Re: Planet X: Dec 27 Images

CNote wrote:

>
> Actually I'm reading a brief history of time by Steven Hawking, and
> their are "gravity particles" which are known as gravitons, however
> they aren't completely physical its just a model, just like the
> diagrams of atoms being little planetary systems is just a model and
> its not actually like that.  All your doing is ridiculing the zetas
> for using un-orthodox terminology and models, and thats no a valid

Hehe, first of all gravitons, to date, are theoretical (no detection method
has yet quantified them). Gravitons (or gravity waves) are theorized to be
essentially massless particles; particles that carry gravitational force;
basically the purveyors of gravity.  For all intents and purposes,
describing the effects of gravity and the effects of gravitons should be
synonymous when trying to describe the forces affecting Planet Xs supposed
swirling moons. In other words, if they're referring to "gravity particles"
in the sense of gravity or gravitons, then their "gravity particles" should
induce an orbital plane for Planet X's moons similar to that of every planet
in our solar system (that has moons), not to mention all that obscuring
dust.  According to their site, however,  "gravity particles" force the
moons toward the planet, but the moons never seem to be able catch up.
Either they're referring to "gravity particles" in a different sense or they
don't understand gravity.

Your statement that the zetas are using unorthodox terminology and models is
understated.  I certainly can't argue that point.  They also happen to be
using the idea of "gravity particles" to contradict what science can
quantify - that is the effects of gravity upon particles (whether massive or
massless).  If gravitons do exist, then gravity should be the result of
those particles/waves, and gravitons should not be a competing force that
would nobble the calculable effects of gravity - why, then, would they use
the same idea in different terms to justify their swirling nonsense?  Once
again, if the zetas are using the term "gravity particles" to indicate
gravitons (gravity waves, whatever), then it's quite apparent that they
don't know the theory behind the term.  Either way, they're subject to
ridicule.

> argument, just a persuading ridicule of what their saying.  If this
> all goes down next year, I hope you feel good about being a truth
> terrorist.

If this all goes down next year, you can call me Osama Bin Laden.  In the
mean time, I reserve the right to ridicule unscrupulous individuals who
induce terror and bilk individuals for millions of dollars every year - I'm
not going to leave them (you) alone.  Frankly, I think the zetas should be
held liable for fraud if it doesn't happen.

JBH