From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Icon conspiracy.svg

This conspiracy theories related article has not received a brainstar for quality. Please consider expanding the article appropriately. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Editorial notes
  • This article should focus only on Sitchin's claims. For the current claims, go to Planet X.

Sailor Nibiru[edit]

There's Sailor Nibiru, though it seems that there's no consensus what she looks like. The End is nigh...--ZooGuard (talk) 09:32, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Rule 3-whatever strikes yet again... ADK...I'll dehydrate your arcade! 09:47, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
34 --√2 (talk) 09:48, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
That's specifically for porn, there are dozens of others that probably apply. Rule 1 is probably "if you can think of it, Urban Dictionary lists the rule for it". ADK...I'll confuse your diet coke! 09:50, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
They're all here --√2 (talk) 09:52, 9 August 2011 (UTC)


Okay, so counting Pluto in would make Nibiru tenth right? Or are there two "invisdable plannetses"?? (talk) 21:15, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

The Sun and the Moon are included among the classical seven "wanderers". Sitchin added the Earth and the modern discoveries (Uranus, Neptune and Pluto) to the old count.--ZooGuard (talk) 18:16, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

A case of sunstroke?[edit]

Are [1], [2] and [3] sufficiently 'daft' for this entry?

And, to balance it out, [4] (talk) 17:16, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

The Sun can't do a report on a NASA statement without discussing Niburu[edit]

What a time to be alive. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 19:42, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Oh, and they literally decided this was news. Great job, guys! Reverend Black Percy (talk) 19:48, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
Who wants to place bets on NASA funding being earmarked for the investigation of Niburu under our new administration? Petey Plane (talk) 19:52, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
Hey, maybe what Michio Kaku said is true after all — if you'd just tell the politicians that you're seeking funding because you're out looking for God or Nibiru or the Ninja Turtles or something like that, they'd fund the equivalent of a new CERN in a heartbeat.
Also, regarding the articles from The Sun — note that the actual NASA report explicitly says that there's no risk whatsoever, at all. Lol.
Here's NASA on 2016 WF9Wikipedia:

2016 WF9 will approach Earth's orbit on Feb. 25, 2017. At a distance of nearly 32 million miles (51 million kilometers) from Earth, this pass will not bring it particularly close. The trajectory of 2016 WF9 is well understood, and the object is not a threat to Earth for the foreseeable future.

And here's NASA on C/2016 U1 NEOWISEWikipedia:

As seen from the northern hemisphere during the first week of 2017, comet C/2016 U1 NEOWISE will be in the southeastern sky shortly before dawn. It is moving farther south each day and it will reach its closest point to the sun, inside the orbit of Mercury, on Jan. 14, before heading back out to the outer reaches of the solar system for an orbit lasting thousands of years. While it will be visible to skywatchers at Earth, it is not considered a threat to our planet either.

Finally, reporting on that same NASA report, here's The Sun on both of the above:

Massive asteroid 2016 WF9 to strike Earth and trigger mega-tsunami NEXT MONTH, according to this scientist
NASA detected a mystery object approaching Earth and it’s so huge you’ll be able to see it from Britain A MASSIVE mystery space rock is on collision course with Earth, according to crackpot theorists.

This isn't a quote mine, either — this is literally the order in which text appears in the original article. Also, note that the clickbaity headline says "this scientist", but the text post-click instantly reads "crackpot theorist". The Sun, ffs Facepalm
In all relative seriousness: Is The Sun basically widely read fake news at this point? Could a Brit weigh in, please? Not to sound all terrible, but certainly there's anecdotes from you locals on the calibre of the average reader of this type of tabloid? Reverend Black Percy (talk) 20:25, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
It's with the Daily Mail on the reliability scale - its purpose is to spread bullshit, and if it ever accidentally prints something good it'll be stolen from somewhere else. This report should be posted to the clogs - David Gerard (talk) 20:44, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
The Scum has always been fake news. Right back to the first issue. --Scherben (talk) 17:07, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

Claims and Debunking?[edit]

As an admitted space-nerd, and inspired by the fresh BS apparently published by Wikileaks I feel that a claims and debunking thing about all things planet is supposed to do and why people can't see it. The 3600-year-orbit, passing close to the sun (without disturbing other planets' orbits or itself being kicked out of the system by a close encounter with any of the other planets), how it's supposedly hiding, etc. is in order. Is there any reason why we don't have this beyond nobody's taken the time to write it up? -- Onychoprion (talk) 21:21, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Alternatively, anyone know a good resource for Nibiru claims? Preferably one that wont give my computer (or my eyes) the bubonic plague? -- Onychoprion (talk) 21:42, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Another possibility[edit]

Nibiru is actually the ghost of Theia, and is 'remembered' in a manner akin to Quatermass and the Pit. Anna Livia (talk) 21:49, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

New Planet 9 Search[edit]

There is a legitimate scientific search for a Kuiper Belt object expected to be two to 15 times more massive than the Earth predicted by irregularities in other Kuiper Belt objects. While the projected orbit of this planet would not bring it inside the known planetary orbits, it probably should be addressed as a factor, because it's only a matter of time before the Nibiru conspiracists will latch onto it as a foothold for legitimacy. — Unsigned, by: / talk / contribs