Nibiru

[brianj]

Elder Orson Pratt confirmed this belief. He stated:

The Prophet Joseph once in my hearing advanced his opinion that the Ten Tribes were separated from the Earth: or a portion of the Earth was by a miracle broken off, and that the Ten Tribes were taken away with it, and that in the latter days it would be restored to the Earth or be let down in the Polar regions. Whether the Prophet founded his opinion upon revelation or whether it was a matter of mere speculation with him, I am not able to say.

Orson Pratt, “Letter box of Orson Pratt,” Church Historian’s Office, Letter to John C. Hall, December 13, 1875

I think the key here is the last sentence of the quote. Pratt didn't know if it was revelation or speculation.

Was it Joseph Fielding Smith who announced that man would never walk on the moon because the Earth the limit of our domain?

I have also heard claims that this planet is hollow, or that there are giant caverns housing large numbers of people. Cleon Skousen proposed that maybe the lost tribes are on another planet or maybe they are inside this planet.

We can have fun speculating, but that's about it. When people talk about a secret conspiracy to keep a secret about something in plain view, or use natural phenomena as "proof" of their nonsensical beliefs, I believe they are putting their attention someplace it doesn't belong.

[Col. Flagg]

After listening to John Moore's videos on you tube, I'm starting to believe it is on its way. He's a former Green Beret who has his own radio show.

John Moore is 100% disinformation - he was pounding the Nibiru/Planet X threat years ago and even went as far as to say that anyone who wanted to be safe from the effects of Planet X needed to be in the Ozarks before November, 2014 - guy's a joke.

[markharr]

Wilford Woodruff recorded in his journal a statement he attributed to Brigham Young:

The leaders upon their return from Provo made a visit to Logan. Here, President Young is quoted as saying that the ten tribes of Israel are on a portion of the earth--a portion separated from the main land.

Matthias F. Cowley, “Wilford Woodruff,” BookCraft, Salt Lake City, Utah. 1964, p.448

Which could also be interpreted to mean a separate continent like Asia.

So it's a conspiracy and "they" are hiding it??? A binary solar system is more common than a single star solar system. We will find out before the second coming lol

Binary solar systems are not more common than single star solar systems.

http://www.space.com/1995-astronomers-w ... ingle.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Binary solar systems have a gravitational signature that can be spotted hundreds of light years away. They wobble due to the gravitational impact of the other star. Our sun does not have that gravitational signature and being as close as it is we would know for certain if it did.

[Bronco73idi]

Elder Orson Pratt confirmed this belief. He stated:

The Prophet Joseph once in my hearing advanced his opinion that the Ten Tribes were separated from the Earth: or a portion of the Earth was by a miracle broken off, and that the Ten Tribes were taken away with it, and that in the latter days it would be restored to the Earth or be let down in the Polar regions. Whether the Prophet founded his opinion upon revelation or whether it was a matter of mere speculation with him, I am not able to say.

Orson Pratt, “Letter box of Orson Pratt,” Church Historian’s Office, Letter to John C. Hall, December 13, 1875

I think the key here is the last sentence of the quote. Pratt didn't know if it was revelation or speculation.

Was it Joseph Fielding Smith who announced that man would never walk on the moon because the Earth the limit of our domain?

I have also heard claims that this planet is hollow, or that there are giant caverns housing large numbers of people. Cleon Skousen proposed that maybe the lost tribes are on another planet or maybe they are inside this planet.

We can have fun speculating, but that's about it. When people talk about a secret conspiracy to keep a secret about something in plain view, or use natural phenomena as "proof" of their nonsensical beliefs, I believe they are putting their attention someplace it doesn't belong.

My belief in nibiru is in the 70% range. I keep hearing that there would be more evidence of its existence. My patriarchal blessing said I would see (notice) the changes in the earth prior to the second coming. I see changes in the earth.

https://youtu.be/jqnrXBVM6D8" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I'm not promoting this video as Planet X or our second star. I think it's interesting that the people in this village think this is a planet and a sign of the second coming

[skmo]

There is no possible way that another galaxy is passing through ours without you seeing it.

There was one. I remember seeing a very in-depth movie about it. It was on Orion's Belt. It was passing through earth, and there was someone trying to capture it. Orion was a cat and his belt turned out to be a collar. I don't remember everything about it, but there was someone trying hard to save us all. I remember that they were Men in Black suits.

[skmo]

The leaders upon their return from Provo made a visit to Logan. Here, President Young is quoted as saying that the ten tribes of Israel are on a portion of the earth--a portion separated from the main land.

As we have no understanding of how many dimensions there may be in our Universe, we don't know who may be living on a different "portion" of the same land we walk on. Our knowledge is so limited in this life, I have no problem with trying to work on the problems we have here and leave the crackpot ideas in the pot. I'm not saying they're all bunk, but blindly chasing after things we generally aren't going to experience in this life is a waste of effort and intellect that could be better served by working on our own exaltation and relieving the suffering that exists in the real world today.

[Bronco73idi]

we are all wasting time, this forum is like facebook. A time waster!!! :))

If we do not have a companion star then where is Enoch's city of Zion? The lost 10 tribes is debatable even thou if part of them are not on another planet it would make JS wrong.

When I read D&C, I got out of it that Heavenly Father is about Doctrine (laws) and Covenants (promises). Heavenly Father is omnipotent, yes. At the same time he follows the same Doctrine (laws) that he gives us. He hasn't given us the full law of nature, he will.

If we do not have a companion star then where is Enoch's city of Zion?

Wikipedia; If components in binary star systems are close enough they can gravitationally distort their mutual outer stellar atmospheres. In some cases, these close binary systems can exchange mass, which may bring their evolution to stages that single stars cannot attain. Examples of binaries are Sirius, and Cygnus X-1 (Cygnus X-1 being a well-known black hole). Binary stars are also common as the nuclei of many planetary nebulae, and are the progenitors of both novae and type Ia supernovae.

Sounds like Joseph Smith is writing on wiki!!!!! =))

[brianj]

My belief in nibiru is in the 70% range. I keep hearing that there would be more evidence of its existence. My patriarchal blessing said I would see (notice) the changes in the earth prior to the second coming. I see changes in the earth.

https://youtu.be/jqnrXBVM6D8" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I'm not promoting this video as Planet X or our second star. I think it's interesting that the people in this village think this is a planet and a sign of the second coming

IT'S A RAINBOW! I want those two minutes of my life back!

Three minutes in it says that the object is perfectly circular, unlike a rainbow. Show me a rainbow that's not perfectly circular! As a private pilot or airline passenger, when I see a rainbow in flight it is always a perfect circle! On earth we usually don't see a full circle because the ground interferes. But in this video, since the sun was low on the horizon, we can see more of the rainbow than if the sun was higher in the sky. And there appears to be a second rainbow a little wider than the one everybody is cheering over.

[Bronco73idi]

Yes it is a rainbow. The point was a small African village thinks a planet being so close is a sign of the second coming. Wonder why?

[Dlight]

I just don't see how it fits into known prophecy. A planet striking our planet would completely and fully destroy all life which I don't think fits well with the earth's future. And I echo what was said above: you can't hide a planet from all the astronomers of the world.

Joseph Smith said

"There will be wars and rumors of wars, signs in the heavens above and on the earth beneath, the sun turned into darkness and the moon to blood, earthquakes in divers places, the seas heaving beyond their bounds; then will appear one grand sign of the Son of Man in heaven. But what will the world do? They will say it is a planet, a comet, etc. But the Son of Man will come as the sign of the coming of the Son of Man, which will be as the light of the morning cometh out of the east [see Joseph Smith—Matthew 1:26].”"

[JohnnyL]

The current understanding of mainstream science does not mesh with truth. We should all understand this. This includes astronomy and physics.

How did Earth get in this solar system? What of the Fall?

How does the Sun glow? Where does it get its "life" from?

Why is the moon hollow, or such?

How did the USA ever get men there and back?

How do lasers reach miles afar, FLAT instead of missing their mark because of the earth's curvature?

Why were the experiments of sound traveling faster than light not picked up on? And do we really believe that light is the fastest thing in existence, and that it has been calculated?

How did the city of Enoch "space off"?

How will the earth be like a scroll?

How did the Flood occur? What changes happened to life? Why did the curse change from the earth to the waters?

Electrical universe?

Ether? Light of Christ?

Experiment after experiment about "quantum connections"?

The greatest scientists were experimenters and builders, not mathematicians.

Some scientists are going way far beyond MSS, but are basically being ignored or derided by MSS. I don't know why LDS feel the need to follow. Perhaps some sayings of prophets and apostles were a little off/ speculation? But many are not. And MSS does not mesh with the gospel! Not just following, but deriding, is to deride the prophets. Where is true foolishness?

Surely we've heard of Charles Fort? I strongly suggest a reading of Lyall Watson, especially "The Nature of Things: The Secret Life of Inanimate Objects". And there are lots of other "anti-MSS" great reads, too.

Anyone can hold on to untruth as much as they want, but if it's just untruth on the other side of the other untruths people are getting derided for, how much better isn't it?

[JohnnyL]

After listening to John Moore's videos on you tube, I'm starting to believe it is on its way. He's a former Green Beret who has his own radio show.

John Moore is 100% disinformation - he was pounding the Nibiru/Planet X threat years ago and even went as far as to say that anyone who wanted to be safe from the effects of Planet X needed to be in the Ozarks before November, 2014 - guy's a joke.

I have no idea if he is or not--never heard of him--but surely you have more evidence of his being 100% disinformation?

[brianj]

I just don't see how it fits into known prophecy. A planet striking our planet would completely and fully destroy all life which I don't think fits well with the earth's future. And I echo what was said above: you can't hide a planet from all the astronomers of the world.

Joseph Smith said

"There will be wars and rumors of wars, signs in the heavens above and on the earth beneath, the sun turned into darkness and the moon to blood, earthquakes in divers places, the seas heaving beyond their bounds; then will appear one grand sign of the Son of Man in heaven. But what will the world do? They will say it is a planet, a comet, etc. But the Son of Man will come as the sign of the coming of the Son of Man, which will be as the light of the morning cometh out of the east [see Joseph Smith—Matthew 1:26].”"

The sign of the coming of the Son of Man is commonly interpreted as the Lord coming in His glory, not another planet approaching. And Smith's own words seem to confirm this interpretation. "They will say it is a planet..."

[brianj]

The current understanding of mainstream science does not mesh with truth. We should all understand this. This includes astronomy and physics.

How did Earth get in this solar system? What of the Fall?

How does the Sun glow? Where does it get its "life" from?

Why is the moon hollow, or such?

How did the USA ever get men there and back?

How do lasers reach miles afar, FLAT instead of missing their mark because of the earth's curvature?

Why were the experiments of sound traveling faster than light not picked up on? And do we really believe that light is the fastest thing in existence, and that it has been calculated?

How did the city of Enoch "space off"?

How will the earth be like a scroll?

How did the Flood occur? What changes happened to life? Why did the curse change from the earth to the waters?

Electrical universe?

Ether? Light of Christ?

Experiment after experiment about "quantum connections"?

The greatest scientists were experimenters and builders, not mathematicians.

Some scientists are going way far beyond MSS, but are basically being ignored or derided by MSS. I don't know why LDS feel the need to follow. Perhaps some sayings of prophets and apostles were a little off/ speculation? But many are not. And MSS does not mesh with the gospel! Not just following, but deriding, is to deride the prophets. Where is true foolishness?

Surely we've heard of Charles Fort? I strongly suggest a reading of Lyall Watson, especially "The Nature of Things: The Secret Life of Inanimate Objects". And there are lots of other "anti-MSS" great reads, too.

Anyone can hold on to untruth as much as they want, but if it's just untruth on the other side of the other untruths people are getting derided for, how much better isn't it?

The current scientific belief is that the earth was formed by particles coming together when the sun and the rest of the solar system formed, and I suspect this is an accurate belief. Referring to Moses 4 I infer the following: This planet was formed before the sun had enough mass to initiate nuclear fusion. Fusion began, creating light, and the nebula from which the solar system formed reflected light such that there was no darkness anywhere on the planet. As that nebula dissipated, the light was separated from the darkness and the stars became visible. Tidal and tectonic forces caused the formation of land above the water that covered the planet. Plant life was brought into existence, either evolving from a couple of seed organisms or by various plants being introduced to the planet over time. Animal life was brought into existence, either evolving from seed organisms or by animals being introduced to the planet over time. Man was formed. Either Adam's body was created by the power of God, or animal life evolved until a human body was created at which time Adam's spirit was placed into a body. Thus the creation of solar system and life doesn't have to put science and religion in opposition to one another.

How does the sun glow? Exactly the same way a neon or florescent light works. Energy, coming from electricity in a light bulb or from nuclear fusion in the sun, causes electrons to jump to a higher, more energetic orbital shell. When the electron falls back to its normal shell energy is released in the form of light.

The moon is hollow. How we got to the moon is easily explained through orbital mechanics. This universe follows laws, many of which are now understood through science. The same science that allows us to drive around, fly in aircraft, or interact on this forum.

It is known that light particles have no mass and travel in a straight line, though gravity can curve that line. Why would the curvature of the earth have any impact on the flow of photons?

The idea of sound traveling faster than speed is a poor explanation for a theorized and eventually observed phenomena. Read any reputable scientific journal on the subject and you will learn that neither particles nor information traveled faster than the speed of light. The collective velocity was faster than light, but the velocity of each individual components did not exceed the speed of sound.

Scientists wouldn't try to explain how the city of Enoch lifted away because there is no evidence of it happening.

I don't know of anything in scripture or modern revelation claiming that this planet will be rolled up like a scroll. There are prophecies of the heavens rolling up like a scroll, which is probably the best descriptive terminology that the ancient prophets who saw that event could use but isn't literal. Looking at what the sky would theoretically look like if you were accelerated to the speed of light, it is possible that the planet will be accelerated to C when it returns to where it was created at the Second Coming.

And I feel like I have answered enough of your points. I will leave the rest to someone else, but first I will say that you are wrong in your last assertion. All of the greatest scientists have been mathematicians. Mathematics explains scientific principles. Engineers take those scientific principles and do the building.

[Bronco73idi]

Brianj nice post, johnnyl path was leading to flat earth and plasma (electric universe). Flat earth doesn't fit the Tower of Babel ie. Joseph smith drawing of the ancient heavens.

The electric universe has some interesting points.

Brianj my question to you is how old do you think the earth is?

[brianj]

Brianj nice post, johnnyl path was leading to flat earth and plasma (electric universe). Flat earth doesn't fit the Tower of Babel ie. Joseph smith drawing of the ancient heavens.

The electric universe has some interesting points.

Brianj my question to you is how old do you think the earth is?

Short answer: I don't know and I look forward to finding out.

Longer answer: We are told of six creative periods, called six days, but not told anything more. I know people who believe the earth is 6,000 years old, but their reasoning on that belief seems faulty to me. They accept that one day to Heavenly Father is 1,000 years on earth, inferred from the people early in the Bible who lived more than 900 years but never 1,000 or more, and (I believe) correctly determined that the fall happened about 4,000 years before the birth of Christ. Using their logic, if this planet was created on day one of creation, the planet would be about 13,000 years old.

Since we don't know how long each of those creative periods were, if there was any amount of time between the end of one creative period and the start of the next, or how long Adam and Eve were in the garden before they transgressed, the best I can do is to place a lower bound of 13,000 years and an upper bound of 6,000,000,000 (six billion) years.

[skmo]

Yes it is a rainbow. The point was a small African village thinks a planet being so close is a sign of the second coming. Wonder why?

It's good for business: tourism, traveling ministry, trinket sales.

[Bronco73idi]

Yes it is a rainbow. The point was a small African village thinks a planet being so close is a sign of the second coming. Wonder why?

It's good for business: tourism, traveling ministry, trinket sales.

Sure buddy lol

[JohnnyL]

The current understanding of mainstream science does not mesh with truth. We should all understand this. This includes astronomy and physics.

How did Earth get in this solar system? What of the Fall?

How does the Sun glow? Where does it get its "life" from?

Why is the moon hollow, or such?

How did the USA ever get men there and back?

How do lasers reach miles afar, FLAT instead of missing their mark because of the earth's curvature?

Why were the experiments of sound traveling faster than light not picked up on? And do we really believe that light is the fastest thing in existence, and that it has been calculated?

How did the city of Enoch "space off"?

How will the earth be like a scroll?

How did the Flood occur? What changes happened to life? Why did the curse change from the earth to the waters?

Electrical universe?

Ether? Light of Christ?

Experiment after experiment about "quantum connections"?

The greatest scientists were experimenters and builders, not mathematicians.

Some scientists are going way far beyond MSS, but are basically being ignored or derided by MSS. I don't know why LDS feel the need to follow. Perhaps some sayings of prophets and apostles were a little off/ speculation? But many are not. And MSS does not mesh with the gospel! Not just following, but deriding, is to deride the prophets. Where is true foolishness?

Surely we've heard of Charles Fort? I strongly suggest a reading of Lyall Watson, especially "The Nature of Things: The Secret Life of Inanimate Objects". And there are lots of other "anti-MSS" great reads, too.

Anyone can hold on to untruth as much as they want, but if it's just untruth on the other side of the other untruths people are getting derided for, how much better isn't it?

The current scientific belief is ...

Yes, that sums it up. ;)

“When the earth was framed and brought into existence and man was placed upon it, it was near the throne of our Father in heaven. … But when man fell, the earth fell into space, and took up its abode in this planetary system. … This is the glory the earth came from, and when it is glorified it will return again unto the presence of the Father, and it will dwell there, and these intelligent beings that I am looking at, if they live worthy of it, will dwell upon this earth.”

The moon is hollow. How we got to the moon is easily explained through orbital mechanics. This universe follows laws, many of which are now understood through science. The same science that allows us to drive around, fly in aircraft, or interact on this forum.

To show one small example of lack of understanding and knowledge:
Hollow moon: http://www.utaot.com/2013/08/16/incredi ... -the-moon/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Irwin Shapiro,
Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics
“The best possible explanation for the Moon is observational error – the Moon doesn’t exist.’
“The Moon is bigger than it should be, apparently older than it should be and much lighter in mass than it should be. It occupies an unlikely orbit and is so extraordinary that all existing explanations for its presence are fraught with difficulties are none of them could be considered remotely watertight.”

Isaac Asimov,
American author and professor of biochemistry at Boston University and Science Fiction writer. Asimov was one of the most prolific writers of all time.
“We cannot help but come to the conclusion that the Moon by rights ought not to be there. The fact that it is, is one of the strokes of luck almost too good to accept… Small planets, such as Earth, with weak gravitational fields, might well lack satellites… … In general then, when a planet does have satellites, those satellites are much smaller than the planet itself. Therefore, even if the Earth has a satellite, there would be every reason to suspect… that at best it would be a tiny world, perhaps 30 miles in diameter. But that is not so. Earth not only has a satellite, but it is a giant satellite, 2160 miles in diameter. How is it then, that tiny Earth has one? Amazing.”
“The Moon, which has no atmosphere and no magnetic field, is basically a freak of nature”

Christopher Knight and Alan Bulter
Book: Who Built the Moon?
The Moon has astonishing synchronicity with the Sun. When the Sun is at its lowest and weakest in mid-winter, the Moon is at its highest and brightest, and the reverse occurs in mid-summer. Both set at the same point on the horizon at the equinoxes and at the opposite point at the solstices. What are the chances that the Moon would naturally find an orbit so perfect that it would cover the Sun at an eclipse and appear from Earth to be the same size? What are chances that the alignments would be so perfect at the equinoxes and solstices?

Farouk El Baz,
NASA
“If water vapour is coming from the Moon’s interior is this serious. It means that there is a drastic distinction between the different phases of the lunar interior – that the interior is quite different from what we have seen on the surface.”

Mikhail Vasin, Alexander Shcherbakov,
Societ Academy of Sciences, 1970.
“Is the moon a creation of an alien intelligence?”

Dr Harold Urey,
Nobel Prize for Chemistry
“I’m terribly puzzled by the rocks from the Moon and in particular of their titanium content.”

Dr S Ross Taylor,
Geochemist of lunar chemical analysis
Said the problem was that maria plains the size of Texas had to be covered with melted rock containing fluid titanium. He said you would not expect titanium ever to be hot enough to do that, even on Earth, and no one has ever suggested that the Moon was hotter than the Earth.
“What could distribute titanium in this way? Highly advanced technology developed and operated by entities that are immensely more technologically advance than humans.”

Dr. Gordon MacDonald,
NASA
“it would seem that the Moon is more like a hollow than a homogenous sphere’. He surmised that the data must have been wrong – but it wasn’t.”

Carl Sagan,
Cosmologist,
“A natural satellite cannot be a hollow object.”

Dr. Sean C Solomon,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
“The Lunar Orbiter experiments had vastly improved knowledge of the Moon’s gravitational field and indicated the frightening possibility that the Moon might be hollow.”

University of Arizona Lon Hood
“We knew that the Moon’s core was small, but we didn’t know it was this small… This really does add weight to the idea that the Moon’s origin is unique, unlike any other terrestrial body.”

NASA scientists
The Apollo 12 mission to the Moon in November 1969 set up seismometers and then intentionally crashed the Lunar Module causing an impact equivalent to one ton of TNT. The shockwaves built up for eight minutes, and NASA scientists said the Moon ‘rang like a bell.

Maurice Ewing,
American geophysicist and oceanographer
“As for the meaning of it, I’d rather not make an interpretation right now, but it is as though someone had struck a bell, say, in the belfry of the a church a single blow and found that the reverberation from it continued for 30 minutes.”

Ken Johnson,
Supervisor of the Data and Photo Control department during the Apollo missions
“The Moon not only rang like a bell, but the whole Moon wobbled in such a precise way that it was almost as though it had gigantic hydraulic damper struts inside it.”

Moon rocks have been found to contain processed metals, including brass and mica, and the elements Uranium 236 and Neptunium 237 that have never been found to occur naturally.

Dr. D L Anderson,
Professor of geophysics and director of the seismological laboratory,
California Institute of Technology
“The Moon is made inside out and that its inner and outer compositions should be the other way around.”

Dr. Robin Brett,
NASA Scientist
“It seems much easier to explain the nonexistence of the moon than its existence.”

And I feel like I have answered enough of your points. I will leave the rest to someone else, but first I will say that you are wrong in your last assertion. All of the greatest scientists have been mathematicians. Mathematics explains scientific principles. Engineers take those scientific principles and do the building.

You have good MSS answers, but as can be ascertained by just one answer... failed the test. I could go on and on, but I'll leave the rest to someone else.

I can give you all kinds of things that don't fit with MSS, and that no one can seem to answer--MSS least of all.

"Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality." --Nikola Tesla

[skmo]

Yes it is a rainbow. The point was a small African village thinks a planet being so close is a sign of the second coming. Wonder why?

It's good for business: tourism, traveling ministry, trinket sales.

Sure buddy lol

Oh yeah. Everyone's got to have something to offer. On my mission I saw a lot of preachers of terror bilk many poor families out of all their money by quoting all kinds of Revelations scriptures and making people believe the Apocalypse was at hand. One method was to explain that Reagan was the Anti-Christ because he had 6 letters in his first, middle, and last names, meaning he had the mark of the beast: 666. Not only can just about anything be bought for money in this world, but just about anything will be done to get money as well.

I love the assurance at the beginning of his video: "...I can assure you that these african villagers are much more in touch with nature than we are..." I've spent most of my teaching career living with poor villagers who touted their close ties to nature, knowing secrets white men have long lost. I certainly agree that there is great knowledge of things from nature that we've lost, and it's possible to run across someone who has some of this dying knowledge, but my experience has shown me it's professed a LOT more than it's proven.

[brianj]

The moon is hollow. How we got to the moon is easily explained through orbital mechanics. This universe follows laws, many of which are now understood through science. The same science that allows us to drive around, fly in aircraft, or interact on this forum.

To show one small example of lack of understanding and knowledge:
Hollow moon: http://www.utaot.com/2013/08/16/incredi ... -the-moon/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

No, the moon is not hollow. If it were hollow then seismic waves would not propagate through the empty space. This should be obvious. Remember that six passive seismic experiment packages were left on the moon within the Apollo Lunar Surface Experiment Packages (ALSEPs) by the six Apollo missions that successfully landed. Since then both man made and natural objects have crashed into the lunar surface, causing seismic waves that propagate through the moon exactly as they would if the moon were solid.

Contrary to one of your quotes, a quote I can't find from any reputable source, observed variation of the Lunar Prospector Orbiter's orbit reveals fine-scale variation of the lunar gravitational field consistent with the presence of a core, mantle, and crust. And the moon's normalized polar moment of inertia of 0.393 ± 0.001 is very close to the 0.4 value for a solid object with a constant density. For comparison, the earth's normalized polar moment of inertia is 0.33.

You do have a somewhat accurate quote claiming that the moon "rang like a bell" after certain impacts - by which the lunar seismologists meant that it continued vibrating for a long time as opposed to a literal comparison to a bell. When the S-IVB from Apollo 13 hit the moon, the ALSEPs left by Apollo 11 and 12 recorded seismic shaking for over four hours. What causes this? There is a lot of liquid in the crust of the earth, which quickly dampens seismic waves. But the moon is very dry so the waves keep bouncing around for much longer. This is proof that the moon is not hollow and does not act like it has hydraulic struts inside.

You also claimed that uranium 236 does not naturally exist. This is false. Uranium 236 is a natural decay state of uranium 235. Almost one in five atoms of U235 will not undergo fission, but will emit a gamma ray and capture the neutron that strikes the atomic nucleus.

I don't know if this universe has always existed or if it was created for Heavenly Father's purposes. But either way it follows rules. Science identifies those rules. Science is not your enemy.

[JohnnyL]

The moon is hollow. How we got to the moon is easily explained through orbital mechanics. This universe follows laws, many of which are now understood through science. The same science that allows us to drive around, fly in aircraft, or interact on this forum.

To show one small example of lack of understanding and knowledge:
Hollow moon: http://www.utaot.com/2013/08/16/incredi ... -the-moon/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

No, the moon is not hollow. If it were hollow then seismic waves would not propagate through the empty space. This should be obvious. Remember that six passive seismic experiment packages were left on the moon within the Apollo Lunar Surface Experiment Packages (ALSEPs) by the six Apollo missions that successfully landed. Since then both man made and natural objects have crashed into the lunar surface, causing seismic waves that propagate through the moon exactly as they would if the moon were solid.

Contrary to one of your quotes, a quote I can't find from any reputable source, observed variation of the Lunar Prospector Orbiter's orbit reveals fine-scale variation of the lunar gravitational field consistent with the presence of a core, mantle, and crust. And the moon's normalized polar moment of inertia of 0.393 ± 0.001 is very close to the 0.4 value for a solid object with a constant density. For comparison, the earth's normalized polar moment of inertia is 0.33.

You do have a somewhat accurate quote claiming that the moon "rang like a bell" after certain impacts - by which the lunar seismologists meant that it continued vibrating for a long time as opposed to a literal comparison to a bell. When the S-IVB from Apollo 13 hit the moon, the ALSEPs left by Apollo 11 and 12 recorded seismic shaking for over four hours. What causes this? There is a lot of liquid in the crust of the earth, which quickly dampens seismic waves. But the moon is very dry so the waves keep bouncing around for much longer. This is proof that the moon is not hollow and does not act like it has hydraulic struts inside.

You also claimed that uranium 236 does not naturally exist. This is false. Uranium 236 is a natural decay state of uranium 235. Almost one in five atoms of U235 will not undergo fission, but will emit a gamma ray and capture the neutron that strikes the atomic nucleus.

I don't know if this universe has always existed or if it was created for Heavenly Father's purposes. But either way it follows rules. Science identifies those rules. Science is not your enemy.

No, sorry. Claims were made by scientists. Here, again:
Irwin Shapiro,
Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics
“The best possible explanation for the Moon is observational error – the Moon doesn’t exist.’
“The Moon is bigger than it should be, apparently older than it should be and much lighter in mass than it should be. It occupies an unlikely orbit and is so extraordinary that all existing explanations for its presence are fraught with difficulties are none of them could be considered remotely watertight.”

Isaac Asimov,
American author and professor of biochemistry at Boston University and Science Fiction writer. Asimov was one of the most prolific writers of all time.
“We cannot help but come to the conclusion that the Moon by rights ought not to be there. The fact that it is, is one of the strokes of luck almost too good to accept… Small planets, such as Earth, with weak gravitational fields, might well lack satellites… … In general then, when a planet does have satellites, those satellites are much smaller than the planet itself. Therefore, even if the Earth has a satellite, there would be every reason to suspect… that at best it would be a tiny world, perhaps 30 miles in diameter. But that is not so. Earth not only has a satellite, but it is a giant satellite, 2160 miles in diameter. How is it then, that tiny Earth has one? Amazing.”
“The Moon, which has no atmosphere and no magnetic field, is basically a freak of nature”

Farouk El Baz,
NASA
“If water vapour is coming from the Moon’s interior is this serious. It means that there is a drastic distinction between the different phases of the lunar interior – that the interior is quite different from what we have seen on the surface.”

Dr. Gordon MacDonald,
NASA
“it would seem that the Moon is more like a hollow than a homogenous sphere’. He surmised that the data must have been wrong – but it wasn’t.”

Carl Sagan,
Cosmologist,
“A natural satellite cannot be a hollow object.”

Dr. Sean C Solomon,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
“The Lunar Orbiter experiments had vastly improved knowledge of the Moon’s gravitational field and indicated the frightening possibility that the Moon might be hollow.”

University of Arizona Lon Hood
“We knew that the Moon’s core was small, but we didn’t know it was this small… This really does add weight to the idea that the Moon’s origin is unique, unlike any other terrestrial body.”

More or less pretty direct about the moon being hollow, and nothing like what "it should be". Perhaps you thought I meant, "the moon is completely hollow, like a balloon paper creche."

But then, I didn't figure we would agree on any of those things.

Religion is your friend. ;)

[rewcox]

Not only is the moon hollow, but the lost tribes are living in the hollow.

After serving 8 years as president, Trump will fly on Virgin Spacelines to the moon, and lead the lost tribes in triumphant glory to destroy Putins Global Army, and Trump will again lead the United States.

[brianj]

No, sorry. Claims were made by scientists. Here, again:
Irwin Shapiro,
Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics
“The best possible explanation for the Moon is observational error – the Moon doesn’t exist.’
“The Moon is bigger than it should be, apparently older than it should be and much lighter in mass than it should be. It occupies an unlikely orbit and is so extraordinary that all existing explanations for its presence are fraught with difficulties are none of them could be considered remotely watertight.”

Isaac Asimov,
American author and professor of biochemistry at Boston University and Science Fiction writer. Asimov was one of the most prolific writers of all time.
“We cannot help but come to the conclusion that the Moon by rights ought not to be there. The fact that it is, is one of the strokes of luck almost too good to accept… Small planets, such as Earth, with weak gravitational fields, might well lack satellites… … In general then, when a planet does have satellites, those satellites are much smaller than the planet itself. Therefore, even if the Earth has a satellite, there would be every reason to suspect… that at best it would be a tiny world, perhaps 30 miles in diameter. But that is not so. Earth not only has a satellite, but it is a giant satellite, 2160 miles in diameter. How is it then, that tiny Earth has one? Amazing.”
“The Moon, which has no atmosphere and no magnetic field, is basically a freak of nature”

Farouk El Baz,
NASA
“If water vapour is coming from the Moon’s interior is this serious. It means that there is a drastic distinction between the different phases of the lunar interior – that the interior is quite different from what we have seen on the surface.”

Dr. Gordon MacDonald,
NASA
“it would seem that the Moon is more like a hollow than a homogenous sphere’. He surmised that the data must have been wrong – but it wasn’t.”

Carl Sagan,
Cosmologist,
“A natural satellite cannot be a hollow object.”

Dr. Sean C Solomon,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
“The Lunar Orbiter experiments had vastly improved knowledge of the Moon’s gravitational field and indicated the frightening possibility that the Moon might be hollow.”

University of Arizona Lon Hood
“We knew that the Moon’s core was small, but we didn’t know it was this small… This really does add weight to the idea that the Moon’s origin is unique, unlike any other terrestrial body.”

More or less pretty direct about the moon being hollow, and nothing like what "it should be". Perhaps you thought I meant, "the moon is completely hollow, like a balloon paper creche."

But then, I didn't figure we would agree on any of those things.

Religion is your friend. ;)

Sources? As Abraham Lincoln said, "The problem with quotes found on the internet is that they are often not true." Without sources there is no way to validate them, see if they are based on an earlier incorrect understanding, Since computational models disprove Asimov's assertion, you may skip a citation for that one. Since the quote from El Baz starts with "if" we can accept that he is expressing an idea and nothing factual. But since the quote from Solomon directly contradicts actual measurements from the Lunar Prospector Orbiter and others, there's no need to provide a citation for his alleged quote.

[cayenne]

Fact: The lost tribes are coming back.

Fact: The City of Enoch is coming back.

If they are not living in Middle Earth, they will be coming down from the sky. We are running out of options, unless they are on the earth now but in another dimension.

By the way, Nibiru, planet X, or whatever name it is given is an entire galaxy that is passing by earth, not just one planet.

you forgot the the flat earth model, maybe the 10 will come from beyond or under the dome ;)