The Dark Star: The Planet X Evidence (30 page)

However, this is another rather complicated subject which requires
very comprehensive review. It is unfortunate that I cannot do that argument
justice in this volume; to work through the Biblical Scholarship alone would
require several chapters. It is best left to a future book more focused on
these particular issues. Suffice it to say, for now, that a potential link
between the phenomenon of Nibiru and the Messianic Star is an open one.

However, the Messianic Star thesis would be more difficult to
substantiate scientifically than the ideas we are currently looking at
concerning a larger Dark Star orbit. If the orbital period was longer - in fact
much, much longer - then the Dark Star's current position could be further away
still, making it easier to explain why detection had yet to happen. In other
words, if we challenge the acquired wisdom that the orbit of Nibiru is just 1
Sar in length, then the science underlying the prospect of a Dark Star becomes
more realistic. The question then is how this can be justified, in terms of
ancient textual references.

I have occasionally come across passages like this one by Harold
T. Wilkins:

"Censorinus, the Roman chronologist of
the third century A.D. said that, at the end of every great year of six
Babylonian sars (a period of 21,600 years), our planet undergoes a complete
revolution. Polar and equatorial regions change place, the tropical vegetation
and swarming animal life moving towards the forbidding wastes of the icy poles...Catastrophes
attend the change, with great earthquakes and cosmical throes".
²

It seems that it would be legitimate to consider the orbit in
terms of multiples of Sars. After all, the length of the reign of gods as
described by the ancient Mesopotamians were also set out in Sar multiples. One
such multiple, or 10,800 years, is equivalent to the orbital period of Sedna.
This points towards a resonant relationship between these outer solar system
bodies.

Given all the other anomalous properties of this new minor planet,
I wondered whether drawing a analogy was justified. Quite what the exact
relationship between the Dark Star and Sedna is, I don't yet know. But it seems
more realistic to argue that the Dark Star's orbit is much greater than 3,600
years, and this figure of 10,800 years has real promise, for reasons we shall
now consider.

If we work with the premise that the Dark Star's orbital period is
10,800 years, then its orbit is very similar (but exactly opposite) to Sedna.
In that case, the Dark Star's aphelion will take place over the next 100 years,
coincident with Sedna's imminent perihelion. That means that the Dark Star last
encountered the edge of the Edgeworth-Kuiper Belt about 5,300-5,400 years ago,
around 3350BCE. This was during Sumerian times, and around the time of the
emergence of Dynastic Egypt. There is also strong evidence of severe climate
change during that period of time, connected with dramatic changes in the sun's
activity.
³

The period between then and now roughly fits in with the current
Mayan Age, which will come to an end on 21st December 2012. This date may be
associated with changes in the sun's activity, or possibly even a reversal of
the solar system's neutral sheet.
⁴
Does that Age coincide with half
an orbit of the Dark Star?

Last chapter we dealt with the concept of Lagrangian points, or
positions in space which were stable for minor bodies in a dynamic three body
system. So, for a system with the sun at the centre, with a massive body like
the Dark Star orbiting it, regional positions relative to the Dark Star could
play host to masses of minor planetary bodies. Sedna may well sit in just such
a position; at the co-linear Lagrangian point on the opposite side of the sun
to the Dark Star.

If so, then Sedna may be one of many, many bodies clustered
together within a particular region of space, made relatively stable by a
positional relationship with the sun and Dark Star. Clusters of relatively
small objects located at these regions will orbit around the sun just like the
Dark Star does, and feel no net acceleration. This works the same for
elliptical orbits as for circular ones, with the Lagrangian points being
similarly located at 60 degree intervals around the orbital path.
⁵

I have no idea how many minor planetary objects might be trapped
in such a cluster, but it is useful to bear in mind that there may be an
effective distribution of total system mass, as described by John Bagby.
⁶
Arguably, such a widespread distribution of the mass of the Dark Star system
might help to explain other anomalies, like the apparent slowing down of the
Pioneer spacecraft as they move away from the planetary solar system towards
the Heliopause. This anomaly has puzzled astronomers and physicists for years.

The earliest spacecraft to leave the planetary solar system, on
their way to the stars, such as Voyager and Pioneer, have covered vast
distances in the intervening years. They are still able to send small packets
of data back to us, but we no longer monitor their weak transmissions. Instead,
their positions are monitored by periodically sending them a signal from the
Earth, and timing how long the response takes to return.

A few years ago, it became apparent to NASA scientists that the
probes were not making the progress expected, possibly indicating they were
subject to greater solar system gravity than previously thought. Early in 1999,
NASA scientist John Anderson described how Pioneer 10 and 11, as well as the
spacecraft Ulysses - which is in a polar orbit around the sun, were displaying
anomalous behavior. This anomaly had been picked up by scientists studying the
doppler shift of the radio signals from the craft, enabling them to work out
the current velocity of the craft (7). Various possible causes have been ruled
out, leading some scientists to quite seriously question whether there is some
kind of new physical force at work. The fact that this effect is observed in
four quite separate cases is exacerbating the issue.

It should be noted that John Anderson is fairly forthright about
the possible existence of a tenth planet in the solar system. He was presumably
hoping that this anomalous behavior would be a further clue to its existence.
Dr. Anderson, a "Celestial Mechanics Investigator" with the Pioneer
program, went on record to indicate his belief that Planet X would indeed be
found, although no data available at that time supported the notion.

He adhered to the conclusions from nineteenth century astronomical
data that the outer planets were being perturbed by a distant gravitational
force. He considered it likely that the perturbing influence lay in a plane
perpendicular to the ecliptic, and that the orbital period of the planet was
between 700 and 1000 years.
⁸
Although this description is not in keeping
with the one we are currently considering, it is worth noting the anticipation
among the Pioneer team that a breakthrough would one day result.

The two Pioneer spacecraft appears to be slowing down, so much so,
that it seemed that they would eventually begin to fall back towards the sun.
⁹
NASA, as an institution, officially denies that these craft are being affected
by an unusual gravity effect that was unknown at the time of their launches.
Instead, they claim that the phenomenon has been attributed to a mechanical
problem with the probes themselves. This is a U-turn from the information
presented above, first was made public in 1998. NASA's position at that time
was that all mechanical anomalies had been thought of and ruled out.

The scientists who had been studying this behavior could offer no
explanation for the slowing down of the probes, and had checked and rechecked
their data for years. The results were substantive enough to actually call into
question our current theoretical understanding of gravity! Despite NASA's
insistence that the problem of this "anomalous gravitational
attraction" could be put to rest, the official Pioneer homepage continues
to recognize this as a genuine mystery.
¹⁰

One must then question whether these gravitational effects might
indicate the additional gravitational influence of our unseen brown dwarf? Dr.
Carl Sagan once postulated this possibility in 1995, before this scientific
anomaly was publicly discussed. He argued that the presence of a massive planet
just beyond Neptune would have been given away by variations in the
trajectories of the Pioneer and Voyager spacecraft.
¹¹

It turns out that, in the case of the Pioneer craft, such an
anomaly has indeed happened. But instead of pulling the craft towards a
distant, unseen planet, the effect has been an extra pull form the direction of
the sun. It's all very strange.

An interesting footnote to this story occurred one year after the
NASA report, presenting a possible explanation that was given about Pioneer
10's weird behavior. It would appear that the craft had been unexpectedly
“pushing itself in one particular direction”. No explanation was forthcoming
about the same behavior in the other probes, and this discussion of Pioneer 10
was made in the context of it having also been “mysteriously knocked off
course” by a new, as yet unidentified, object orbiting the sun.
¹²

The effect occurred in December 1992, when the craft was deflected
from its course for about 25 days. The discovery of a Kuiper Belt object was
then claimed by researchers at Queen Mary and Westfield College, in London, and
the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in California.

Would our consideration of a widely distributed Dark Star system
help to explain this slowing of the spacecraft? After all, the Dark star is
very distant at the current time, and its gravitational influence on bodies
nearer to the sun would be fairly negligible. But if we consider clusters of
bodies along the orbital path of the Dark Star, which are nearer to the
planetary solar system, then we can conceive of a way that they might have some
minor, but measurable effect.

This effect would be nebulous, however, because by their very
nature these clusters are distributed over space, as is the sum of their
gravitational pull. In effect, the known gravitational pull of the central
solar system itself is greater taking these clusters into account, and this
might explain the observed Pioneer anomaly.

In case you're wondering why the Voyager probes are not similarly
affected, Dr. Anderson argued in 2001 that the current trajectories of the
Voyager probes could not be analyzed in the same way, because they make use of
a different kind of orientation and propulsion system.
¹³

10,800 Years Ago

These clusters of minor planetary bodies and comets are spaced along
the orbital path of the Dark Star (which is the same orbital path as Sedna, in
effect). One cluster is located alongside Sedna, and is heading towards
perihelion at the moment. This is the cluster on the opposite side of the sun,
opposite from the Dark Star. A second cluster trails behind the Dark Star and,
for the sake of argument, may have moved through its perihelion about 3,600
years ago, around 1600BCE.

There has been a lot of conjecture about catastrophism occurring
at that period of time, centred around Biblical texts and other sources. It is
beyond the scope of this book to explore them in depth, but one need only
browse through the collected works of Immanuel Velikovsky to get the general
idea. Such arguments were used to generate the concept of an imminent passage
of Nibiru in the very near future. This argument about an extended Dark Star
system may help some to reconcile such a scenario with the scientific need to
place the actual Dark Star at a very considerable distance.

The next cluster of minor planets and comets would have arrived
closer to the known planets during the actual perihelion of the Dark Star, some
5,400 years ago. During this period the sun behaved very strangely,
dramatically affecting the Earth's climate.

The date that corresponds with the last full orbital period, when
Sedna last achieved perihelion and the Dark Star last reached its furthest
point, was about 10,800 years ago. This date is associated with great changes
to the climate of this planet; Earth - changes that include the sudden warming
of northern oceans over short time periods, leading to the catastrophic melting
of ice sheets. For instance, the North Atlantic Ocean appears to have warmed by
seven degrees Celsius over a period of just 50 years, bringing in its wake
dramatic changes to the climate of Greenland and other land masses skirting the
edges of the North Atlantic.

Such changes were not isolated to this region, but were concurrent
with other climate shifts in China and across the Himalayas.
¹⁴
Studies of ancient tree-rings near Lake Superior in North America showed that
there was no warning of the sudden flooding of the forests there 11,000 years
ago. This dramatic flooding resulted from the melting of glaciers at that time,
an event that Theodore Bornhorst, Professor of Geology at Michigan
Technological University, thinks could happen again, as our own global warming
accelerates.
¹⁵

These sorts of changes to the world's climate sound eerily
reminiscent of the kinds of Global Warming issues our world faces today. In our
present case, the most marked changes seem to be occurring in the Arctic
regions where melting processes appear to be accelerating. It is most likely
that our industrial output of greenhouse gases is to blame for the problems we
now face, but it may also be true that there is a link to the distant past
discussed above, spanning 10,800 years. Because, if a celestial body, or its
distributed system of accompanying objects, is to blame, then the global
effects registered on our planet would be cyclical. Such considerations make
the search for the Dark Star and its extended retinue an ever more urgent
consideration.