Which astronomers can verify conjunction in "Missing Earth"?

[dalter]

The title below is self explanatory. The top part of the article is cutnpasted to here.
As you will understand from the article, speed is essential. The article on the No 1st Cost List site has all the live links needed. Since the two asteroids are from among the 100 largest, this is the link to that list in the article "List of 500 largest asteroids with no TNOs" http://www.no1stcostlist.com/Forums/vie ... 1.html#401

"Which two asteroids in the Longwood-Warren, aka the "Missing Earth" crop circle are shown in conjunction?"
By Daniel Alter n1cl-1
http://www.no1stcostlist.com/News/article/sid=53.html

When our astronomers objectively confirm in public that the conjunction is unnatural, this confirms that E-Ts are trying to contact us with a public warning telling us when our conservation debt made of Anti-Matter(A-M) will strike the Sun vaporizing Earth. We can prevent it, once we know precisely when. Time is of the essence, we can not afford to be wrong about this. Everyone's life is at stake.

"objective facts" are always created by eye witnesses. For a scientist it means eyewitness reports that accurately measure reality leading to predictions about thee causes and effects of what is reported. Objective facts can and must be verified by others. Honesty is a work requirement.

There are two ways to verify which asteroids are used for the conjunctions:


1. The brute force way our astronomers can use to confirm what the ME predicts: We have fast computers and telescopes so they could look where the 100 largest asteroids are supposed to be in their orbits, find those that are not where they are supposed to be, then look where the anomalous asteroids would be for them to be in conjunction on above predicted dates. This way would verify what the ME message shows.

or 2. Use the clues provided by the structure of the 'Missing Earth" to deduce which asteroids are used: This method is described below. This still requires our astronomers to look to fing the predicted asteroids.

(There is another another benefit, the ME shows us the logical syntax and structure the E-Ts use to tie pictures objectively/logically to reality.)

In order to find which two asteroids are shown in conjunction in the "Missing Earth" crop circle we need to do the following: Assume = posit a basis of comparison between the "Missing Earth" crop circle and the actual solar system, then measure the predictions this comparison generates.

b]Base Objective Premise of Comparison:[/b] The "Missing Earth" crop circle is an exact to scale representation of our solar system out to the asteroid belt.

There are 65 asteroids shown in the "Missing Earth" crop circle. Two asteroids are shown in conjunction at exactly the 9 o'clock position of our North Heliocentric view of our solar system. There are two possible conjunction dates, either on July 16, 2009 at 16:30.09 UT or exactly three sidereal Earth years later on July 16, 2012 at 10:57.52 UT.

Definition of conjunction for our purposes: When any two of the 65 asteroids intersect plane "A" at the same time on either of the two dates listed above. Plane "A" looks like a great wall that slices down through the asteroid conjunction vector that runs out from the Sun's center on Earth's ecliptic plane. i.e. A conjunction occurs even though both asteroids could literally be 100,000s of kilometers(km) apart on plane "A". e.g. One above the plane of Earth's ecliptic and one below, as long as they intersect "A" simultaneously.

How do we use the "Missing Earth" to determine which two asteroids are shown in conjunction?

1. The 65 asteroids shown in the 'Missing Earth" are all shown on the same orbital radius; yet asteroids vary by several 100 million kilometers in their orbital radii.

Our Secondary Premise: We assume the orbital radius shown is the average of the radii of the 65 asteroids = their Mean Orbital Radius(MOR).

Use this equation to find Mean Orbital Radius of 65 asteroids(MOR): Since we know Earth's orbital radius equals 1 AU(149,550,000 km), then we can deduce the MOR using the following relationship: Measure the diameter of 65 asteroids using a "Missing Earth" picture. The diameter of the asteroids in my "Missing Earth" picture measured 17.6 millimeters, while at the same time the orbital diameter of the Earth measured 7.075 millimeters. You will get an equation that looks like this, 17.6/7.075 = x/AU. Solve for x and divide by 2 to get MOR.

2. The equation the circle makers used to determine the size of the circles depicting the 65 asteroids in the 'Missing Earth" crop circle. The ME circle 65 asteroid orbital radius and diameter equation. i.e. Divide actual radius of each asteroid on either date into MOR, then multiply this percentage times actual diameter of asteroid in km to get proportional size of circle representing each asteroid in km.

Ergo, once you know one of two things, an asteroids actual orbital radius used in computing the Mean Orbital Radius of the 65 'Missing Earth" asteroids, or its actual diameter; then you can deduce which asteroid it is from the size of its the circle in the "Missing Earth".

3. Determine the constant of multiplication used to increase the size of the circles depicting the asteroids so they can be seen. I think by 10^5 = 100,000. This one is easy, each asteroid circle is some percentage of MOR in the ME picture, thus once we identify one asteroid and its circle size from the "asteroid diameter eq." defined above, then we can deduce what factor of multiplication was used. i.e. 1. Measure the circle size in the ME picture for your asteroid, divide that measurement by the MOR you measured in your picture and determine the percentage = A; 2. Divide the MOR in km into actual asteroid diameter and determine the percentage = B; 3. Solve for x: xB(km)/MOR(in km) = percentage A.

I presume the same for all the asteroid circles


Key characteristics of Longwood-Warren, i.e. "Missing Earth" crop circle.

The ME has two different dates in it, and one big difference.

First date: the concentric rings representing inner four planets orbits are for July 17, 2003 as the positions of the remaining three planets demonstrate.

Second date: the positions of the 65 asteroids shown are for July 16, 2009 or for July 16, 2012, exactly 6 or 9 sidereal years later.

The big discrepancy in ME is: the Sun is pushed nearly to Mercury's orbit, showing the net directional force of the explosion over 6 or 9 years , i.e. the difference between July 17, 2003 and July 16, 2009/2012.

These 65 asteroids shown are anomalous, in that they all lie on the same orbital radius. Actually their orbital radii vary by 100s of thousands of kilometers. Below we will see how the circle makers uses a beautifully elegant way to show actual asteroid diameter, orbital radius, and position with one circle for each asteroid and the mean of the 65 radii shown. How to see this is explained in Methods & Materials below.


Methods & Materials

READ MORE: http://www.no1stcostlist.com/News/article/sid=53.html

The "Methods & Materials" will explain in detail what is outlined above. Conclusions follow.

Questions please.

Dan Alter

 

[origin]

Re: Who can find the conjunction shown in the "Missing Earth"?

Questions please.

What in the hell are you talking about?

 

[Mee_n_Mac]

Re: Who can find the conjunction shown in the "Missing Earth"?

Questions please.

What in the hell are you talking about?

As best as I can determine Mr Alter thinks that we have accumulated what he terms an "anti-matter debt". That some anti-matter has been created and pushed to some nether-regions but is now on course to come back and impact on the Sun. This will cause some massive explosion that destroys the Earth (or at least us living on it). He needs people and $$s to make a FTL spaceship to open a wormhole to prevent the collision of the AM and the Sun. This is all been indicated to him by ET via the aforementioned crop circles. He seeks to confirm his theory by confirming that some conjunction of 2 asteroids, that shouldn't have happened, actually did happen. And it (the conjunction) happened because ET made it happen to prove they were not fooling around ... but to do so in a non-obvious way.

I think I've covered the major points.

Look for other threads started by dalter in this forum.

 

[MeteorWayne]

Re: Who can find the conjunction shown in the "Missing Earth"?

The title below is self explanatory.

Actually, nothing you write is self explanatory, or even makes enough sense to explain, but that's another show...

Since the two asteroids are from among the 100 largest, this is the link to that list in the article "List of 500 largest asteroids with no TNOs" http://www.no1stcostlist.com/Forums/vie ... 1.html#401

So you went ahead and used that list, even after I told you it was out of date, inaccurate, and was missing several of the top 100?

Great research job.... :roll:

BTW, that is not blaming Andrew for providing the list...it's the best list that was around a few years ago. My current list is better, because I did some actual research

When our astronomers objectively confirm in public that the conjunction is unnatural, this confirms that E-Ts are trying to contact us with a public warning.

Yeah, right :roll:

"objective facts" are always created by eye witnesses. For a scientist it means eyewitness reports and predictions that can be verified by others. Honesty is a work requirement.

In order to find which two asteroids are shown in conjunction in the "Missing Earth" crop circle we need to do the following: Assume = posit a basis of comparison between the "Missing Earth" crop circle and the actual solar system, then measure the predictions this comparison generates.


Base Objective Premise of Comparison: The "Missing Earth" crop circle is an exact to scale representation of our solar system out to the asteroid belt.

Hmmm, exact to scale...you do realize it isn't, right?

There are 65 asteroids shown in the "Missing Earth" crop circle. Two asteroids are shown in conjunction at exactly the 9 o'clock position of our North Heliocentric view of our solar system. There are two possible conjunction dates, either on July 16, 2009 at 16:30.09 UT or exactly three sidereal Earth years later on July 16, 2012 at 10:57.52 UT.

And you can determine these dates and times to .01 day precision from the crop circle? That's delusional.

Definition of conjunction for our purposes: When any two of the 65 asteroids intersect plane "A" at the same time on either of the two dates listed above. Plane "A" looks like a great wall that slices down through the asteroid conjunction vector that runs out from the Sun's center on Earth's ecliptic plane. i.e. A conjunction occurs even though both asteroids could literally be 100,000s of kilometers(km) apart on plane "A". e.g. One above the plane of Earth's ecliptic and one below, as long as they intersect "A" simultaneously.

That's a conjuction in Right Ascencion, but despite the fact you didn't define it, it's actually correct. Congratulations!!

How do we use the "Missing Earth" to determine which two asteroids are shown in conjunction?

1. The 65 asteroids shown in the 'Missing Earth" are all shown on the same orbital radius; yet asteroids vary by several 100 million kilometers in their orbital radii.

Our Secondary Premise: We assume the orbital radius shown is the average of the radii of the 65 asteroids = their Mean Orbital Radius(MOR).

Use this equation to find Mean Orbital Radius of 65 asteroids(MOR): Since we know Earth's orbital radius equals 1 AU(149,550,000 km), then we can deduce the MOR using the following relationship: Measure the diameter of 65 asteroids using a "Missing Earth" picture. The diameter of the asteroids in my "Missing Earth" picture measured 17.6 millimeters, while at the same time the orbital diameter of the Earth measured 7.075 millimeters. You will get an equation that looks like this, 17.6/7.075 = x/AU. Solve for x and divide by 2 to get MOR.

And the result of your calculation was???

2. The equation the circle makers used to determine the size of the circles depicting the 65 asteroids in the 'Missing Earth" crop circle. The ME circle 65 asteroid orbital radius and diameter equation. i.e. Divide actual radius of each asteroid on either date into MOR, then multiply this percentage times actual diameter of asteroid in km to get proportional size of circle representing each asteroid in km.

And the result of your calculation was????

Ergo, once you know one of two things, an asteroids actual orbital radius used in computing the Mean Orbital Radius of the 65 'Missing Earth" asteroids, or its actual diameter; then you can deduce which asteroid it is from the size of its the circle in the "Missing Earth".

So which ones (on your out of date, inaccurate, and incomplete list) are they? If your "model" is to have any validity, it should be able to make predictions...otherwise it's just spouting meaningless fluff.

3. Determine the constant of multiplication used to increase the size of the circles depicting the asteroids so they can be seen. I think by 10^5 = 100,000. This one is easy, each asteroid circle is some percentage of MOR in the ME picture, thus once we identify one asteroid and its circle size from the "asteroid diameter eq." defined above, then we can deduce what factor of multiplication was used. i.e. 1. Measure the circle size in the ME picture for your asteroid, divide that measurement by the MOR you measured in your picture and determine the percentage = A; 2. Divide the MOR in km into actual asteroid diameter and determine the percentage = B; 3. Solve for x: xB(km)/MOR(in km) = percentage A.

And the result of your calculation was???

I presume the same for all the asteroid circles

You presume a lot, apparently without understanding very much of it.

Key characteristics of Longwood-Warren, i.e. "Missing Earth" crop circle.

The ME has two different dates in it, and one big difference.

First date: the concentric rings representing inner four planets orbits are for July 17, 2003 as the positions of the remaining three planets demonstrate.

Second date: the positions of the 65 asteroids shown are for July 16, 2009 or for July 16, 2012, exactly 6 or 9 sidereal years later.

The big discrepancy in ME is: the Sun is pushed nearly to Mercury's orbit, showing the net directional force of the explosion over 6 or 9 years , i.e. the difference between July 17, 2003 and July 16, 2009/2012.

Well, since no "explosion" has yet occurred, you'd better change that to 3 years

These 65 asteroids shown are anomalous, in that they all lie on the same orbital radius.

I'd suggest you look up the word anomalous (sic). Your statement is an oxymoron

Actually their orbital radii vary by 100s of thousands of kilometers. Below we will see how the circle makers uses a beautifully elegant way to show actual asteroid diameter, orbital radius, and position with one circle for each asteroid and the mean of the 65 radii shown. How to see this is explained in Methods & Materials below.

The brute force way our astronomers can use to confirm what the ME predicts: We have fast computers and telescopes so they could look where the 100 largest asteroids are supposed to be in their orbits, find those that are not where they are supposed to be, then look where the anomalous asteroids would be for them to be in conjunction on above predicted dates. This way would verify what the ME message shows.


Methods & Materials

READ MORE: http://www.no1stcostlist.com/News/article/sid=53.html

The "Methods & Materials" will explain in detail what is outlined above. Conclusions follow.

Questions please.

Dan Alter

I listed a few questions, I await your answers with baited (intentional sic) breath.

MW

 

[Shpaget]

Re: Who can find the conjunction shown in the "Missing Earth"?

Haven't we already dispatched mr. Alter and his ET made crop circle/antimatter debt ideas?

As to the question of "Who can find the conjunction shown in the "Missing Earth"?" I already provided you with the answer.
Conjunctions of main belt asteroids happen on hourly basis. There are billions of particles in the belt, some are bound to overlap at any given moment.

Besides, WHO CARES?
Conjunctions are absolutely unimportant and irrelevant in predicting the doomsday. Why don't you stick with giant meteor impacts like regular foil hatters? They make much more sense.

 

[Wellington1114]

Re: Who can find the conjunction shown in the "Missing Earth"?

Well it's not irrelevant or unimportant to HIS doomsday theory.


Haven't heard from him in awhile he must have gotten his funding and based on mars. Now that I mention it he must have been the one to free our Rover! Thank you for that.

 

[dalter]

Meteor Wayne has questions.

Meteor says my Assumption that the ME is an exact to scale replica of the features it depicts in our solar system is wrong.

I beg to differ, measure from the center of formation to outer edge of concentric rings at the location of each of the inner four planets and you will find these rings are exactly proportional to the exact orbital radii of the inner four planets on July 17, 2003 at 03: 35:17.76 UTC. I expect the means of their orbits will get you close enough for government work.

As to the rest, I worked out all the equations for you, figuring out the constant of multiplication used to enlarge circles representing the asteroids in the ME should be easy. They either used base 10 or base 2. Seat of the pants, it must be either 10^5 or 2^16-17. The differences between the three alternatives are substantial enough that once you determine a pair of the 30 asteroids common to 65 of top 100 counting from either end, then you can determine what constant of multiplication they used.

Other people, hopefully starting with you, have to verify my predictions independently, that is how science has to work to create "objective" facts. You guys are getting first crack at it. I can't save this planet all by myself, the rest of you have to help by testing this prediction, you live on Earth too.

I got here by making lots of wrong predictions, that is how you improve any scientific hypothesis or theory, and I certainly could handle being wrong about this one, so lets look and prove me wrong or right. After all, it is a falsifiable prediction. However, proven right means we have a big problem, and I suspect that most of you do not want to fry in July 2012. Neither do I. Times awasting.

Merry Christmas

Dan Alter

P.S. As to the list of 500 asteroids with some errors, we know within a error of one or two for sure what are 30 of the 65. Once we determine which date those asteroids that are sure to be included in the 30 show, then you can work out the rest of the 65 using my equations.

Of course, there is the "Brute Force" way. We will have to use it in all cases to verify the conjunctions. We do have to actually look; but knowing how the E-Ts structured the ME show us they predicted = created the conjunction(s), please may there be two.

 

[Shpaget]

You've been asked these questions countless times by different people, but let me ask once more.

What asteroids are depicted in the crop circle? Give us their names.

Why are the biggest asteroids omitted from the circle?

Why do you reject our observations that the orbits of the planets in crop circle are not to scale? We gave you enough evidence that it isn't so.

They either used base 10 or base 2. Seat of the pants, it must be either 10^5 or 2^16-17.

10^5=10 000
2^16=65 536
2^17=131 072

Why don't you just say that the "constant of multiplication", whatever it is, is n. Throwing random numbers that are not even on the same order of magnitude is ridiculous.

Why don't you show us your calculations you are so proud of?

I thought I would give you guys first crack at it.

We're not interested.

I can't save this planet all by myself, the rest of you have to help

No one expects you to, and we are not interested.

you live on Earth too.

Some of us don't. :lol:

 

[dalter]

Shpaget: You have proof ME not to scale?

Also you dishonestly imply conjunctions occur hourly between any 2 of 100 largest asteroids? There was no mention in the post of the billions of particles in the asteroid belt was there, just the 100 largest asteroids. The chances of any two of them being in actual conjunction on any stated date/time in any year are certainly in the many millions to one. Add the second requirement that the conjunction between be also on a given vector from the Sun on the given date/time and the odds are almost incalculable. There Mean Orbital Circumference is over a billion kilometers, the average diameter of the 100 largest is about 160 kilometers, you do the math.

Second you assert the 'Missing Earth" is not to scale. Prove it.

Show and tell please. Put up or shut up.

Clearly none of you are astronomers, and some of you are intellectually dishonest.
Your scoffing and name calling show that.

Dan Alter

 

[dalter]

Re: Why E-T message was obscure.

We on Earth had no context. Without an objective context created by a real objective scientific theory, we people of Earth could not have a 'frame of reference' to understand the message.

I recognized the first crop circle called the Barbary Castle(July 17, 1991) http://www.no1stcostlist.com/coppermine/displayimage/album=3/pid=1.html because it graphically described and confirmed my theoretical prediction made in February 1991 that we life forms created a conservation debt made of Anti-Matter that would strike the Sun vaporizing Earth.

I was talking with Gerard Hawkins about the math he described in his article "Geometric harvest" in the February 1, 1992 Science News. Gerard is one of the worlds foremost geometricians. He pointed out that some of the early crop circles were extremely elegant proofs of geometric theorems that had never before been published on Earth in ancient or modern mathematical literature.

The picture on the cover started to poke me in the eye about 45 minutes into our conversation. After doing some measurements, I realized it was a picture of my theoretical prediction I had made a year earlier.

It took me about 30 seconds to get over the euphoria of having the foundation premise of my theory, i.e. we life forms create a conservation debt made of Anti-Matter, confirmed by an E-T eyewitness source. Their ritual hieroglyph was showing Earth being vaporized in six or seven units of time. I became less happy when I remembered I was standing on the planet that was to be vaporized.

It took me three days to deduce we could in theory prevent this event from happening, so I have been trying to wake the rest of you up ever since. It has taken almost 18 years to work out all of the details of the E-T message.

Thus, once you have a theory that gives the E-T message a context, it is perfectly clear and oh so elegant. I am sure the result of many iterations.

While this explanation is on the http://www.no1stcostlist.com/index.php, it is obvious most of you have not read there carefully.

While your objections have been helpful in clearing up some of my exposition, I do think and others agree that it is clear enough.

So here again is a declarative sentence stating our problem: "We, the life forms of Earth, have created a conservation debt made of Anti-Matter that will cause our Sun to explode, unless prevented in the following way.......". Apparently some E-Ts are showing us exactly when by using NOT Natural, therefore must be caused, asteroid conjunctions. We need to know when to prevent this Sun explosion.

We have a big problem and your not liking it will not make it disappear.

Challenges, questions, disagreements are what science advances on. Screening or excluding theories and predictions that disagree with the establishment paradigm are the antithesis of doing real science.

I have agree to answer questions from anyone about my assertions using the Q&A procedures of the No 1st cost List http://www.no1stcostlist.com/Forums/c=5.html. My wife and I started building the N1CL in 1985 because I made a fundamental discovery in 1984 that my Phd mentors said was right in private, but then they proceeded to block publication because it upset so many establishment apple carts. You people would not do anything like that would you?

I think we are about to find out if this is a "well respected science site", as one of your members said.

Real help please.

Dan Alter

 

[origin]

Alter wrote:
So here again is a declarative sentence stating our problem: "We, the life forms of Earth, have created a conservation debt made of Anti-Matter that will cause our Sun to explode, unless prevented in the following way.......".

Well I for one think that since we created the debt in anti-matter, that we should pay the price. Yes of course the sun is going to explode, but I say bring it on. We created this situation so we should just live with it (for a little while). It is a nice gesture that the aliens are trying to help us but we do not need nor deserve their help. I also think that you, Mr. Alter, may be causing severe quantum fluctuations in space-time which could result in a temporal disruptions of epic proportions by trying to change the out come of the anti-matter debt. There is a very real chance that your interfernence in conjunction with the aliens will just make things worse for the rest of the universe. Think about it, stop being so earth centered and think about the rest of the galaxy for gods sake!

 

[Shpaget]

Re: Shipaget: You have proof ME not to scale?

Also you dishonestly imply conjunctions occur hourly between any 2 of 100 largest asteroids?

Let me worry about me burning in hell for my dishonesty.

There was no mention in the post of the billions of particles in the asteroid belt was there, just the 100 largest asteroids.

You also failed to mention the names of the asteroids in question (despite countless demands for them).
You also conveniently overlook numerous questions about why the few largest main belt asteroids are not depicted in the crop circle.

The chances of any two of them being in actual conjunction on any stated date/time in any year are certainly in the many millions to one. Add the second requirement that the conjunction between be also on a given vector from the Sun on the given date/time and the odds are almost incalculable.

Chances of largest asteroids to be in conjunction are certainly lower than if we observed all the particles, but you still haven't provided us with a proper list of the asteroids in question.
We all know what a conjunction is, you don't need to educate us on that.

There Mean Orbital Circumference is over a billion kilometers, the average diameter of the 100 largest is about 160 kilometers, you do the math.

Why, and what math are you referring to?

Second you assert the 'Missing Earth" is not to scale. Prove it.

Me and others have already done that in your previous thread, which is still open in case you forgot about it.
You should also remember that it is not up to us to prove you are wrong, but up to you to (try to) prove you are right.

How exactly did we create out antimatter debt, how much do we own, to whom, and when is the deadline (just don't say 2012)?
Why are we being warned about it? Are we warned about our debt by some benevolent aliens, or by the loan sharks we own the antimatter?
Even if you are right, how do you propose to pay this debt? By producing enough antimatter to satisfy our benefactors? And why is the Sun going to go kablooie? Are the aliens going to destroy it? How, and why don't they just use the whatever energy they're going to use to destroy the Sun to pay the debt? What do they gain by destroying us?

Why are you avoiding answering the questions?

 

[dalter]

Apology to shpaget

I just sent shpaget this apology in a PM. Questioning someones motives is a classic debating and logical fallacy and is not to be used between scientists unless there is conclusive objective evidence. I apologize to all of you and won't do it again.

"Second, I was wrong to say you were dishonest about the particles, I could have said you did not appreciate the actual odds. I will also say this in the forum. I do apologize."

Dan Alter

 

[dalter]

Shpaget gives good list of our differences.

1. Shpaget said, "You also failed to mention the names of the asteroids in question (despite countless demands for them).

I don't know there names yet shpaget, that is why I am am asking astronomers to look. I am suggesting two methods for our astronomers to use. First, "Brute Force" by going and looking to see if any of the 100 largest asteroids are out of position; and second, the elegant way, use the clues provided by the "Missing Earth" itself. I will add saying this at the beginning of the article.


2. Shpaget said, "You also conveniently overlook numerous questions about why the few largest main belt asteroids are not depicted in the crop circle."

The short answer is the "context" post above. There is no intent to make this easy for us. But the second and more practical reason is that the E-Ts want to start the first conjunction(please a 2nd conjunction) with the largest practicable asteroid = Europhysine on July 16, 2009. Clearly Ceres and the next few largest are not included, which makes the search that much easier.

3. dalter wrote:The chances of any two of them being in actual conjunction on any stated date/time in any year are certainly in the many millions to one. Add the second requirement that the conjunction between be also on a given vector from the Sun on the given date/time and the odds are almost incalculable.


Shpaget said, "Chances of largest asteroids to be in conjunction are certainly lower than if we observed all the particles, but you still haven't provided us with a proper list of the asteroids in question.
We all know what a conjunction is, you don't need to educate us on that."

"Lower" is a gross understatement. As to a list of the 65 asteroids and the 2 or 4 conjunction asteroids, that is what we are trying to determine.


4. dalter wrote:There Mean Orbital Circumference is over a billion kilometers, the average diameter of the 100 largest is about 160 kilometers, you do the math.

Shpaget said, "Why, and what math are you referring to?"

This calculation underestimates figuring out the odds: Divide 160 into one billion = 6 million to one that any one of the 65 will be at a given point and time "A" on Orbital Radius; then divide 6,000,000/65 = 92,000 is chance that any of the 65 will be at "A"; now square it, = 8,464,000,000 to one. I rounded down every step.

5. dalter wrote:Second you assert the 'Missing Earth" is not to scale. Prove it.


Shpaget said, Me and others have already done that in your previous thread, which is still open in case you forgot about it.

I don't read those anymore, because this post is the result of that feedback. You say you have shown me up then cutnpaste that here so we have something concrete in one spot.

However I think I know what your problem is, my fault, I did not put my "Margin of Error" at top of article. It is explained in "Methods and Materials". Remember we are using a photograph that was taken from an airplane that was not directly overhead, hence some foreshortening, so we need to use an average of at least four diameters across planet rings shown in ME picture to get close to planets actual orbital radius. I will fix. Once we can get someone to do an accurate model of ME circle from picture, it will be spot on. Right now the "Missing Earth" picture we have gets us close enough to find out which asteroids are shown in it. 'I have two pictures of the ME posted: http://www.no1stcostlist.com/coppermine/displayimage/album=3/pid=6.html
http://www.no1stcostlist.com/coppermine/displayimage/album=3/pid=4.html


6. Shpaget said, "You should also remember that it is not up to us to prove you are wrong, but up to you to (try to) prove you are right."

I beg to differ. Finding these conjunction(s) proves I am right and proves you are wrong. It is up to you to prove you are right and I am wrong by doing the test. We can not falsify my conjunction prediction without carefully looking. Your implied hypothesis that the conjunctions are not there is on the same basis as mine logically, except that when I am right and we don't look, we all die. Big practical difference. We have to look, the full article on the No 1st Cost List points out how and where to look. http://www.no1stcostlist.com/News/article/sid=53.html


7. Shpaget said, "How exactly did we create our antimatter debt, how much do we own, to whom, and when is the deadline (just don't say 2012)? Summary: Why We Have A Conservation Debt, Theory & Evidence http://www.no1stcostlist.com/News/article/sid=52.html

8. Shpaget said, "Why are we being warned about it? Are we warned about our debt by some benevolent aliens, or by the loan sharks we own the antimatter?"

We spirits love living in life forms and E-Ts are life forms = spirits just like us, and want life to exist wherever possible; but a new species loose with FTL without a conscious objective moral code that governs our behavior towards other living planets???? Why would E-Ts require a public response from us to help? http://www.no1stcostlist.com/Forums/viewtopic/p=403.html#403

9. Shpaget said, "Even if you are right, how do you propose to pay this debt? By producing enough antimatter to satisfy our benefactors? And why is the Sun going to go kablooie? Are the aliens going to destroy it? How, and why don't they just use the whatever energy they're going to use to destroy the Sun to pay the debt?"

The E-Ts are not going to destroy it, the A-M debt is ours, we created it, we can prevent it, but every reported action by the E-Ts I know of says, "You must figure this out for yourselves. Grow up or die by your own hand.". The message speaks for itself, they are giving us the minimal necessary chance to save ourselves. E-T Message Summary http://www.no1stcostlist.com/News/article/sid=51.html

10. Shpaget said, "What do they gain by destroying us?"

They are not destroying us, but rather they are not saving us from ourselves. The E-Ts gain by not having a barbarous society attacking them. FTL is easy, once you see how. They do want us to live, but only if we become civilized. We will see if my judgment about them is right after we verify the conjunction(s) and start doing What Must Be Done.

11. Shpaget said, "Why are you avoiding answering the questions?"

I'm not, but I do have other balls in the air, and I have to fit my warning into the keyhole of your understanding which means finding out your objections and disagreements to what I say. All I have is my words to get this planet to talk about something it hates to consider, and go in a direction it does not want to go, but right is might. Truth wins in the end.

Thank You for so clearly raising these questions,

Dan Alter