it would have to be about 2.2% as massive as the Sun…roughly 32 times as massive as Jupiter. Certainly we would see it by now. If on the other hand it were only 5.2 AU (Jupiter) It would be about 50% massive as Jupiter, still clearly visible one would think. If this mysterious tenth planet were currently only as far out as Mars, 1.67 AU, it would still have to have 9 to 10 times Earth mass… about and a diameter 2.15 times that of earth. The argument against is once again that we should be able to see it…if it is vibrating at a visible wavelength. Consider the visible part of the spectrum extends from about 4000 A up to about 7500 A . SOHO’s spectrum effective range is roughly 175 A to 20,000A+…hmmm,… and that’s just a small part of the total EM spectrum in this 3-space dimension/universe manifesting harmonic waveforms from Planck scale to harmonic of light in free space.
    I’m going to venture a guess that’s how the portion of the blog I addressed is linked to the vids and the 10th Planet speculation. There is a point at the fringes of dimensions where passing from one set to the next objects “materialize” and become visible/detectable in various spectrums. Doesn’t mean effects aren’t at times felt/detected before the spectrum/waveform becomes visible. Cymatics, it’s been said here before, it is the newest branch of science,…and the oldest as well…


    • Wave…. uhm,…. what…?
      Thank god I get others to do that kinda math For me or my head would explode.
      Lots of speculation on What Nibiru may be.
      Personally, My own researches into ancient tablets suggest that Nibiru it self is one of the bodies Orbitting a larger body, and the Larger body is Not Nibiru at all. ie: what we think of as possibly a Brown dwarf, wormwood, the destroyer and a dozen other names, is mistakenly mislabeled as Nibiru. But Nibiru may actually be one of its largest moons.

      Aaaany way. to much evidence in ancient lore that suggests its large and its out there, and it makes return trips causing deviastation when it does.
      No set date on its next return, but Honestly I dont believe its all that far off. In our life times.
      Now, I cant do the math. But I can say that its orbit takes it a hell of a lot further out than a few hundred plutos. a few thousand may be more like it.
      Originally it was my opinion that it was returning VERY soon, and its mass was what was causing so much perturbation of the sun and in our solar system. and, indeed, it may still be a contributing factor.
      How ever, It is now my current belief that the galactic alignment with the magnetic accretion disk of the galaxy is whats causing our, and other planets to globally warm and become more active. the sun as well.
      As for a brown dwarf being SEEN, well, yes. with infra red tellescopes, as it tends to absorb light when in a non active and cold state. but it may well become more active the closer it comes to the sun. enough to reflect light or give off some heat perhaps. I dont know enough to say how it may work.
      I am just informed enough to know that brown drawfs are a bitch to see or detect.
      Thats MY two cents.
      ~ V.


      • Dear Vara,

        I enjoyed your post as usual. But, could you go into more detail about why you think Nibiru is a moon of a larger body? I haven’t really given that much thought, but it intrigues me. If what you think is true, perhaps our sun is actually in a binary star system with a large brown dwarf, the hidden failed star. Then, in theory, Nibiru could orbit this brown dwarf just as our planet orbits the sun. (I know that’s a long shot, but I’m just throwing it out there.) You mentioned ancient tablets, and I’ve read the 12th planet, but don’t remember anything about Nibiru being a moon/orbiting a larger body. I’ve always assumed that is orbited the Sun is a highly elliptical orbit.

        I must disagree with magnetic accretion disk/galactic alignment idea. It just seems very impractical to me. Even though we are part of the Milky Way, I feel like other star systems are too far away to cause some sort of devastating effect, even in a galactic plane alignment scenario. Even if there was an alignment, which force would cause the activity? I feel like the supermassive black hole in the center of the Milky Way is the only possible candidate, but its effect on our solar system is already apparent. I’m open to the idea I guess, but without any believable evidence, I’m forced to push it aside. Nibiru as a cause for increased activity in the solar system seems much more feasible, at least for my reasoning.

        I believe that Nibiru is nearing, and its effects are slowly becoming more apparent. I believe that the anomaly in the moon’s orbit is one such effect. Even if Nibiru was far beyond Pluto, it could certainly cause increased activity within our solar system if it was large enough!



    • I believe your calculations for a hypothetical tenth planet’s size/distance ratio is incorrect. The magnitude of the increase of eccentricity is that of the study Anderson and Nieto (2010).

      According to this wonderful slideshow,


      a planet with a with a Jovian mass would only be 200AU while a celestial body of a terrestial mass would be around 30AU. I’m not sure where you get your information from, but for someone so mathematically inclined, you should be able to understand the reasoning explained within the provided link. These estimates are, in my opinion, much are feasible than the ones you presented.

      I’m not sure why you are using such heavy jargon. Such detail is meant for a different audience. If you are trying to portray yourself as intelligent, then I suppose it is working, but at the cost of getting any points across because no one understands what you are saying. Your posts would be much more effective if you stayed away from subjects that the readers know nothing about, like the differential operator used in calculus.


      • Hello Nate, I too know the results of the calculations are incorect. The article you point out expresses this quite well. We are comparing apples and oranges…and grapes…Lens-Thirring, gravitational, hyperdiminsional (angular momentum). The mass/size figures I gave are clearly problematic…as stated…”clearly would be visable by now”…and also as mentioned, “largely I believe as a result of erroneous assumptions”…however they are accurate results when attempting to resolve the eccentric orbit with Lens-Thirring gravitational lensing and the law of inverse squares…clearly something wrong with the picture. A most explicit example of this was shown with gravitional lensing models of comet Elenin. I showed this clearly in a paper in early August at the time Elenin entered the orbit of Murcury. L-T grav-lensing gave …”bright part of the nucleus is 4000 meters, or a radius of 2000 meters. So, if it gets four times wider when it brightens as projected in Lens-Thirring models, “r” is four times 2000 meters, or 8000 meters. We also have to convert .15 arc minutes to radians, which is (.15 X PI)/(180 X 60) =
        4.36 X 10^-5 radians. Now, we have enough data to calculate the mass of “comet” elenin:
        M = {theta(rc^2)}/{4G}
        M = {(0.15 arcminute X 3.14 radians/180 degrees) X (1 degree/60 arcminutes) X (
        8000 meters X (3 X 10^8 meters/second)^2)} / {4(6.673 X 10^-11 NM^2Kg^-2)M}, and
        using 1 N = (kg X m)/sec^2,
        and so, (drum roll please)
        M = 1.18 X 10^26 kg
        This is TWENTY TIMES THE MASS OF EARTH!!!…anybody get the feeling there could be maybe a problem with the model?”

        That said, my comments were not intended to promote the gravitational or angular momentum model(or combination of) by showing deficiencies in L-T. Personally I think they each miss the mark…an opinion clearly stated by the authors of the article you reference who show the fallacy of the Newtonian grav model indicating a Jovian mass at 200AU. Standalone, I would suspect hyper-d model might come the closest of the three but still miss the mark.
        I don’t know the answer to the Niburu question re mass, single/ multiple bodies, date of arival,…what I do know is that the accepted models all fail misserably and that it is not difficult to demonstrate this. I think we need a bigger boat. We are trying to measure the noise of a tree falling with the ruler we used to measure the tree. My instincts are that the answer may best be aproached from the perspective of Cymatics…by someone with a functional understanding of quadradic equasions (Maxwellian)…well beyond my ability to reconsile.
        Your comment re “heavy jargon…ment for a different audience”…I don’t generally go there on this blog…and you are right…I had simular thoughts about the article…hence my opening statement/justification…”and even more surprised at the first part of the dialog mentioned above linked to this story! Forgive me if I wax a bit technical…I will try to explain along the way”.
        …I will do my best to stiffle myself…


      • Nate, In reading back over my post, your point is taken. As stated, I was a bit suprised to see the first few paragraphs following the vids here…and with no explanation of the maths. I will accept that my effort at simplification/explanation was likely as baffleing…not real simple concepts.
        I know you are well versed so I have a question for you…kind of goes to my “guess” stated at the end of my first post. I was trully ventruing a guess as to what the intended connection between the SOHO pics and the data given re moon orbit might be…What are your thoughts?


      • Honestly, Waveform, I don’t think they are connected at all. The object on SOHO is no doubt strange, but according to Sitchin’s the 12th planet and known physics, if Nibiru exists, then its orbit should be highly elliptical. Also, its orbit is supposedly inclined to the ecliptic. With the slideshow link that I posted, a Jovian mass would be around 200AU away. There have been a couple news/science posing the idea that a hidden dwarf star could exist near us. If this dwarf star is larger than Jupiter, one can reason that it would be farther than 200AU. I just don’t think the satellites would capture the planet from such a distance.

        On a side note, the two videos aren’t showing SOHO, they are showing STEREO A (A stands for Ahead) and STEREO B (B stands for Behind). There are 3 satellites involved here, each with different orbits, and someone seems hopelessly confused. There is no “SOHO Stereo Behind Cor2″… it is just STEREO Behind COR2. STEREO B is the satellite and COR2 is one of its cameras. SOHO is a different satellite in a halo orbit around the Sun-Earth L1 Lagrange point. The last picture/slideshow is actually SOHO.

        In the second video, the shots are different because STEREO A and B are at different positions around the sun, thus they are shooting from different angles. Because of the sun’s brightness, an object that STEREO A can be may not necessarily be visible by STEREO B.

        With that out of the way, I really DO wonder what these objects are. Perhaps they are large UFOs or (I’d hate to say it) Mercury. With everything I have researched, I just can’t believe the object is Nibiru. It just doesn’t fit.


      • I suspect you are right re the “connection” or lack thereof, unless the posters intent was to imply a hyper-dimensional harmonic anomaly in lew of either of the proposed models referenced. Also clearly confusion regarding source satellite of photos. This is somewhat forgivable. Core2 is one of five imaging devices onboard Stereo. Core2 photos from either Stereo A or B are for the most part indistinguishable from images taken by SOHO’s LASCO instrument. There are important differences however. While SOHO and its instruments are at least 10 years older, it’s orbit at L-1 is closer to the sun and maybe more importantly to this discussion, data is provided in “real time”…a couple of minute delay compared to fresh STEREO images that are 72 hours old if released with no delay…which isn’t always the case. Much easier to locate an inner planet for example with LASCO because you know where to look at any given time. Stereo has better resolution and combined, two perspectives…but you see what they saw three days ago at best, often with more manipulation (sometimes things are blocked out) and not unheard of to have images from A and B reversed. Several examples of this last year with Elenin. If the winged thing was imaged by SOHO, can definitely rule out Mercury. If from Stereo (would have to be dated shots from B real time Jan.1, ) and the images are reversed, you could make an argument of it regarding location but the size would be way off. Also, this would put Mercury moving away from B appearing to turn towards the sun (getting smaller and closer to the sun)…and the wings…hmmm. I think Mercury is not likely.
        I think you may have misinterpreted Anderson and Nieto’s conclusions (your link) from the maths/models they considered. They are not saying that if (to account for the eccentric anomalies) assumed object were “Jovian” sized it would be 200AU. They are pointing out the absurdity of it. Jupiter doesn’t play a major role in moons orbit now. At 200AU, 38.5 time the distance, it’s gravitational effect is reduced to 1/1,482nd of what it is now…that inverse square thing… . Additionally they state… “All the recently proposed long-range modified models of gravity fail to explain the anomalous increase of the lunar eccentricity” which is precisely my conclusion as well. I looked at the question from the other end of the scope and asked the question, “using the standard models, how big and how close would this object have to be”…and came to the same conclusions…it’s the models that don’t work. Another point of agreement I find with the excellent work they show is in their statement (consistent with the distances I considered) “A putative, still unseen trans-Plutonian planetary body does induce a long-term variation of e, but it should be unrealistically
        close to us to yield the right order of magnitude for e”…raising the question how could it be so big and so close and yet not detected? One last point of agreement, but far and away the most profound is in one of their concluding statements…”Indeed, a long-term harmonic modulation is introduced in he_ i by the presence of the time-varying ! and in eq. (15), contrary to the linearly increasing trend actually measured in eq. (1)”…here I believe they are on the right track. I would love to see them and others pursue this line without the fear of stepping on Newton or Einstein’s long dead toes. The answer to so many of the questions of the science of this time in history are to be found in an understanding of harmonics.
        So odd how history repeats itself…at every scale…we learn, we forget, we relearn…seems to be just another example of a harmonic waveform expressing a cycle of time…know what I mean…
        Journey Well…
        I would agree with your conclusions as well re these images vs. the historical records of Nibiru.


      • @waveform. I’m going to bullet because it is easier to organize my thoughts.

        1) You are incorrect about my interpretation of the slideshow. They are saying that a celestial body of Jovian mass at 200AU WOULD account for the eccentricity. They are saying it is unacceptable because they assume that such a celestial body does not exist. This is further demonstrated by the title of the slide: a potentially viable candidate (potentially in italics). I believe that such a celestial body DOES exist. Thus, for them to point out its absurdity is irrelevant to me.

        2) Jupiter does play a role in the moon’s orbit, but because the solar system is relatively stable, Jupiter isn’t going to induce some “new” force with a non-vanishing e. A planet disconnected from the relative equilibrium of the solar system that is approaching the solar system could certainly cause effects, even at 200AU.

        3) In my opinion, you are underestimating gravity. Jupiter has such an intense gravitational field that the Jupiter-Sun center of mass is near the surface of the sun. If you consider their relative sizes and Jupiter’s distance from the Sun, I’d say that this is not a small effect.

        4) Understand that this is a mainstream physics slideshow, the authors of which would automatically rule out the existence of another planet without doing any research. THIS is why they call it absurd. Also, it is entirely possible the government has covered up its existence. Let’s not forget that NASA works for the government.

        5) You mentioned that they are on the right track when you quoted the statement about a long term harmonic modulation, yet this effect came from the Planet X scenario of the slideshow! Of course they are on the right track, but this Planet X does exist and it would perfectly explain the anomaly of the moon’s orbit.

        What I’m saying it that this scenario is entirely possible, and the planet involved is Nibiru, AND that its existence is being covered up. I can’t put it any more clearly than that. It’s just what I believe, but nothing I can prove.


  10. Well,so have to post this strange story which i normally dont wanna post..but it works to well wz this story here….:
    Also a lot earthquakes happend today in california….Ätna in italy errupted yesterday…to many things the same time to ignore…also the sun is right now extrem activ….something is really going on….
    PS: A crazy doomsdayer website, but interessting for a read:


  11. Thank you Nobody.

    Stay Safe


  12. I would think that of all the current hot topics here this topic is the most pertinent if CONFIRMED, as far as the future state of the planet Earth is concerned.


  13. @Jay
    You are welcome Jay, but take care..cause this infos at that links are not confirmed…only scary doomsday stuff…but it fits to the story…..;)
    Stay also safe


  14. I really need to know what tis thing is in space.. anybody any clues? https://www.youtube.com/user/MrNoud911?feature=mhee


  15. I have no idea but would agree not Mercury. I have no good guess to size/mass/ or distance either. At one point a CME in a direction that would seam to be towards it has no effect so likely is not near to the sun as it seams. The wings in 05 pic look to be mirror images like one side is a reflection of the other. Looking at a single wing I am guessing the shape may be more an indication of perspective, speed and angle of aproach than the actual shape of the object. The strecthed to a point coma is likely a plasma discharge, electromagnetic in nature. If it were a at a frequency below ELF and acceloratingand or increasing vibration, or at a frequency above X-ray and slowing or decreasing rate of vibration relative to our frame of reference, it would cause this effect. When you mix hot and cold water, the hot gets cooler and the cool gets hotter. If you think of another diminsion existing above gravational light speed, vibrating faster, and another existing an equal distance below vibrating much slower as well, where an object broaches that boundry there is an equalization…each “reflects” the vibrational frequency of the other.
    This could account for the mirror image effect as well as the shimmering/translucent/ only half there appearance of this and so many other photos and vids…my thoughts on likely characteristics…as to what it is…back to you noud…


  16. seen this type of photos pop up up last year in my email taken with soho behind the sun-its defnately very intresting as it the hyperthesis of nihbru comes into full effect in accodance with various predictions we nowhere close to identifying its originatity but its getting to the area i personally in my research have found based on the speed versus its location to be estimated- maybe im right-maybe im wrong will have to monitor events closer


  17. If you get what you believe to be an accurate assessment of distance and speed or any other data, please post. I would like to take a look at the numbers and don’t have time to commit to the research.
    Be Well


  18. vara. excellent post! that was very reasoned, appeared to be as objective as objective can be, and rational as well. Not filled with cosmic jumbo but clearly laid out some pro and con points, with well formulated questions and possible answers. excellent. I’m serious. Humble, balanced, and informative. Were they all done so well. Thank you. I actually understood what you said and what you were postulating. People, take notes. Again, excellent post.


  19. Consider for a moment (thinking outside the box) setting aside everything you think you know (or think somebody knows who is suposed to) about “mass/matter, distance, gravity”…(you can always go right back to it, nothing lost)…Be mindfull that of the know forces, gravity is far and away the weekest…less than one thousand, billion, billionth that of the EM force…and EM is not the strongest. Be mindfull that your best science as yet to discover how matter is formed or even what it is. Even matter with the highest mass known, at any given volume expressed as a ratio of “physical particles” to empty space is much less than 1 in a billion parts. And of all of these, time is understood the least. Is this not true? What than is the common ground? …all is vibration…consider this for a moment…I could have said all is vibrating, but I didn’t…all is vibration…all matter, energy, every known(and unknown) force in the universe,…and in every universe, in this set of diminisions…and in all diminisions…vibration…hmmmmmmm…


    • You’ve talked a lot about vibration, harmonic frequencies, and the like. I just wanted to ask if you have heard of the Wave Structure of Matter? It poses that the particle theory is incorrect, that matter is made of waves! The electron is a standing wave, made from scalar waves that are distinct from EM radiation.

      Just wanted to throw that out there for you. I think it’s a great theory with a lot of potential, and it is in line with much of what you say.


  20. Yes Nate. Well done. you have connected more than a few dots. In the early ’90 there was a rash of interest expressed to determine the number of elementary particles in the universe. Consensus after much dispute prior to publication was 2.5 x 10^89…In “waveform 144,000 harmonic of light, Wave Structure of matter…there was a simple (sounding) challenge posited that went to the heart of the “dark energy/dark matter” question and the quest for “Higgs boson”…went something like this…a couple of excerpts…” What appear to be “stable” wave forms/ particles are generally found in artificial “closed loop” systems or at the extremes of measurable high/low amplitude. The first case does not exist in nature, the second tells us more about the limits of the measuring device than the matter in question. Bad math also can also result in the apparent stability of matter…
    In fact I will tell you no such critter exists. General consensus in physics and quantum mechanics is that the universe as we know it is essentially comprised of particles (waveform centers…point of collapse) numbering 2.5 x 10 to the 89th power. I won’t challenge or dispute this number. It is not however the number of “waveforms” in the universe. We will get back to this. I will tell you what actually exists… Waveforms. You can think of this as “light waves”, however, understand we are inclusive of the entire electro- magnetic spectrum and beyond in both higher and lower frequencies.
    Aristotle, considered to be the father of both physics and meta-physics, has been credited with the following observation…”the study of science is about space and the motion in it”. While an astute observation for its time, this is much like declaring the study of self is about the mirror in my hand. I tell you the study of science is the study of motion and the space it happens in. This is no play on words. Aristotle statement assumes there is “space” …separate from motion. Hence the term “empty space”. I tell you there is not now and has never been “empty space”. Space is simply where motion is happening. No volume of empty space out there out there waiting for a wave and or particle to come along. Waveform motion pulsing to an irregular beat,…harmonizing over countless modulating frequencies,…always seeking symmetry, synchronicity, efficiency…sympatric vibration. I tell you, all matter is in fact the result of this nature of waveforms harmonizing…occupying the same space in increasing densities.
    So,…if we assume for the moment, (conventional theory) 10 to the 80th “particles”, …how many wave forms… For those of you who are mathematically inclined and in position of a really big computer… The mental construct will be four dimensional,…to keep everything from happening simultaneously in the same space. We will call this challenge…”connect the dots”… all the dots…(Hitzenburg Principle…once connected always connected…)
    We will first connect the dots, then multiply by two since each line we will call a wave,…waves are pairs depending on your perspective, moving both forward and backward in time.
    So here is the challenge. It takes one line (wave) to connect two dots (points…particles…), three lines to connect three dots, six to connect four dots, ten to connect five dots, fourteen to connect six dots, twenty one to connect seven, twenty eight to connect eight, thirty six to connect nine, sixty six to connect twelve,… you see where we are going with this… how many lines (wave pairs) to connect 2.5 x 10 to the 89th particles? A clue for those who accept the challenge. Resolve by algorithm or…harmonic of light value (144,000 cycles per millisecond).
    As to your second post, I am not in disagreement at all with the Nibiru postulate. My point is that the maths of the standard model(s) are not reliable as the models themselves are flawed. It’s not that I underestimate the power of the weakest of all known forces, gravity,…it’s that it is so poorly understood…We have a measurable force, the waveform of which is as yet undetected, linked to matter, the formation of which is, well pick your theory…and well no shortage of good science, it’s not the “big picture” as the lack of a unifying theory confirms. I am getting longer winded than I intended and am running out of time. Consider this. All matter while vibrating at distinct frequency, is composite of “particle form”…the “now” where in the wave has collapsed…a very small % at any time of what exists in the universe. By the time Nibiru becomes visible/detectable with our current yard stick, it may well be in our backyard. The science of this time has forgotten what we once knew of harmonics…the waveform nature of the all… “All is mind…all is vibration…as above so below…”