Copyright 1994 - 2018 Bill's Bible Basics
Authored By :
Published On :
May 15, 2013
Last Updated :
May 15, 2013
Astronomer Percival Lowell and Planet X, Pluto Reclassified, No Serious Astronomer Accepts Nibiru, McAllister's Delusions Fictitious Google Sky Conspiracy, 53m 27s, -6 10' 58 And The Blacked-Out Rectangle, The Cut-Off Star, Image Is Available But Hidden, Click Here For The Post Link, Why Didn't Scott Mention The Link?, Discover The Truth No Matter What, Our Job Is To Convince People Of The Truth, Preaching Guidelines And Bounds, No Conspiracy Or Hidden Data, SIMBAD: Recovering The Missing Google Sky Data, A Google Sky And SIMBAD Comparison, Alleged New Coordinates For Nibiru, Astronomers Offer Input
Astronomer Percival Lowell and Planet X
As I mention in the eight-part series "Alien Life, Extrasolar Planets and Universal Atonement", as well as in "The Nibiru Planet X Wormwood Controversy", it is also important to point out that over one hundred years ago, the term "Planet X" was actually associated with valid, astronomical research. More specifically, astronomer Percival Lowell used it to describe a hypothetical planet which he believed was responsible for what he perceived as perturbations in the orbits of Uranus and Neptune. Today, however, the astronomical community no longer believes that Planet X even exists.
Pluto Reclassified As Dwarf Planet / Plutoid
Caption: This is a computer-generated map of the planet Pluto which was created from still images which were taken by the Hubble Space Telescope. This map is synthesized true colour, and is among the highest resolutions possible with current imaging technology.
Furthermore, if we take into consideration the fact that a number of years ago, in the midst of a considerable amount of controversy, the planet Pluto was demoted and reclassified by the International Astronomical Union as a dwarf planet -- or plutoid -- and is no longer considered the ninth planet, this makes the term Planet X even more obsolete, at least for the time being. Pluto's fate was sealed on July 29, 2005, with the announcement of the discovery of a new Trans-Neptunian Object which has approximately the same size as Pluto. This object is now called Eris. Please refer to the aforementioned series for additional information concerning Trans-Neptunian Objects and the Kuiper Belt.
No Serious Astronomer Accepts Nibiru
At this point, it must be clearly stated that there are no serious astronomers who actually believe in the existence of Hercolubus or Nibiru; at least there are none that I am aware of. The reason why this point is important, is because even if the "Nibiru" photograph was really taken by the South Pole Observatory, it becomes evident that the names Hercolubus and Nibiru were most certainly not added to the image by any of the astronomers there. What does this imply? It suggests that someone else must have added them, in order to promote their own misguided beliefs regarding Hercolubus, or Nibiru. Was it Scott McAllister, or someone else? Well, obviously, I simply don't know. Regardless of who added the names to the image, I can only view it as an intentional act of deception.
Scott McAllister's Delusions
As I stated in part one, despite the questionable origin of the alleged South Pole Telescope image of Nibiru, Scott used the coordinates on the image as a basis for launching into his speculations regarding the so-called Blue Star Kachina and Red Star Kachina in his "Comet Elenin Nibiru Planet X & The Day of The LORD" video. If we consider the very shaky foundation upon which Scott establishes his predictions, it is really no surprise to me that he became so misguided and deceived by all of this New Age nonsense; even to the point that he viewed it as, in his words, "the most significant, most important prophetic teachings I've ever done."
Even at this current time, I am still attempting to figure out exactly what "prophetic teachings" are supposed to be contained in Scott's video. I see nothing in it which, in my opinion, contains any element of being a true prophecy from God. All I see is satanic deception and delusion, a number of false predictions, as well as a heavy dose of speculation and personal theories. I see a man who desperately wanted to convince us that Jesus Christ was going to return during the Fall feasts of the Jewish month of Tishri, which obviously did not happen in 2011, and which has not occurred since then either.
Google Sky Conspiracy and 53m 27s, -6 10' 58
As we discussed in parts one and two of this series, based on the coordinates that are found on a supposed photograph of the planet Nibiru -- or Hercolubus, if you prefer -- that was allegedly taken by the South Pole Telescope, similar to other people before him, in his "Comet Elenin Nibiru Planet X And The Day of The LORD" video, Scott McAllister proceeds to use the "Sky" portion of the Google Earth program. It is at this point that we will pick up our discussion from part one.
Upon entering the coordinates -- 53m 27s, -6 10' 58 -- into Google Sky, everything appears fine at first, or is it? At this point, just as other people have done, Scott zooms out a bit, and we discover that part of the image is blocked out by a large black vertical rectangle. If you are viewing this article on the Bill's Bible Basics website, you can see the black rectangle in the image below. In order to prevent this page from loading too slowly in your web browser, I am using a reduced image here. But please don't worry, because I will be providing a number of closeup images as we continue our discussion, in order to totally refute the misguided claims that are being made by Scott, and by other people just like him.
The Cut-Off Star
Scott then attempts to convince his video audience that the blacked-out rectangle is the result of a conspiracy by the entire global astronomical community, as well as by national governments, to conceal the presence of Nibiru in the image, and to keep the truth from us -- regarding Nibiru wreaking havoc on the Earth -- until it is too late. In order to fully convince us of this supposed "fact", he calls our attention to the bottom portion of the blacked-out rectangle, where we can clearly see that a star is cut in half, leaving just the lower half of its rays in view. In Scott's view, this cut-off star is the so-called "smoking gun" which undeniably proves that whatever is in that blacked-out rectangle, was purposely concealed from us by someone somewhere. But is it really?
Being as this portion of the Google Sky image is important to our discussion, below you can see an enlarged version of the same. In addition to the cut-off star, I have also left the coordinates that were automatically added by Google Sky intact. This is so that you can determine exactly where the 53m 27s, -6 10' 58 position is located in the image. I have also left the 2007 DSS Consortium copyright intact as well, so that you can see that this image was made in 2007 by the DSS Consortium:
Image is Available But Hidden
To further convince us that conspiratorial powers are at work here, Scott proceeds to click on the little info icon that is located in the lower portion of the blacked-out rectangle. The reason why you cannot see the info icon in the above image is because I turned off that feature in Google Sky so as to make a clearer image without any unnecessary distractions. However, upon clicking on the info icon, we see a short message which states "this is the prove that the image is available but hidden", as you can see by the enlarged image below:
Amazingly, that is as far as Scott discusses the contents of the dialog window. I believe that he has a motive for doing so. You need to understand that his objective is to convince us that what he is saying regarding the data purposely being concealed is true; and showing his video viewers the "image is available but hidden" text will accomplish that task. But what about the rest of the contents of the dialog window? Are we supposed to simply ignore that it is there? By his silence, Scott seems to be suggesting this very thing.
"Click Here for the Post" Link
Even though it is right in front of our eyes, Scott makes absolutely no attempt to tell his viewers that if they click on the "Click here for the post" link that is located in the same dialog, they will be taken to an online conversation where the blacked-out area and the missing data is discussed quite at length. Not only that, but the forum discussion in fact informs us how and where we can find the data that is missing from the Google Sky app. So the question that needs to be asked is this: If Scott is sincerely interested in preaching the truth to his viewers, then why didn't he make any attempt to share that crucial bit of information with us, or at least point us in the right direction?
Why Didn't Scott Mention the Link?
I can only arrive at a few possible conclusions. One is that when Scott conducted his own research regarding Comet Elenin and Nibiru, he was simply being lazy, and therefore did not even bother to click on the link himself. Thus, he was not aware of the fact that the answer which he sought for would easily be found in that forum. Does this sound plausible and acceptable to you?
Not to me. Human nature being what it is, it is difficult for me to accept that this is what really happened. Scott was no doubt aware that the link to the forum discussion was there. It is obvious that he clicked on the info icon at least a few times while he conducted his own research, as well as when he made his video. Each time, that forum link stared him right in the face and beckoned for his attention. So it is hard for me to believe that during all those times that he stared at that link, his curiosity never prompted him to click on it.
Discover the Truth no Matter What
Unlike Scott, as I conducted my own research regarding Comet Elenin and Nibiru, my primary interest was in obtaining the truth; even if it meant that whatever information I found might possibly contradict what I currently believe. My job as a Christian writer and evangelist is not just to fill my readers' heads with my personal theories and speculations. It is to discover the truth, particularly Scriptural truth, and then to share it with my readers. That means that I need to travel down a lot of informational roads, in order to see where they lead, and to determine if what they have to offer is trustworthy and safe from a Christian perspective. It is a given that I determine this by how much the information agrees with -- or contradicts -- God's Word.
Thus, when I saw the link to the forum in the dialog window, I didn't hesitate to click on it. I wonder if Scott did the same. If he did, then he is guilty of purposely withholding information from his viewers which contradicts what he has chosen to believe. He has purposely tried to manipulate our beliefs, to conform to his own.
Our Job: Convince People of the Truth
Now, please don't get me wrong. As evangelists and ministers of God's Word, that is exactly what we are supposed to do. We are supposed to try to convince unsaved people of their sin; of their need for a Savior; of the fact that Jesus Christ is that Savior; and that through an act of repentance and belief, they can be forgiven, and can become born-again recipients of Salvation and Eternal Life. In short, we preachers need to be good talkers and good writers. We need to be able to persuade people of our Christian beliefs. That is in fact what I do in every single article and series that I write. I am a salesman for Jesus Christ and the Word of God. Of course, I don't mean that in the sense of financially profiting from it. I mean in the sense that it is my desire to convince people that God's Word -- the Bible -- is absolutely trustworthy and true.
Preaching Guidelines and Bounds
However, there are certain guidelines by which we must abide, and certain bounds within which we must remain, as we conduct our evangelistic tasks. Simply stated, as I point out in my 1997 article "Biblical Cafeteria, or the Whole Course?", we cannot pick and choose what we want to believe in the Bible. If I were to reject certain portions of God's Word, simply because they don't agree with or even contradict my personal theology, then I would be wrong. If I were to engage in this very same practice as I go about teaching others, then it is evident that I would be even more in error.
I suspect that this is what Scott may be doing in his video. I believe that the primary reason why he does not draw his viewers' attention to the forum link that is included in the dialog window, is because he realizes that they would find information in the forum discussion that would challenge -- and in fact contradict -- what he is trying to convince his viewers to believe concerning the blacked-out area and the missing data in the Google Sky app. So exactly what is this vital information, and why is Scott so afraid that people might discover it? Read on and find out.
There is No Conspiracy or Hidden Data
As I began to read the forum discussion, I learned that upon discovering the blacked-out rectangle in the Google Sky app, people were simply relying upon other astronomy programs and websites to find the missing data. In fact, some posters even went as far as to provide images in the message thread, so we novices would not have to struggle with finding the data for ourselves. If anything, what this proves is that, contrary to what some conspiracy theorists and Nibiru/Hercolubus fanatics have been promoting, there is no sinister plot or treacherous conspiracy to keep us all in the dark until we meet our doom, as Nibiru crashes into our planet, side swipes it, or whatever conspiracy theorists have imagined. No data has been purposely hidden from us. There is absolutely nothing threatening hidden in that area of the sky.
The Google Sky program is simply missing the data for that particular area of the sky for some reason. I do not know if it is due to human error -- such as a programming mistake -- or if it's the result of data corruption, or if perhaps it is related to some other problem. There were a few individuals in the message thread who seemed to represent Google. Even they openly admitted that their program still has a few bugs that need to be worked out. Now, if there's anything remotely suspicious about this, it is that according to the discussion that I was reading, the data has been missing from the Google Sky app since 2007; and apparently, no attempt has been made to add it to the program since that time.
Now, before you get all excited and exclaim "Uh-huh! There is proof of a conspiracy!", let me tell you something. Space is a very huge place. It has taken dedicated astronomers years to image all of the objects that are included in the Digital Sky Survey, and a great many of those objects have not even been properly identified and classified yet. I don't remember the exact figure now, but their work has also involved a huge number of photographic plates which all had to be processed, properly formatted, etc., in order to be used in the Google Earth program. Given the obviously intricate process that has been involved, I don't think that anyone should be surprised to learn that error crept in somewhere along the way, so that data is missing in that particular area of Space in the app.
Let me remind you again that, to my knowledge, that data is only missing from the Google Earth program. I availed myself of two other astronomy websites, as well as a downloaded app; and the data that is missing in Google Earth is present in all of the others.
SIMBAD: Recovering the Missing Data
It was through the aforementioned discussion forum that I was led to the SIMBAD Astronomical Database. This online database is located at the CDS -- Centre de Données astronomiques de Strasbourg, or Astronomical Data Center of Strasbourg -- in Strasbourg, France. You can freely access SIMBAD directly at the following URL, and I encourage you to do so:
Being as I am not an astronomer -- and therefore do not have any experience with astronomical databases, or with how to use sky coordinates with them -- I was disoriented at first. However, sufficient help is offered on the website, so that eventually, I figured out what I needed to do. There are different methods and coordinate formats which can be used to feed data into the system. When I enter the coordinates 5h 53m 27s, -6 10' 58 into the SIMBAD Database using the Sexagesimal format with colons as field separators -- like this 5:53:27-6:10:58 -- along with SIMBAD's default settings -- (FK5, 2000, 2000), radius: 2 arcmin -- the thumbnail you see below is displayed on the right side of the page:
However, if I click on the flash-powered "CDS Simplay" image that is located in the "Plots and Images" section of the same page, I am taken to a new page which displays the full image, which you can see below. Please note that I have reduced the image by about fifty per cent, as otherwise, it would take a lot longer for this page to load due to the size of the file:
A table on the same page that's situated just below the above image identifies three objects in the image, along with their coordinates, type and other data. The top whitish-blue object is a star that is identified as "HD 39592". This star has the coordinates of 05 53 21.8535 -06 06 32.122. The whitish object with orangish-yellow rays that is situated just about in the center of the image is identified as an "IR Object"; that is, an infrared object. It has an ID of IRAS 05509-0612. It has the coordinates of 05 53 22.5 -06 12 12. Finally, the largest object that is located in the bottom left area of the image -- which has the red and blue "halos" around it -- is identified as a PulsV* type star with an ID of HD 39634. Its coordinates are 05 53 34.6893.
As I said a moment ago, I am not an astronomer. As such, I will not even pretend to understand all of the data that is included on the page. However, because the coordinates in the top left corner of the image change as you move your mouse around, it was really easy for me to find the coordinates that we are interested in; that is, the coordinates which are found on the image that supposedly originated from the South Pole Telescope, and which allegedly shows Nibiru, or the planet Hercolubus, if you prefer. To refresh your memory, those coordinates are 5h 53m 27s, -6 10' 58. I have added a red square to the above image, so that you can see precisely where the coordinates are located; that is, to the northwest of the IR Object that you see in the middle of the image. The coordinates are actually on the northwest side of the object that is contained in the red square.
In other words, what you are actually seeing in the previous image, is the very same area of Space that is displayed as a black rectangle in the Google Earth program. For those of you who may be Doubting Thomases -- simply because you want to believe that there is a dark conspiracy in progress -- I will now prove to you beyond a shadow of a doubt that this is in fact the missing data from the Google Sky program.
Common sense dictates that if the Google Sky image, and the SIMBAD image are displaying the same area of Space, or at least part of the same area of Space, then both images must contain common elements. As you can see below, this just so happens to be case. The image on the left is the very same image from the Google Earth program that I shared with you above. I have simply cut out the lower portion in order to concentrate on the part that is most revealing. The image on the right is also the same image from SIMBAD that I shared above. All I have done is drawn a large red square on it, in order to roughly show you the part that is blacked out in the image on the left. I didn't aim for perfection, but it is close enough to make my point.
Google Sky and SIMBAD Comparison
Let's make a few simple comparisons between the two images, shall we?
1. The coordinates at the top middle of the Google Sky image on the left, are located just to the northwest of the object that is enclosed in the small red square in the SIMBAD image on the right. In other words, the coordinates are actually inside of that small red square.
2. The hidden star with the long ray that is cut off in the lower left corner of the Google Sky image is the very same star that we see in the lower left corner of the large red square in the SIMBAD image on the right. We have already seen that this star is a PulsV* type star identified as HD 39634.
3. It is easy to determine that in both of the above images, the coordinates that were acquired from the alleged image of Nibiru, are located at about the one o'clock position from the aforementioned star that is in the lower left-hand corner.
4. If you carefully examine all of the star formations that are located along the bottom edge of the blacked out area in the Google Sky image on the left, and compare them to the star formations that are located just below the bottom red line in the SIMBAD image on the right, you will obviously come to the conclusion that they are the very same stars. It is impossible to dismiss this fact, unless one intentionally wants to be deceived. If anyone reading this series is still unable to see how they are the very same region of Space, I will gladly email you copies of larger images from Google Sky and SIMBAD, as well as an image where I actually overlay the Google Earth image with the SIMBAD image, in order to fill in the missing data. The celestial objects match up perfectly.
Clearly then, there is no secret data which has been hidden from us by astronomers and national governments, in order to purposely keep us in the dark until we are obliterated by a fictitious planet named Nibiru -- or Hercolubus -- which is supposedly in a 3,600 year orbit around the Sun. As we have already discussed, even Zecharia Sitchin plainly stated that according to his personal calculations, Nibiru is not due to arrive in our vicinity for a very long time; that is, if we even accept Sitchin's theories regarding the existence of his imaginary planet Nibiru, which I don't.
New Set of Coordinates for Nibiru
Well, believe it or not, but while one would think that this strange story regarding world governments and astronomers all colluding together in order to conceal the dangerous approach of Nibiru from the unsuspecting citizens of the world would slowly fizzle out once it had been revealed that there really is no missing data in the photographic plates, this was not the case. While I cannot remember now exactly how I acquired the additional information, at some point I discovered that a new set of coordinates was being offered for the position of the mythical planet of Nibiru, or Hercolubus. In other words, as naturally occurs with all celestial objects, due to the passage of time, Nibiru had moved, and somehow a resourceful person had apparently discovered where the planet killer was now lurking; or at least so it was alleged.
As one of my astronomer friends basically told me some time later, some people are just so desperate to believe what they want to believe, that they will continue to do so, even when the actual facts contradict their belief, theory, or whatever it is that they are promoting. At any rate, when I input the alleged new coordinates for Nibiru -- 6h 09m 48s, 22 27 54 -- the SIMBAD database provides information for a star that is identified as "HD 252532", as well as the resulting thumbnail that you see below:
When I follow the same procedure as described above and go to the full image page for star HD 252532, below is the result. Again, please note that I have reduced the image by about fifty per cent, as otherwise, it would take a lot longer for the page to load in your web browser due to the file size:
In this image, HD 252532 is the bluish-white star that you see right about in the center of the image. There are twelve stars and two X-ray objects that are identified in this image. What you will find interesting -- as do I -- is that the very large dirty orange object that is located to the bottom right of HD 252532 is not identified in the image. In fact, this same object can be seen at this same coordinates in Google Sky, as well as in the Aladin Sky Atlas program, or at the Aladin Sky Atlas website, which you can access at the following URL. It is also located in Strasbourg, France at this URL:
According to conspiracy theorists, the large, dirty orange object that we see in these images is supposedly the planet Nibiru, or Hercolubus if you prefer. But is that really what it is? Not being an astronomer myself, my next step was to contact people who would know; that is, actual astronomers. One individual who I contacted in November of 2011 has been the director of the University of Guam Planetarium for about twenty years now, so if anyone could help me to identify the strange object, she would be the one. As you can see by her combined responses below, while she was unable to provide me with a definitive answer, she was inclined to believe that the dirty orange object is merely some type of processing error:
----- Begin Quote -----
Thank you for the pictures. Although I am no nearer to identifying it, I can certainly tell you what it looks like. It looks like some kind of processing error. I'm assuming that the image is digital from its inception and not from film because if it were from film it would simply be a flaw in the film.
It hasn't been identified, I suspect because no one wants to own up to the error that created it.
The other thing it could easily be is a "planetary" nebula (the aftermath of a stellar explosion). It has the circular appearance with the dark hole in the middle that's characteristic of many of them. You might want to go with that explanation even if it's unidentified because it's easy to believe. And lord knows, these people just HAVE to believe in something!
----- End Quote -----
In addition to contacting the director of the University of Guam Planetarium, in November of 2011 I also contacted the project director of the Pittsburgh Planetarium, who in turn contacted a number of other planetariums and astronomers. One response I received during that time is the following:
----- Begin Quote -----
The blown-up images reeeeeallly look like a diffraction artifact/lens flare-ish thing and the scope's 4-vane secondary supports still are discernible in it.
I'm thinking it's an optical-to digital plate-scanning artifact of some kind . . .
It does _not_ impress me as being authentically part of the star field.
----- End Quote -----
So once again we see that the inclination is to believe that the "object" is really not an actual object in the star field whatsoever, but rather some kind of artifact that was created while the plate was being processed. I will be honest and tell you that the above quotes are the only relevant responses that I received regarding my inquiries concerning the dirty orange object. There were a few additional responses, but they didn't contain anything useful that I could use in this series. For whatever their reasons, I received no additional information from any of the aforementioned individuals. It may be that they just got too busy with their real work as astronomers and no longer had time to address this issue. It could also be that they simply became uncomfortable with discussing the issue. I don't think that there are very many serious astronomers who want to be associated with the Nibiru/Hercolubus fantasies.
Please go to part four for the continuation of this series.
⇒ Go To The Next Part . . .