Philip Porter said:

You haven’t looked into this at all

Although it is called Planet X it is not a planet, it is a brown dwarf star (the suns twin), which is only visible via very expensive infrared equpiment, it is on a several thousand year orbit. They built a telescope at the south pole and at the vatican to see it. It is causing the volcanoes, earthquakes and tsunamis, these will intensify over the next 3 years. There was an earthquake in Ireland two weeks ago, first time in recorded history.

Actually I know all about this and in fact, considerably more than yourself.

What you’re talking about is a bastardized version of something called the Nemesis Hypothysis It holds that a brown dwarf star could orbit the sun in an extreme elliptical orbit far beyond the orbit of Pluto and that this could account for the apparent periodic rise in cometary collisions and some other anomalies. Basically the object would come close enough to the sun every 26 million years and in doing so would disturb some cometary orbits.

Most astronomers consider the hypothysis to be a bit speculative. It *could* be true, but there’s no direct evidence. However, there are possibilities of detecting such a body. Brown dwarfs are difficult to detect, but since this one is relatively close, it should be visible with sensitive enough infrared telescopes.

The WISE mission began in 2009 to map the sky using a wide field infrared telescope. If Nemisis is there, WISE should pick it up. The mission is between 1/4 and 1/3 complete. Thus far nothing detected.

By the way. I know you’re a conspiracy theorists and so the Vatacan seems like a great place for some super-sensitive telescope (very in vogue with the Da Vinci code and all) but the Vatacan is located right in Rome. Horrible place for a super-sensitive telescope! There is a small astronomy there, but really, if you actually wanted to do serious observations with a big hightech telescope, a place like that has too much light and thermal pollution and its too low and too much moisture in the air.

Highly sensitive modern telescopes are built on remote mountaintops and desert plateaus. Only an idiot would think the Vatican would be a descent place for one.

Also, the South Pole would not be a very good place for a big super-sensitive infrared telescope. While it has the advantages of very dry air and very cold ambient temperatures, there are some big drawbacks. For one thing, all the equipment has to be brought in on C-130, but more importantly the blowing snow and ice crystals during high winds would scour optics and mirrors. It’s a very harsh environment. The Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station does do astronomy research, but building optical telescopes that are exposed to the outside for an extended period of time is not feasible. Buildings tend to be burred in drifting snow banks (hence the current station is actually elevated.

Highly sensitive telescopes need big mirrors to gather light. South Pole is probably a no-go.

See.. I know about this. Considerably more than yourself, actually

Oh by the way, what does this have to do with cancer?

        BMS said:

Three years? How is this possible when everybody knows that the world will end on December 21, 2012?

I rounded it up, yes that date is meant to be the main date for activity

        DV82XL said:

A universally accepted truth is called an axiom. An axiom is a proposition that is not proved or demonstrated but considered to be either self-evident, or subject to necessary decision. Therefore, its truth is taken for granted, and serves as a starting point for deducing and inferring other (theory dependent) truths.

None of the items in your list were ever axiomatic in that sense – they were never self-evident, and the first was enforced dogma of the Catholic Church, that had been disproved by the Greeks. The others are opinions that were being questioned even at the time.

What you linked to is not evidence, since one cannot prove the proposition by restating the conclusions. Nor is inductive reasoning going to work if the propositions remain themselves unproven. Theologists have constructed vast, logically sound inductive reasoning of what must be the will of God. However it is all founded on assuming scripture is inerrant, which it certainly is not. All the carefully built dogma that has been derived is nonsense because the contents of the Bible cannot be proven. The same with your ‘research’ on the internet. If the statements you are welding together themselves are unproven, your conclusions are not sound.

However I am still waiting for an answer to the question of why you would come to a den of skeptics, who you know are going to demand that you present a standard of proof, you know you cannot possibly provide? The whole point of being a skeptic is to require a higher standard of proof than vague accusations of conspiracy.

You say “the first was enforced dogma of the Catholic Church, that had been disproved by the Greeks”

how do you know this? where is the proof? according to this the notion that catholics believed the earth was flat was a myth

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_Flat_Earth

However, assuming for as moment that it was not a myth, it may be more Catholic lies after all. What I believe you are doing is behaving exactly like those under the control of the Catholic Church. They had been brainwashed into believing things work a certain way, and may say something like

“the idea that the world is round is nonsence, a vague conspiracy theory and why would you come here saying that it is round you have no proof. The evidence you have presented is not proof. We understand the modern world and know it to be flat and will not believe you”

So therefore you acknowledge that the Catholic Church maufactured this conspiracy. What if today the masses were still under an even greater and older conspiracy manuafctured AGAIN by the Catholic Church, how would you know of this if you were a victim of that conspiracy. You wouldn’t! That was me a year ago. Society would have taught you that looking at conspiracy theories is the activity of the mentally ill. So how do you get break free from that? You look into the stuff that you are told is conspiracy. It is only then that you will be on the road to freeing your mind.

I am trying to make you see that you have the wrong approach, that this sceptical attitude wont help you, it only serves the ego. You need to go through a waking up process (start by watching Wake Up Call on google videos, I assure you it is very interesting and will probe you into asking many more questions) after which you will see that most major and small events that happen in the present and in history are not disconnected activities, like our university eduaction and the mainstream media has us believe, but they all are connected in ways most people, brainwashed by the Zionist lies could not possibly imagine.

You are a prisoner, but how do you break out when you don’t know that you are in a prison, there are many levels to the prison, but you can only break out when you stop being sceptical prisoner and start to look at what is preventing your understanding of the matrix and reality. Socrates said “The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing.” once you keep that in your mind, your mind is open to all possibility, it doesn’t mean you accept everything, but that you can filter it through intuition. This is the only way to find the truth. Dismissal and disinterest in unproven theories compartmentalises your understanding of reality and provides you with a fake notion of personal security. Ignorant slaves are exactly what Rothschild and Rockefeller want.

        Philip Porter said:

Although it is called Planet X it is not a planet, it is a brown dwarf star … causing the volcanoes, earthquakes and tsunamis, these will intensify over the next 3 years.

Three years? How is this possible when everybody knows that the world will end on December 21, 2012?

        drbuzz0 said:

Planet X?

A planet whose influence is major enough to alter the climate of earth yet is so small and/or distant that only NASA’s sophisticated equipment could detect it and no other possibly could and which was discovered in 1983 but hidden for whatever evil reasons of the conspirators….

Yes, this does keep getting better and better.

How many apricot pits do I need to eat to see the planet?

You haven’t looked into this at all

Although it is called Planet X it is not a planet, it is a brown dwarf star (the suns twin), which is only visible via very expensive infrared equpiment, it is on a several thousand year orbit. They built a telescope at the south pole and at the vatican to see it. It is causing the volcanoes, earthquakes and tsunamis, these will intensify over the next 3 years. There was an earthquake in Ireland two weeks ago, first time in recorded history.

http://www.darkstar1.co.uk/

You wont believe it until you look at it from all angles, but considering the activities of the governments alone is enough to make you people suspicious, why have they moved the CIA to Denver at a cost of billions, why has Bush bought land in Paraguay, why do a disporportionate amount of retired military live in Denver, Why does Denver International Airport resemble the “end of the world” with its own pale horse of the appocalypse?

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_denver05.htm

None of the items in your list were ever axiomatic in that sense – they were never self-evident, and the first was enforced dogma of the Catholic Church, that had been disproved by the Greeks. The others are opinions that were being questioned even at the time.

What you linked to is not evidence, since one cannot prove the proposition by restating the conclusions. Nor is inductive reasoning going to work if the propositions remain themselves unproven. Theologists have constructed vast, logically sound inductive reasoning of what must be the will of God. However it is all founded on assuming scripture is inerrant, which it certainly is not. All the carefully built dogma that has been derived is nonsense because the contents of the Bible cannot be proven. The same with your ‘research’ on the internet. If the statements you are welding together themselves are unproven, your conclusions are not sound.

However I am still waiting for an answer to the question of why you would come to a den of skeptics, who you know are going to demand that you present a standard of proof, you know you cannot possibly provide? The whole point of being a skeptic is to require a higher standard of proof than vague accusations of conspiracy.

        DV82XL said:

Philip Porter – Proof in its broadest sense includes everything that is used to determine or demonstrate the truth of an assertion. Producing evidence is the process of using those things that are either, presumed to be true, or were themselves proven via evidence, to demonstrate an assertion’s truth.

The material in the links you posted do not fulfil those requirements being only more unproven statements that are not universally accepted as true, nor to they have a clear, logical path back to universally accepted truths.

They are not proof. They are not even reasonable evidence.

OK, they are not proof, but they are evidence, and there is a lot more. I am trying to indicate that there is a huge conspiracy which has been ongoing for centuries, which is now reaching its pinacle, which has successfully made the general public believe certain things, whilst omitting certain important truths. Everything regarding this can be found in books and on the internet. You cannot however, recognise the depth of this conspiracy until you put the pieces together. One piece of the jigsaw, ie. one piece of evidence is not going to change your mind, if you have been systematically brainwashed by education and the media into believing things are a certain way. You need to look at an at least nearly complete jigsaw to see it. I have attempted to highlight some of these things for you but if you do not wish to investigate further because you are interested only the mainstream approach then I can’t do much else.

Universally accepted truths?
What does this mean?

was it universally accepted that the earth was flat?
was it universally accepted that the twin tower attack was organised from thousands of miles away by a man in a cave?
was it universally accepted that Sadam had WMDs?

Is a “universally accepted truth” something that the authorities believe or that most people believe. If it is “the authorities” then it is not universal, if it is “most people” then how do we know that the authorities haven’t used the media to manipulate the people in order to fullfill their agenda.

        drbuzz0 said:

There is no such thing as death from old age.

You die when a critical organ fails due to disease of some type, cancer, circulatory failure etc.

You don’t just die because you’re old.

As one ages, wear and tear accumulates, the body is not as good at repairing itself, organs degrade and so on.

Ultimately, there has to be an acute cause of death.

Jeanne Calment of France died at 122 of respiratory failure, possibly associated with an infection. She had been experiencing respiratory problems for her last years.

Shigechiyo Izumi of Japan died at age 120 of pnemonia

Marie-Louise Meilleur died at 117 due to a blood clot.

Walter H. Seward died at 111 years old due to septis caused by an infection.

I presume that your so-called “natural cures” are capable of effectively curing all these conditions, so then I’d have to assume these people died unnecessarily and would otherwise live forever

The body’s organs wear out after so long, you can’t keep going forever, natural cures will only work to a point with age, you can’t beat time. Old people often die because they feel it is their time, it doesn’t always need to be medicalised, they can die from grief like my Gran, the doctor put “old age” on her death certificate.