The Dark Star: The Planet X Evidence (38 page)

In the U.K. Government-funded “Report of the Task Force on
Potentially Hazardous Near-Earth Objects”
⁷
, which was published in
2000, discusses the threat posed by tsunamis which are unleashed by asteroid
impact. The tragic events of Christmas week, 2004, underline the potential
catastrophe we all face.

There are many, many Flood myths from around the globe. The
Biblical account of Noah is not just a story popular in the Levant, but one
whose telling spanned the ancient world. The Book of Enoch identifies seven
burning stars with the Flood.
⁸
Perhaps these were part of a comet
swarm, or perhaps they were part of the observable phenomenon of Nibiru, or the
Dark Star. Such an association sets off alarm bells in my head.

However, scholars seem unwilling to give any credence to the idea
that a worldwide catastrophe of this nature may actually have occurred in
prehistorical times, leading to the extinction of many species. Yet, it is
such a common myth across disparate cultures, that there is surely some truth
to it. Scholars counter that such an event could not have occurred across the
whole face of the planet, without some kind of evidence being left behind.

However, it is the very nature of such sudden flooding, that
little trace of the devastation remains long after the event. The damage is
literally washed away, or left buried in a chaotic state.

One of the surprising stories to emerge from the terrifying
tsunami of 26th December, 2004, was the reaction to it by an undeveloped tribe
of hunter-gatherers living on North Sentinel Island, among the Andaman Islands.
The entire tribe of 500 or so people survived the tsunami, having evacuated the
coastal areas immediately following the initial earthquake. Madhusree Mukerjee,
a researcher and author working among the Andamanese, spoke with tribesmen, who
explained that their evacuation of the coastline before the tsunami struck
happened because of warnings given to them by their forefathers. Their folklore
advises the tribe to head for the hills, or out to sea in boats, when an earthquake
occurs.
⁹
The tribe clearly took that advice very seriously, saving
many lives.

This remarkable tale indicates the importance of orally
transmitted folklore and teachings within any culture. Tsunamis are examples of
rare catastrophic phenomena, yet this undeveloped tribal society held onto the
warnings of dire consequences for many years following an earthquake. Our
modern thinking has long since rubbished the warnings of the ancients about
catastrophe. By ignoring the ever-present dangers ― our modern society
― through its misplaced skepticism, has foolishly turned its back on the
wisdom handed down to us from the past.

We should learn from this. There is great wisdom to be found in
the writings of the ancients, and the orally transmitted tribal teachings.
These teachings cannot replace our science, but they can, and should,
complement our modern framework of knowledge.

This loss of interest in our prehistorical roots, and the myths
which abounded in those times, finds another analogy in the modern hunt for
planets beyond Neptune. When astronomers began to catalogue the minor planets
and asteroids in the solar system, they gave each a name. These names were
derived from the pantheons of classical gods and goddesses, much like the more
familiar names of the planets like Mars and Jupiter. However, as the number of
known minor bodies in the solar system has expanded over time, the pool of
available gods and goddesses to which they could be dedicated has dried up.

This problem is worsened if one considers the possible requirement
of a name of a major god for a potential major planet. This problem has been
recently tested by the discoveries of various Edgeworth-Kuiper Belt Objects
whose sizes have begun to compete with Pluto itself. Names of gods from
pantheons of other religions have been used, of which the Inuit “Sedna” is a
good example. But if the discovery was of a planet bigger than Pluto, then
shouldn't that planet be named after a classical god or goddess from Greek or
Roman mythology?

The discovery of a 'real' tenth planet has recently highlighted
this problem, as well as raising some further controversy for the Planet X
debate. The planet, officially designated 2003 UB313, was found by Dr Mike
Brown and colleagues using the Samuel Oschin Telescope at Palomar Observatory
near San Diego, California.
¹⁰
It is the most distant object yet
found in the solar system, currently lying almost 100 times the distance from
the Earth to the sun.

It is incredibly difficult to spot a planet at this distance.
Indeed, this new world still cannot be picked out by the powerful Spitzer
telescope, despite a good knowledge of its whereabouts. Its fortuitous
discovery results from the high reflectivity of its icy surface, without which
it would certainly have remained hidden. Again, this very large scattered disc
object has an elliptical orbit, falling in line with several other lesser
objects discovered recently. Have these eccentric scattered disc objects have
been affected by an influence beyond that of mighty Neptune? It seems
reasonable to think so.

This emerging trend also suggests that larger bodies almost
certainly await discovery, each with its own remarkable degree of eccentricity.
The elliptical orbits of these scattered disc objects seem to be the reason why
such large planetary bodies have been so difficult to spot. This, of course, is
why the Dark Star has remained undetected, for the moment at least.

2003 UB313 is not just bigger than Pluto, it is also a planet of
similar character. One would expect it to be justly called the solar system's
Tenth Planet.

At the moment, 2003 UB313 does not have an official name. It
appears that the planet's discoverers have offered up the name 'Xena', after
the character from the fictional television series of the same name.
¹¹
This suggestion breaks the mould of planetary nomenclature, and will certainly
provoke controversy among professional astronomers. Personally, I quite like
the name. It has a certain ring to it, and gives the impression of moving off
in a new direction, which Planet X research does, of course. But I'm not sure
that it will be very acceptable to the authorities charged with a final
decision.

Quixotically, they may even decide that, although 'Xena' is a
planet larger than Pluto, it is not really a 'tenth planet' proper after all,
and that giving it a rather trivial name symbolically down-grades its
importance. So, dependent upon the philosophical stance taken over how to
categorize planets, the non-classical 'Xena' might prove to be useful nomenclature
after all...

The name eventually attributed to 2003 UB313 will depend upon
whether it is actually classified as a major or minor planet. Given that it is
larger than Pluto, one would have thought that should be incontrovertible.
Pluto, after all, doggedly remains a 'major planet'.

However, this discovery may be the first among many. If every
round chunk of rock and ice larger than Pluto in the Edgeworth-Kuiper Belt
were to be classified as a major planet, then one could imagine a situation
where the science books need to list literally dozens of 'planets' in the solar
system in a just few years time! You can see why astronomers have a dilemma on
their hands.

You might have wondered why astronomers would announce the discovery
of a brand new planet without being in a position to give it a proper name. Its
technical name implies initial discovery in 2003, actually before Sedna whose
designation is 2003 VB12. The realization that this new Edgeworth-Kuiper Belt
Object was actually a planet in its own right did not occur until 8th January
2005, however. From that point onwards, Mike Brown and his team worked with at
least two different telescopes to collect the cast-iron evidence needed to make
the discovery public.

During this time, they kept their discovery secret. However,
technical information about 'Xena' was being held on computer databases by the
research team, and it transpired that this 'secure' data was actually available
over the Internet for anyone with sufficient technical knowledge to find their
way around the databases.

Dr Mike Brown then discovered to his horror that someone had
clandestinely accessed that database, which meant that someone with an
astronomical background could work backwards through his data and 'discover'
Xena independently, before his team made their planned announcement. Mike Brown
was forced to release his findings prematurely, which inevitably stole some of
his thunder.
¹²

Given that 'Xena' had been catalogued for over 18 months prior to
the public announcement of its planet-hood, could one argue that all such
astronomical discoveries are being deliberately kept from the public? Does
Nibiru appear on a database somewhere, quietly mulled over by a research group
somewhere? Are we being kept in the dark about Planet X?

Such considerations are far from fanciful, but the issues involved
are admittedly rather complex.

Releasing information about the discovery of new EKBOs is fraught
with difficulties. Spotting new dots of light on CCD camera images, and
capturing enough data to actually specify orbits and sizes of new objects are
two entirely separate things. Sometimes it proves difficult to re-find objects
that have previously been identified.

This might seem difficult to believe, given the technical power of
the instruments used nowadays. However, these objects are being resolved at the
very limits of the instruments' power, and the quality of scans over a period
of time will vary with atmospheric conditions, and such like. Some potential
objects are simply seen once, and then never seen again. Without a history of
sightings mapping out an actual trajectory for the object over time, there is
no discovery to speak of. An entire planet might blink in and out at the edge
of resolution.

In addition, the more distant the object, the slower is its
procession across the sky. This is because its orbital period is that bit
longer. This perhaps explains why a Nemesis object is so difficult to pinpoint.
Its lateral motion across the sky is so slow that it is readily mistaken for a
stationary background star, and catalogued as such.

After all, the stars themselves are dynamic, revolving around the
galactic core like celestial carousel horses. Nothing in the universe is truly
at rest. So establishing what is distant, and what is relatively nearby is not
as straightforward as one might imagine. As we have discussed in a previous
chapter, even the heat signatures of objects located on an infrared search
might be less easy to verify than one might think, with many objects being
pinpointed but never properly identified or researched.

So an object might be initially classified in 2003, but it may
take a couple of years of painstaking work to establish enough factual data to
allow other scientists, and the general public, to accept this object as a new
planet. Scientists who rush through this kind of process are liable to find egg
on their faces.

That said, the issue of secrecy remains. Even if we can appreciate
the complexities of the scientific work being undertaken here, and the need to
verify the work before writing up a paper for a journal, the fact remains that
discoveries of new planets in the solar system will be kept secret temporarily.
This may be fine if the discovery of Planet X is merely of academic interest.

However, there is an aspect to this work that transcends the
science involved. There are so many different ideas about the significance of
Planet X that it's difficult to cover all of them in detail here, but it's
worthwhile appraising the possibilities briefly.