Session 12 July 2014

[Musashi]

Thank You Again and Always! Great session! Whew...

So If I could ask the Honorable Julius Caesar:

"Did you ever interact with other-worldly entities or see them or perhaps hear them"
"Did the Lizard's ever try to contact or knowingly manipulate you"
" Is there anything we could pass on to our soldiers to help them deal with post stress after having been basically cajoled into killing others"
"What's your impression on the Cassiopaean Experiment"
"Did you ever have Beer?" Heh, mirth....

Thanks All, Luv you guys!!!

 

[pavlin_k]

Q: (L) Well, that takes care of that. So these guys with their electric universe business kind of seem to have a little problem, and I wonder what their main problem is?

A: Too much electricity and not enough astronomy.

Q: (L) So, are you saying that they have kind of gone way elaborate with their electrical theories and haven't taken into account... I mean, I don't understand.

A: There is some validity to certain astronomical models.

Q: (Pierre) The electric universe supporters threw out the baby with the bath-water, and they rejected ALL astronomical theories, but some of them are valid.

A: Accretion does occur around most stars.

Q: (L) So, you're talking about the accretion disk theory of planetary formation?

A: Yes. But other bodies can arrive whole. Plus, Thornhill and pals neglect a companion star.

That is a free will to believe.
_http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=15107#p96752

We need to see the evidence.
I would ask you, or anybody else that can help, to provide up to date composite astrophoto images of the area around RA: 06:05:53 Dec: 23:29:30. That will include near infrared data, inclusive of H band ( 1.45-1.7μm ).

 

[mkrnhr]

That is a free will to believe.
_http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=15107#p96752

We need to see the evidence.
I would ask you, or anybody else that can help, to provide up to date composite astrophoto images of the area around RA: 06:05:53 Dec: 23:29:30. That will include near infrared data, inclusive of H band ( 1.45-1.7μm ).

Hi pavlink_k,
Your post is not clear, what did you want to convey?

 

[goyacobol]

Q: (L) Well, that takes care of that. So these guys with their electric universe business kind of seem to have a little problem, and I wonder what their main problem is?

A: Too much electricity and not enough astronomy.

Q: (L) So, are you saying that they have kind of gone way elaborate with their electrical theories and haven't taken into account... I mean, I don't understand.

A: There is some validity to certain astronomical models.

Q: (Pierre) The electric universe supporters threw out the baby with the bath-water, and they rejected ALL astronomical theories, but some of them are valid.

A: Accretion does occur around most stars.

Q: (L) So, you're talking about the accretion disk theory of planetary formation?

A: Yes. But other bodies can arrive whole. Plus, Thornhill and pals neglect a companion star.

That is a free will to believe.
_http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=15107#p96752

We need to see the evidence.
I would ask you, or anybody else that can help, to provide up to date composite astrophoto images of the area around RA: 06:05:53 Dec: 23:29:30. That will include near infrared data, inclusive of H band ( 1.45-1.7μm ).

pavlin_k,

I am not so sure your desire to "see" the evidence of a companion star even in infrared is possible. We don't normally "see" magnetic fields either.
I don't know if you have searched the forum for "brown dwarf" but there are several threads on the subject.

Here is a link for one "Some transcripts about dark companion and comet cluster": http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,8401.msg60178.html#msg60178

The C's clues indicate our sun's companion may be a "brown dwarf".

In the transcripts there are a number of times where the twin sun was discussed, and there is also this:
Quote from: 000318
A: Our "companion star" data was meant as a clue for guidance purposes, not as the be all and end all.
Therefore this collection of transcripts and comments is best, at the present time, understood as a source of inspiration for ones research and meditation.

“Twin sun” in the Cassiopaean transcripts
The "twin sun" in the transcripts became a subject following a discussion of comets.
Quote from: 960803
Q: (L) Well, what is it then?
A: Hale-Bopp: Flopp!
[…]
A: Since you have broached the subject: are you familiar with the "twin sun" theory?
[…]
A: Theory that the sun is really a double star.
[…]
Q: (L) Can we see it? […]
A: Can you?
[…]
A: No. What is "dark" matter, and what are dark stars?
[…]
Q: (T) Dark matter that I have read about is what the astronomical community calls all the loose stuff floating around out in the cosmos that must exist because of the equations, but they can't see it.
A: Yes.
Q: (T) Would dark stars be part of this?
A: Yes.
Q: (T) So there is dark matter and dark stars?
A: Yes.
Q: (T) The dark matter they cannot see because it is dark.
A: Yes. How about "Brown stars?"
Q: (T) Okay, Brown stars I have heard of. There is yellow, red, blue, green... Okay, our star burns as a yellow star because of the matter it is composed of - hydrogen, etc.
A: Close.
Q: (T) Other stars burn different colors in the visible spectrum because of the make-up of the star...
A: Yes, but not "brown" ones.
[…]
Q: (L) Okay, it has burned so long it is about to run out of gas?
A: Yes.
[…]
A: Why did we put "brown" in quotes?
[…]
A: How easy is it to see brown against a black background?
Q: (T) Not easy at all! That is why they can't see the dark matter...
A: That is why scientists dubbed it "brown."
[…]
Q: (L) What is the significance of the brown star?
A: Dark star.
[…]
Q: […] (T) Wait, a dark star is dark because it doesn't give off light. It is still a star, and acts like a star...
A: Yes. And if it has an elliptical orbit... would it, maybe, like, "come and go?"
Q: (T) What science, astronomy, has described as double stars, are two stars that are close together with some sort of interactive orbit. But that is not necessarily the only way two stars can exist.
A: Close. As you perceive from your vantage point. But how would you like to embark on a bicycle trip between them?
Q: (L) So the ones that we are aware of and see can be so far apart that there can be a lot between... (T) So our astronomers have not recognized this possibility?
A: Yes they have.

Of course we don't just "believe" the clues but we do sometimes have to take a hint and check it out?

As you say "That is a free will to believe."

goyacobol

 

[pavlin_k]

Of course we don't just "believe" the clues but we do sometimes have to take a hint and check it out?

We don't see in infrared unaided.
Here is DSS colored picture of the Sun's companion.
_http://files.kostovi.com/DSS_colored.png

_http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=15107#p96719

 

[pavlin_k]

Hi pavlink_k,
Your post is not clear, what did you want to convey?

I was expecting that someone would take a hint and check it out.

 

[lainey]

Hi pavlink_k,
Your post is not clear, what did you want to convey?

I was expecting that someone would take a hint and check it out.

Perhaps you could just be open and clear rather than posting a rather cryptic clue? I for one am not smart enough to understand what you were implying or hinting at so why not share?

 

[Beau]

Hi pavlink_k,
Your post is not clear, what did you want to convey?

I was expecting that someone would take a hint and check it out.

Perhaps you could just be open and clear rather than posting a rather cryptic clue? I for one am not smart enough to understand what you were implying or hinting at so why not share?

Exactly. It is more considerate to say what you think than to post cryptically and expect people to spend their time looking for something when you could just as easily save their time by explaining what it is that you think.

 

[Laura]

Hi pavlink_k,
Your post is not clear, what did you want to convey?

I was expecting that someone would take a hint and check it out.

Perhaps you could just be open and clear rather than posting a rather cryptic clue? I for one am not smart enough to understand what you were implying or hinting at so why not share?

Me either. "Suggestive" remarks always make me think of schizoid psychopaths as described by Lobaczewski.

 

[pavlin_k]

lainey, Heimdallr, Laura,
I did spell it out.
« Reply #394 on: Yesterday at 04:50:47 PM »
It's the Companion.

 

[fabric]

lainey, Heimdallr, Laura,
I did spell it out.
« Reply #394 on: Yesterday at 04:50:47 PM »
It's the Companion.

It's still very cryptic what you are writing...no idea what you mean.

 

[pavlin_k]

It's still very cryptic what you are writing...no idea what you mean.

Good quality photos of the solar companion existed since decades.
After seeing them you can still keep your believes intact.

 

[mkrnhr]

Good quality photos of the solar companion existed since decades.
After seeing them you can still keep your believes intact.

pavlin_k, photos are irrelevant, and beliefs are irrelevant. If a particular object is identified as the solar companion, or one of solar companions, what is needed is evidence, proof. So, he question is, how to demonstrate that a particular object is the solar companion? Otherwise, this poor communication is nothing more than noise.

 

[pavlin_k]

photos are irrelevant, and beliefs are irrelevant.

For those who live in a fact-free zone photos would be irrelevant.

If a particular object is identified as the solar companion, or one of solar companions, what is needed is evidence, proof.

Since we are looking at astronomical objects what better evidence than the photos are to be expected?

So, he question is, how to demonstrate that a particular object is the solar companion?

The object is perfectly positioned to be the cause of the orbital precession.

 

[Laura]

pavlin_k, gather the "evidence" and provide it and provenance to mkrnhr who happens to be qualified to examine it and offer a professional opinion.