By ROY M. MOORELos Alamos
Since the five visible planets are all shining nicely in the early morning sky for the next few weeks, it seems like a good time to mention that NASA has announced the newest planet, number eleven.
Now NASA is calling it the 9th Planet after they demoted Pluto, but The Urantia Book says that our solar system formed with twelve planets. (It’s just like a bunch of scientists wanting to play God and demoting pour little Pluto.) The UB says a planet existed in the orbit between Mars and Jupiter but once came too close to Jupiter and split up resulting in the asteroid belt.
And since Jesus calls Pluto a planet, that is good enough for me. So this means Pluto is ten and the new planet is eleven and we have one more planet to discover in the Monmatia system (our solar system). Also, please remember that The Urantia Book was written in 1934, well before this eleventh or twelfth planet was discovered.
The Monmatia planetary system was formed when the large Angona Star System came very close to our sun, causing a large amount of matter to stream outwards towards Angona. It was fat in the middle and tapered to a point at both ends. Jupiter and Saturn were made from the fat middle section while the smaller planets were made from the smaller sections. Jupiter and Saturn both shown briefly as small suns and still remain as gaseous giants, even though the other planets have cooled and solidified.
The most interesting part to me is that due to the closeness of the two systems, and due to the fact that our sun was once a variable star (proven by the present eleven and one half year sunspot cycle), there came a moment when our sun captured three planets from the Angona System, meaning that Pluto and the newly discovered planet once revolved around another sun and was not created in our solar system.
This makes a lot of sense because Pluto and especially the new planet are very far from our sun and this surely gives a plausible explanation of how our sun could have planets so far away.
But the really disturbing planetary news to me is the fact that NASA recently announced that they have found liquid water on the surface of Mars, even though the same announcement was made in 2011 when the pictures were actually taken.
The pictures used as evidence are clearly labeled 2011. Apparently NASA formulated a fictitious account of finding water on Mars, assuming the public doesn’t really keep track of such things, all apparently in an effort to help promote the movie about Mars.
I have a meteorite from Mars that clearly shows that Mars is not only wet, but still alive, and NASA scientists think they should spend their time promoting a movie instead of investigating the life of another world. It seems our value systems are all out of kilter and I’m not sure I’m on the right planet.
Moore later, if it be the will of God, and the Post.
