Planet-X' Highly Ludicrous Cover-Story?/Re: Planet X: ...

Josh wrote:
> http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/red_asteroids_001025.html
> "The red Kuiper Belt Objects -- or KBOs, as they are called -
> were first noticed three years ago, their color being
> significantly redder than other KBOs.  ... KBOs travel in
> non-circular orbits (much like Pluto, which is considered
> a KBO by some scientists). ... For objects with perihelion
> distances beyond 40 AU, we only see red objects."
>
> "Our observations showed that QB1 reflects light that is
> quite rich in red hues compared with the sunlight that
> illuminates it."
>
> "The object is somewhat redder than solar light"
>
> "In 1992, the first member of the Kuiper Belt was
> discovered ... This process has been put forward as a
> possible reason for the reddening of KBOs"
>
> If someone would want to cover-up this Planet-X, what
> would he do. It must appear normal, to appear normal it
> must be part of a standard group of objects.
> 1983 reportedly the date the reddish Planet-X was
> discovered on a highly elliptical orbit well outside Pluto.
> 1992 The Kuiper Belt Objects are found, first one QB1
> is oddly rich in red hues, they have elliptical orbits and
> travel from Pluto's orbit   to far away out the solar system.

Actually, I'm kind of impressed with the choice for the "alternate
explanation" the Zetas predicted for Planet X located at their given
coordinates.  Look at the matches!

     COLOR: both red
      SIZE: at present, a large KBO and Planet X are probably not
            that dissimilar
     ORBIT: KBO's are as a given having highly excentric orbits,
            so could be outbound or inbound or whatever, anyone's
            guess as to where this or that KBO might be going next
  SURPRISE: so many just waiting to be discovered!

But what might be a problem, a non-match point?  The Zetas wish to
expound on this.

    There are two significant areas that are problematic for the
    disinfo artist painting the inbound sighting of Planet X as
    a KBO.  First, even a temporary orbit assigned to a moving
    asteroid will NOT line up with the inbound path of Planet X.
    Thus, they may find one close enough to a given set of
    coordinates for Planet X, but the projected orbit given will
    NOT be where Planet X then moves.  Even if the disinfo
    artists give a projected orbit that lines up with our future
    coordinates, there will be divergence that they had not
    anticipated, but which we will report ahead of time, lending
    credence to OUR explanation of what is being sighted.
    Second, KBOs will never reach the size of Pluto, else how to
    explain all the math they have trumpted that shows that
    Planet X does NOT exist, based on the known planet
    compositions and positions?  Can't have it both ways.  As
    Planet X grows larger in the skies, it will be questioned if
    a KBO can be this large and not have been known to exist,
    based on their prior trumpting of math perfection by NASA
    et al.

    There are a number of other reasons this alternative
    explanation will not hold comfortably for long, but we wish
    not to put amunition into the hands of the disinfo artists.
    They can wait and worry.
        ZetaTalk™