Hi,

Thanks for the invitation. I've been working on the Planet X problem for
quite a while, and I should be working on it now instead of composing this
post. So at the risk of repeating myself to any reader who follows my
work, allow me to just copy a recent post I made to the PX2003_Debate list
plus my own astro-revelation list, followed by a couple of my replies
following the same thread. The three messages are separated by
"=============="

I've read Nancy's book, and while I agree with much in it, I also disagree
with many details. I'm really not interested in debating her work. But if
anybody wants to discuss my work, I will be happy to oblige.

Peace,
Glen

==========================================
Dear Rusatossa,

Jim's reply about Nancy Leider of Zetatalk being first to declare 2003 as a
target date is correct as far as I know.

I have my own reasons for thinking that Planet X exists and that it will
arrive in the inner solar system in 2003, and they are independent of
Zetatalk.

I approach the problem from two directions. First, I'm trying to identify
the "unmodeled force" that has been perturbing the planets for at least 20
years by comparing numerically integrated 9-planet orbits to the official
JPL ephemerides. That is a work in progress. If it succeeds, it should
provide an orbit for Planet X. (Actually, I already have a tentative orbit
for Planet X based on what I think its mission is; see below. But this
numerical orbit integration work should confirm that orbit.)

Second, I consider my hypothesis that Immanuel Velikovsky's _Worlds in
Collision_ (Doubleday 1950) Exodus scenario will recur in reversed time
sequence. In brief, Velikovsky claims from studying ancient texts from
many cultures that Venus was ejected by Jupiter as a giant comet. Venus
nearly collided with Mars at least once and with Earth twice during the
Exodus, and afterward it just settled into its present orbit. Between
those two apparitions at Earth, six days apart, Venus appeared to follow
or "fly formation with" the Earth.

"Because of the proximity of the earth, the comet left its own orbit and
for a while followed the orbit of the earth. The great ball of the comet
retreated, then again approached the earth, shrouded in a dark column of
gasses which looked like a pillar of smoke during the day and of fire at
night, and the earth once more passed through the atmosphere of the comet,
this time at its neck. This stage was accompanied by violent and incessant
electrical discharges between the atmosphere of the tail and the
terrestrial atmosphere. There was an interval of about six days between
these two close approaches. Emerging from the gases of the comet, the
earth seems to have changed the direction of its rotation, and the pillar
of smoke moved to the opposite horizon. (Cf. Exodus 14:19). The column
looked like a gigantic moving serpent." [_Worlds in Collision_ pages
91-92.]

Earth also nearly collided with Mars according to Velikovsky.

In our time (which I hypothesize flows in the opposite direction of the
cosmic time flow during the Exodus), Venus would be minding its own
business in its present orbit, when (I think on May 7, 2003) it would
suddenly brighten, sprout a huge coma and tail, swing around the Sun and
nearly collide with Earth twice and Mars at least once before eventually
being absorbed by Jupiter.

That could only happen if Planet X collides with Venus so as to knock it
out of its present orbit. That collision would be so violent, I believe,
that it would turn Venus inside-out.

Any competent theorist will tell you that an actual collision between
planets is impossible. (At least if both bodies have direct orbits such
collisions are impossible because they always swing around their common
center of gravity as they pass each other. However, since Planet X will
have a retrograde orbit, then I think a collision with Venus is possible if
unlikely.) But I suggest that if Venus ejected its core just before the
Exodus, then it will be absorbing its core this time, so from that aspect,
Planet X can't miss Venus. Planet X is the escaped core of Venus,
according to my hypothesis, and it is now returning home. In our present
time frame, Venus will absorb Planet X and immediately change into an
Earth-crossing orbit.

There is an analog to this in particle physics. It is called pair
production. A high-energy photon can be transformed into an electron and a
positron. A positron is just an electron moving in negative time. It is a
particle of anti-matter. By the same token, an electron and a positron can
collide and annihilate each other, converting their combined energies into
a gamma ray photon. I suspect that Planet X has negative mass now, and
that may be why we can't see it.

I presently think that Planet X will nearly collide with Venus on March 30,
2003 on its inbound leg (passing slightly North of Venus), then after
swinging around the Sun in a very close perihelion (about 0.05 AU) on April
18, 2003, it will actually collide with Venus on or about May 7, 2003,
turning Venus inside-out. At this point I must invoke an unknown and
hypothetical physical theory that I invented to make all this work.
Turning Venus inside-out will reverse the flow of time for Venus, and it
will retrace the orbit that Planet X had before then (and has now) only
moving backwards with respect to its present motion. That is, before the
collision, Planet X will have a retrograde orbit, and afterward,
Venus/Planet X will have a direct orbit. It would be as if Planet X just
bounced off of Venus like a billiard ball against the rail, except that
what we now know as Venus would become the core, and Planet X would become
the shell of the new "Comet Venus". Since its time flow will have been
reversed, I dare say that it will have negative gravity. The first near
collision with Earth would then occur on July 4, 2003, and the second one
on July 10.

This behavior of Comet Venus following the Earth for six days between
apparitions makes sense in my scenario only if Venus has negative gravity
after it absorbs Planet X. That's because Venus can't follow the Earth
unless it passes behind the Earth, and if it passes behind the Earth, it
can't speed Earth's orbit velocity in the slingshot maneuver unless Venus
has negative gravity. Earth can't acquire a Mars-crossing orbit unless the
Venus encounters speed it up.

This negative gravity for Venus is a new idea for me. I had previously
thought that during Earth's encounter with Planet X, it would pass "under"
the Earth's South Pole. Actually, I had envisioned that Earth's spin axis
would tilt 90º so that the South Pole would point forward in the direction
of Earth's motion around the Sun. That way, Planet X could pass in front
of Earth (in its orbit plane), which if it had positive gravity, would be
the only way it could increase Earth's orbital velocity. In that case,
Earth's southern hemisphere would face Planet X as it crossed in front of
Earth's bow. That would decrease the gravity in the southern hemisphere
and increase it in the northern hemisphere, causing the great hurricane to
blow from north to south. It would also cause the northern hemisphere to
get very hot and the southern hemisphere to get very cold. The low
barometric pressure would cause great snow storms in the southern
hemisphere.

But now, with Comet Venus having negative gravity and passing behind the
Earth's stern in the orbit plane, it would pass "above" the Earth's
northern hemisphere, assuming the spin axis tilts 90º as before with the
South Pole pointing in the direction of Earth's motion around the Sun.
Because the force of gravity from Comet Venus would be a repulsion instead
of an attraction, then gravity would still increase in Earth's northern
hemisphere and decrease in its southern hemisphere, and the hurricane wind
would still blow from north to south, and the north would still get hot
while the south got cold.

Having two encounters with Comet Venus relaxes the constraint on the
slingshot maneuver because there would be two of them, and each one would
need to be only half as powerful. The goal is to give the Earth an
increase in its orbit velocity by 10.4% to give it a Mars-crossing orbit.
That means that each Comet Venus slingshot would need to boost Earth's
orbital velocity by only 5.2%.

Now, regarding 2003 as the year for the arrival of Planet X into the inner
solar system. Everything I have seen so far points to the dates I
mentioned above. That is, they are consistent with what is possible with
celestial mechanics to perform the game of cosmic billiards that I
envision. If you neglect Venus, then the three planets Earth, Mars, and
Jupiter must have the same angular configurations relative to the stars and
to each other. The question would be if 2003 gives a workable
configuration for those three planets, when will the next similar
configuration occur?

It is impossible for each of three planets to ever have exactly an integral
number of orbit revolutions for the same time span, so we can speak in
terms of an error that would be the fractional part of the actual number of
revolutions. This fraction of an orbit can also be expressed as a
heliocentric longitude difference by multiplying it times 360º per
revolution. In this case the shortest time span until the next similar
configuration would be 47 Earth years (47/1.88075 = 24.99 Martian years;
47/11.85678 = 3.964 Jovian years). So, the next window of opportunity
would be in the spring/summer of 2050. The Jovian heliocentric longitude
error in this case is 4 - 3.964 = 0.036 Jovian years or 13º of longitude.
If you could only tolerate a 9º error, you would have to wait 190 years.
For a 5º error, you would have to wait 237 years. For a 1º error, you
would have to wait 3391 years. I think the 13º error is tolerable, so 47
years is the interval until the next opportunity for those three planets.

However, when you look at Venus, you find that its error would be 145º on
July 4, 2050 and 54º on July 4, 2193, neither of which would be acceptable.
My orbit viewer does not go past 2200, so I couldn't find out what the
error in the heliocentric longitude of Venus would be in 2240 or 5394
without considerable effort. But who really cares?

The bottom line is that if the four planets Venus, Earth, Mars, and Jupiter
must be in the same configuration that they will be on July 4, 2003, then
there will not be another opportunity for this scenario to occur within the
next 200 years or longer.

The year 2003 also meets my criterion of a close Earth-Mars conjunction.
It's the best time in the reasonably near future for Earth to be launched
into a Mars-crossing orbit.

You can read my article that tells why July 4, 2003 is a preferred date.
See http://home1.gte.net/res00bfl/Smiting_Sun&Moon.htm
There is a broken link in that article, and I explain it here.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/astro-revelation/message/991

I know this scenario seems complicated, but I have not even told you how
Mars will circularize Earth's orbit at around 1.5 AU with two or three
slingshot events and how Venus will circularize Mars's orbit with another
slingshot event before it goes to Jupiter to become absorbed by Jupiter.
But if it happens as I envision it, then I dare say that everybody will
concede that it did not happen by chance.

This mission was planned by God. And the purpose is twofold. The first
purpose is to move Earth into Mars's present orbit and to move Mars into
Venus's present orbit and to Terraform it. Mars will also have two very
close encounters with the Sun, and all of that will help warm Mars up and
make it inhabitable. And why is that necessary? I can only guess that the
Sun will experience a sudden discrete increase in its radiant energy
output, so Earth needs to move its orbit farther out again.

The Bible says that the Kingdom of God will last 1000 years. By then we
should have the technology to migrate the entire population to Mars, the
"new earth" where there is no sea [Rev. 21:1]. There will also be a new
heaven. Obviously the inner solar system will have been re-arranged, but
also the stars will look different. This will be because Earth will have
turned its atoms inside out, as it were, converting them from left-handed
as they are now to right-handed. Also Earth will have experienced a
physical blueshift. This will make all the stars appear to be redshifted.
Evidently the Sun is a very long period variable star, but the variations
are not continuous; they are discrete.

This periodic orbit expansion has happened before. We know this because of
the ages of the Biblical patriarchs: Adam, Noah, Methuselah, etc. They
lived a large number of years because Earth used to orbit much closer to
the Sun in those days, and the length of a year was much shorter. After
Earth moves out to the orbit of Mars, the number of days in a year will
increase by 88%. The length of a day will not change.

The second purpose of this scenario is to provide the physical means to
implement Judgment Day. For my ideas about that, see
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/astro-revelation/message/965

Peace,
Glen

----- Original Message -----
From: "rusatossa" <rusatossa@...>
To: <PX2003_Debate@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 17, 2002 10:22 PM
Subject: [PX2003_Debate] QUESTION ??

>
>
> I have a question:
>
> WHY is 2003 a target date and WHO first declared
> it to be a target date ??
>
> THANKS !

=====================================================

----- Original Message -----
From: "glenwdeen" <glen.deen@...>
To: <PX2003_Debate@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 4:25 PM
Subject: [PX2003_Debate] Re: Digest Number 157


--- In PX2003_Debate@y..., Bob Avery <rwavery@j...> wrote:
> Glen,
>
> >Obviously the inner solar system will have been re-arranged,
> >but also the stars will look different. This will be because
> >Earth will have turned its atoms inside out, as it were,
> >converting them from left-handed as they are now to right-handed.
>
> What law of chemistry or physics will produce that trick? Why do
> you expect it?

Those are a very good questions. This is an example of my own
intuition at work. We know that antimatter particles are just like
matter particles that move backward in time. We also know that the
signs of the electric charges of electrons and protons are the
opposite of their corresponding particles, positrons and anti-
protons. We know that the nuclei of atoms have positive charges and
are much more massive than their electron shells that have
negative charges. We also know that matter particles are left-
handed. This is all in the physics textbooks. Are you with me so
far or do I need to find references?

Well, I hypothesize that there are two universes, and time runs
backwards in the other one. That means to me that if our atoms are
left-handed, then the atoms in the other universe are right-handed.

I hypothesize that if you could somehow turn an atom inside-out, it
would have positrons orbiting a nucleus of anti-protons and neutrons
(assuming they are their own anti-particle). That is, you would have
an atom of antimatter in which time runs backwards.

The following is confusing even to me, and I don't guarantee I have
it right even yet because I have changed my mind about it so many
times.

I think the Earth will shift its polar axis on Judgment Day by about
90º as a result of the near collision with Comet Venus (which
absorbed Planet X and turned inside-out). Some will argue that
magnetic forces will produce the torque to shift the polar axis. I
think it will be the ether flow, but G. F. FitzGerald said in 1878
that "magnetism is treated as a flow of ether." So maybe we are both
right. In any case, I think that as soon as Comet Venus breaks
inside Earth's magnetosphere, Earth's North spin axis pole will
gently swing towards Venus and continue pointing towards it as it
crosses behind Earth's stern in its orbit plane. During this
maneuver, the whole Earth (mantle, crust, oceans, air) would rotate
as a rigid body; there wouldn't be any "slippage". Since Earth's
North Pole would be pointing towards Planet X, anyone in Greenland
would see it overhead and feel heavier since it would be "over their
heads" and pushing down on them with its force of repulsion (Venus
will have negative gravity). People in Antarctica would feel its
gravity making them lighter, because it would be pushing on them
from "under their feet." This gravity gradient will produce a
barometric pressure gradient which will produce the high winds
blowing from north to south.

I've wondered how Earth's rotation could be possibly be halted and
reversed. The rapture, or dividing the sheep from the goats can
evidently only occur at the moment when Earth's rotation is
temporarily stopped. Only Comet Venus/Planet X can do this, so it
must have its spin axis pointing towards Earth as it crosses Earth's
orbit, it must be rotating in the opposite direction, and Earth's
spin axis must be pointing towards Venus. Furthermore, Venus must
have a high rate of spin. We know that Venus presently has almost no
spin, so the collision with Planet X will evidently spin it up as
much as necessary. As Comet Venus passes behind the Earth ("above"
our North Pole), their spin axes must become co-linear. Venus must
pass behind the Earth so that Earth will speed up (because of the
repulsion force), allowing Earth to rendezvous with Mars later, and
this will also allow Venus to fly formation with Earth for six days
outside Earth's orbit path and cross behind Earth again as it moves
inside Earth's orbit path towards the Sun.

I must invoke my ideas about Earth's structure to explain this. I
believe that Earth is a hollow shell, and its core is normally
centered inside the cavity (the "Bottomless Pit"). The only
explanation for that picture that satisfies me is if the core and the
shell experience a mutual repulsion force, and I think that makes
sense if time runs backwards in the core (I guess we could say it is
made of anti-matter). Thus a free particle inside the cavity
would "fall upwards" towards the ceiling of the cavity, which is the
inner surface of the shell.

Venus will evidently couple more tightly to Earth's core than to its
shell. The idea that occurs to me is that somehow the passage of
Venus would cause Earth's core to change the orientation of its spin
axis. But since the core and the shell are a "couple", you can't
just change the core's spin axis alone. The spin axes of both the
shell and the core must change if one changes. The idea that occurs
to me is that if somehow the core and the shell shifted their spin
axes such that they were rotating in opposite directions (in our time
frame), maybe they would brake each other (without touching, of
course). There must be a very intense ether current between them
(magnetic flux if you prefer), and so they should be able to torque
each other to a stop. Alternatively, it may be that Earth and Venus
brake each other to the point where Earth temporarily stops rotating.

That sounds reasonable, except that once it stopped, what would start
Earth rotating again? Evidently, Venus will do that when it crosses
behind Earth again on its way towards the Sun.

I suspect that once Earth's rotation has stopped, it can begin
rotating in either direction. My hypothesis is that if it can go
either way, then it will go both ways. That would be the physical
mechanism for the rapture.

Here is where I have to invoke the many histories (or many worlds)
hypothesis of quantum mechanics. In one history, the goat world, the
flow of cosmic time is reversed. (Or, more likely, this world in
which time flows backwards already exists, and the goats just
transfer their bodies into it.) This permits the polar axis of their
Earth to return to "its upright position" relative to the stars while
the direction of rotation reverses and the direction of ether flow
(outward) remain as it is now. The atom handedness determines the
direction of ether flow. Ether flows out of left-handed worlds and
in to right-handed worlds. Their atoms would still be left-handed,
and the ether would still flow outwards. If you hold your left hand
with its thumb down and fingers curled, they point CCW. This is the
present direction of Earth's rotation. If you now rotate your wrist
so that your thumb points up (to reverse the direction of cosmic time
flow), your fingers curl CW. So, the goat world's rotation reverses
relative to the rest of the solar system because of their axis
inversion, but they are still left-handed. If Earth's rotation
becomes CW, its orbit direction must also become CW because I
hypothesize that a planet's spin must always be in the same direction
as its orbit. The only way for that to happen is for cosmic time to
reverse for the goat world. Since cosmic time reversed for them,
they would find that not only Earth, but also all the other planets
were orbiting the Sun in a clockwise direction (orbits are presently
counter-clockwise). For them, the North Star would still be in the
geographic north, but the Sun would rise in the West and set in the
East.

In the other history, the sheep world, the direction of ether flow
would be changed from outward to inward, and this would be
accomplished by the flipping all the atoms in the world from left-
handed to right-handed and also inverting their spins. I have no
idea how this can be done. But the result would be that Earth would
experience a polar axis inversion and a spin direction reversal from
their viewpoint, but no spin reversal from the cosmic viewpoint. In
the sheep world, the Sun would rise in the West and set in the East
relative to old landmarks, but the Earth and all the planets would
continue orbiting the Sun in a counter-clockwise direction, relative
to the stars, and they would continue to spin about their axes in a
counter-clockwise direction, relative to the stars. But relative to
Earth's own geographic frame, all planets would seem to orbit the Sun
and spin in a clockwise fashion because of the axis inversion. The
sheep would find that the celestial sphere had turned upside down.

So, to review, both worlds would experience a 90º polar axis shift
and a slowing of rotation to a stop. After a pause with no rotation,
the goat world would reverse the direction of its time flow, meaning
that it would retrace its steps. Its polar axis would return to its
normal position. But because of the time flow reversal, its rotation
would become clockwise, as would its orbit direction and that of all
the other planets.

The sheep world would not reverse the direction of its time flow, but
it would continue rotating its polar axis until it reached a 180º
(approximately) axis inversion. The Sun would rise in the West and
setting in the East relative to their customary landmarks in both
worlds. For the sheep word, that is because when you turn the
celestial sphere upside down, east and west reverse. From the
viewpoint of the stars, the Sun would continue to rise in the East
and set in the West for the sheep world.

Both worlds pause at 90º with zero rotation while you decide which
path to take. After the pause the goat world retraces its path that
brought it to the pause. It continues to be left-handed but
experiences a reversal of cosmic time flow. This means that the
goats would repeat the cosmic history we have experienced but in
reverse sequence. For example, 9 years later, they would observe
Jupiter ejecting Comet Shoemaker Levy 9 into space. After the pause,
the sheep world would experience another encounter with Venus and
continue on its odyssey to rendezvous with Mars.

I'm sure you will have no doubt as to which world you find yourself
in after the Judgment. But if sky did not change, you are a goat,
and if the celestial sphere turned upside-down, you are a sheep.

> >Also Earth will have experienced a physical blueshift.
>
> How can this happen?

See my paper http://home1.gte.net/res00bfl/Redshift_Physics.htm
entitled "The Physics of an Episodic Quantized Redshift".

>
> >We know this because of
> >the ages of the Biblical patriarchs: Adam, Noah, Methuselah, etc.
> >They lived a large number of years because Earth used to orbit
> >much closer to the Sun in those days, and the length of a year
> >was much shorter.
>
> I always wondered how that happened. I never thought of that
> possibility.
<snip>
> Bob Avery

Peace,
Glen

===============================================
----- Original Message -----
From: "planetxvideo_com" <planetxvideo@...>
To: <PX2003_Debate@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 3:08 AM
Subject: [PX2003_Debate] for Glen


> Glen wrote:
> >"This periodic orbit expansion has happened before. We know this
> >because of the ages of the Biblical patriarchs: Adam, Noah,
> >Methuselah, etc. They lived a large number of years because
> >Earth used to orbit much closer to the Sun in those days, and
> >the length of a year was much shorter. After Earth moves out to
> >the orbit of Mars, the number of days in a year will increase..."
>
> Very interesting theory Glen. I have always considered the long
> lifespans of the biblical characters to be because they were Annunaki
> or had some plant that acted as a "fountin of youth" (as described by
> Sitchin). Very very interesting stuff, my man.

I reject Sitchin's theory about the Annunaki.

> Now, of course, i have some questions. Where do you get your data
> regarding orbital calculations of Planet X?

First I had to find the date when Venus/Planet X would first rendezvous
with Earth and launch it into a Mars-crossing orbit.

As it happens, the 2003 apparition of Mars on August 28, 2003 will be the
closest (55.5 million km) during the 50-year span from 1969 through 2018.
That may be just a coincidence. But if I were God, and if I were designing
a rendezvous mission for Earth to meet Mars, I would design Mars's orbit so
that it would be nearest Earth during the transfer maneuver. The following
paragraph and tables were copied from the Guide 7.0 Mars help screen.
Guide is sold by http://www.projectpluto.com/.

"The following table lists opposition dates for Mars from 1970 to 2020,
and the distance between Mars and Earth on those dates, in millions of
km. You'll notice that Mars comes particularly close in 1971, 1988,
2003, and 2018. This is part of a roughly 15.8-year cycle of
favorable oppositions.

31 May 1969 dist 72.6 12 Feb 1995 dist 100.9
10 Aug 1971 dist 55.9 17 Mar 1997 dist 98.7
25 Oct 1973 dist 66.0 24 Apr 1999 dist 87.2
15 Dec 1975 dist 85.2 13 Jun 2001 dist 68.1
22 Jan 1978 dist 97.7 28 Aug 2003 dist 55.5
25 Feb 1980 dist 101. 7 Nov 2005 dist 70.3
31 Mar 1982 dist 95.3 24 Dec 2007 dist 88.6
11 May 1984 dist 80.4 29 Jan 2010 dist 99.2
10 Jul 1986 dist 60.6 3 Mar 2012 dist 100.7
28 Sep 1988 dist 59.1 8 Apr 2014 dist 92.8
27 Nov 1990 dist 78.2 22 May 2016 dist 76.2
7 Jan 1993 dist 93.8 27 Jul 2018 dist 57.5
"

Because I find that the Book of Revelation prophesies that Earth will be in
Sagittarius (from the Sun's viewpoint), when it encounters Planet X, it
means that the encounter must occur between June 18 and July 23 of any
year. Sagittarius is the mounted archer in the sky. Revelation 6:2
describes a mounted archer.

"And I saw, and behold, a white horse, and he that sat thereon had a bow;
and there was given unto him a crown: and he came forth conquering, and to
conquer."

The center of the Milky Way is in Sagittarius, and the Milky Way is white.
A man with a bow is an archer. The crown refers to Corona Australis, which
is the constellation immediately south of Sagittarius. This time of the
year is also consistent with the parable of the fig tree in Matthew 24:33
which refers to summer.

This configuration of Earth in Sagittarius and Mars nearest it repeats
every 15 Earth years (15/1.88075 = 7.975 Martian years, where a Martian
year is 1.88075 Earth years). The phase error of Mars in 2018 relative to
2003 is 8 - 7.975 = 0.025 Martian years = 9º ecliptic longitude.

So, if Planet X does not appear in the early summer of 2003, we might look
for it again in the summer of 2018. However, Venus will not be in position
at that time, nor will Jupiter. So, the summer of 2003 is the only time
that will fit my hypothetical scenario.

In my article http://home1.gte.net/res00bfl/Smiting_Sun&Moon.htm I found
seven possible epochs that met the criterion of causing the Moon's apparent
diameter at apogee to be 1/3 smaller than at perigee because it would be
50% farther away. These epochs are:

2003 May 21 at 07:39 UT
2003 June 6 at 18:42 UT
2003 June 18 at 10:26 UT
2003 July 4 at 05:07 UT
2003 July 16 at 05:24 UT
2003 July 30 at 16:33 UT
2003 August 12 at 10:07 UT

Of these, only the middle three (June 18, July 4, and July 16) place the
Earth in Sagittarius (from the Sun's viewpoint). I have been choosing July
4 because the Moon would be near First Quarter, and until recently I had
thought that Planet X would have to cross in front of the Earth because if
it had positive gravity, that is the only way that the slingshot maneuver
could give the Earth an increase in orbital velocity. I believe that the
Moon needs to be on the opposite side of the Earth from Planet X so that
the Earth would shield the Moon from it.

But my ideas about this scenario have always been evolving as I learn more
about it. Recently, I have come to believe that Venus/Planet X will have
negative gravity because the collision with Planet X will turn Venus
inside-out. That requires Venus to cross Earth's orbit behind the Earth in
order to boost Earth's velocity. The reason this is important is that it
is the only way that Venus can fly formation with the Earth for a few days
before crossing behind the Earth a second time. Velikovsky said that the
two close approaches by Venus were six days apart. In that case, in order
for Earth to shield the Moon from Venus, the Moon would need to be near its
Last Quarter. The Last Quarter occurs on June 21 and July 21. Therefore
either June 18 or July 16 would be the better choices (among those three)
for the first encounter. I don't yet know which of these two is best, but
I will find out later.

I am indebted to your question for causing me to realize that July 4 is no
longer compatible with my evolving scenario.

Given a rendezvous date with Earth, the fact that Planet X needs to be in
(or very near) the ecliptic plane, given a period of 1965 years, and given
the fact that Venus needs to cross Planet X's orbit just as Planet X
crosses Venus's orbit, thus insuring a collision with Venus on or about May
7, 2003, these criteria constrain an orbit for Planet X. It's incoming
orbit is retrograde, but when it hits Venus, its flow of time reverses, and
Venus/PX "bounces" off of the collision place in space, and it follows its
incoming orbit in reverse, which now becomes a direct orbit.

The orbit I have is preliminary, and I'm not ready to make it public. The
"proof" if there is any proof to be had, will be if this orbit for Planet X
will explain the observed perturbations of the outer planets, Pluto,
Neptune, Uranus, Saturn, and Jupiter. That is quite a tall order. I'm
going to use my preliminary orbit to check the perturbations first. Then
if that works out, I'll refine Planet X's orbit to do all the things I
think it must do.

> Where do you get your data regarding the
> earth's atoms changing from "left to right handed"?

Matthew 25:31-34

"31 But when the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the angels
with him, then shall he sit on the throne of his glory: 32 and before him
shall be gathered all the nations: and he shall separate them one from
another, as the shepherd separateth the sheep from the goats; 33 and he
shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. 34 Then
shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my
Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the
world:"

> I can see you did a bit of rearanging of the Velokowsky
> material, but failed to see how the conclusions came about.

I hope this helps.

> Thanks for the post and any response.
> -robert
> www.planetxvideo.com

You're welcome. Thanks for reading it and posing your thoughtful
questions.

Peace,
Glen