In article ,
Rudolph_X wrote:

Paul Schlyter wrote:

In article ,
Rudolph_X wrote:
...............
Hey, I didn't write that article. I just provided a link to it.

You did more than that --- you also claimed it was "interesting"....

Folks have been discussing PX on this newsgroup for nearly 10 years -
because it is NOT interesting? Is that what you are saying? Of course it
is interesting - for folks who take an interest is this kind of subject
matter.

Yep --- and since you also claimed it was "interesting", you've revealed
yourself as one of those who are interested in this nonsense... therefore
you should take responsibility for what you post and not try to evade
by saying "I didn't write that article".... no you didn't write it,
but you did choose to post a link to it and reveal your interest in it.

Folks can decide for themselves if what was written there is true or false.

The article is obviously false! I mean, it's impossible for a
planet, or ANY celestial body, to move in an Earth-like orbit and
always be hidden from our view by the Sun, and at the same time have
an orbital period of 3600 years as this article claims....

The article does not claim that. The Russian scientist said he heard
rumors about a 3,600 year orbit, but he counters that by saying that he
is talking about a planet which has an orbit similar to that of Earth's,
but on the other side of the Sun.

That's an old idea, and it was dismissed over 100 years ago because
such a planet would cause noticeable perturbations on the other
planets. No such perturbations have been observed.

He also claims that the 'alien' base in Siberia regulates the orbits
of both planets and to maintain stability in our solar system.

But still, that wouldn't remove the pertirbations from that
"anti-Earth" on e.g. Venus and Mars. Also: how could such a device
remotely adjust the position of a planet on the other side of the
Sun, without causing very noticeable effects in its surroundings?

(I personally don't subscribe to these theories, however they are
interesting and thought provoking speculations.)

It's very easy to invent an interesting and thought-proviking idea;
our world is full of them! But it's much much harder to have an idea
which actually is correct...

In addition any "anti-Earth" moving in the Earth's orbit but on the
other side of the Sun such that the Sun always hides it from our
vire, such a planet would soon reveal its presence anyway by its
perturbations on the other planets (in particular Venus and Mars).

Not if, as the Russian scientist claims that, the orbits are being
regulated by the 'alien' underground base in Siberia.

The only way to do this by "remote control" would be through
gravitation --- and that would require masses far larger than the
mass of the entire Earth.....

(He also said that there are 3 other similar bases in the USA.)

Yep, he spoke a lot of nonsense..... I suppose he didn't give any
specifics about WHERE in the USA they were situated, right?

No such perturbations have ever been observed.

And, they are not likely to be observed, if indeed the 'aliens' are
keeping knowledge of the other planet hidden from us. If these 'aliens'
are manitaining the stability of our solar system, with their advanced
scientific technology, no such irrregular perturbations would be
casually evident.

Well, then you have a decision to make: what's most proable?

1. This guy is telling the truth, and an alien species is indeed
controlling the planets in the solar system, making their motions
violate the natural laws known by us since centuries ago. This is
done remotely, from "bases" at a few places in the Earth, without
causing any noticeable effects in the vicinity.

2. This guy is full of **** and is speaking nonsense.

1. has never happened before while 2. has happened many many many
times before. Now, make your choice!

He also wrote a lot of other nonsense besides his speculations about
PX. Here he was much more vague though, so at least he avoided
outright self-contradictions.

I don't know if the Russian was speaking broken-english or if the
interview was translated, but one should realize the language barrier
can sometimes cause confusion. The transcript does not reveal or convey
a Russian accent or the manner of speech used. Something is always lost
in translations from foreign lanuages, and this could account for the
apparent vagueness of some of the comments made.

So why didn't the reporter bring along a person who knew Russian?
It's not such an exotic language, instead it's one of the dozen or so
most spoken languages of the world! And it's a well-known fact that
you can't expect people to understand English in all parts of the world.

I doubt that the Russian scientist who is the head of an official
Russian government agency in charge of the investigation, is a stupid
person, simply because he may not be fluent in the English language.

However, the reporter who travelled there, without bringing an
interpreter along with him, was indeed stupid.... or perhaps he did
this intentionally, in order to later be able to blame errors/etc on
the "language barrier" ?

Consider this:

# GB: Can you be more specific about the location of this installation?
#
# VU: Look for the site of the Tunguska explosion. To the southeast is
# the very large and famous Lake Baikal. Beyond that, to the
# north, is a huge and barren territory covering 100,000
# kilometres. Hardly anyone lives there. There are no towns or
# cities. Here is where we located the installation ...

He never gets more specific than this. Why didn't he instead just
provide an accurate longitude and latitude of this "installation" he
claims to have found? Today it's easy to do so, with GPS receivers
being so easily available.

Like I said, the language barrier could have caused this.

Not bloddy likely! Russians use the same digits as we do. And the
reporter could at least have brought a dictionary with him! Or maybe
the Russian scientist who is the head of an official Russian
government agency in charge of the investigation (and therefore not a
stupid person :-) had such a dictionary? He should, if he attempted
to speal English....

The Russian obviously doesn't speak english good enough to convey his
thoughts as clearly as we would like. We would have to see the filmed
interview to get a sense of what was really said.

If his English was so bad that he was unable to give a longitude and
latitude, then it would have been even more impossible for him to
give all the other stuff which appeared in the translation. So perhaps
all of it is due to this "language barrier", i.e. the reporter's
misunderstanding of that Russian's not-so-good English ?????


But what he has to say about PX, which you find "interesting"
according to your own words, is just as impossible as what N*nc* had
to say about PX..... nothing new here.....

Like I said earlier, I don't fully subscribe to either of those
theories. I do, however, find them to be entertaining,

If your major interst here is entertainment, perhaps you should have
selected another newsgroup?

and certainly of interest to anyone who has followed the various
and diverse PX discussions on this newsgroup over the past 10 years.

Its main interest is as a case study of the human psyche.....

--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Schlyter, Grev Turegatan 40, SE-114 38 Stockholm, SWEDEN
e-mail: pausch at stockholm dot bostream dot se
WWW: http://www.stjarnhimlen.se/
http://home.tiscali.se/pausch/