Re: Planet X: ALTERNATIVE Garbage <= THOLEN! 3

In Article <DL337.70436$WI.9004086@typhoon.hawaii.rr.com> David Tholen wrote:
> Nancy Lieder writes:
>> As I recall, when Hale-Bopp was all the rage in 1995, that it took
>> only THREE positions to determine the orbit!  Why have things
>> changed?
>
> In a theoretical world without any measurement uncertainties,
> you need three pairs of angles-only measurements to determine an
> orbit with six unknowns.  That's simply standard mathematical
> theory.  ...
>
> We're able to come up with an orbit for 2001 KX76 in a week
> as well.  However, KX76 is moving more slowly, so the amount of
> motion is less, making the relative error larger. ... We know their
> orbits, some better than others.

And they move in egg-shaped orbits in the plane of the ecliptic? So we
have motion ALONG the ecliptic, lateral, not plunging ACROSS, right?
The article on KBO's states:

    KBOs travel in non-circular orbits (much like Pluto, which is
    considered a KBO by some scientists). These egg-shaped orbits
    mean a typical KBO's distance from the Sun can range from 38 to
    more than 50 AU (1 AU, or astronomical unit, is the distance
    from Earth to the Sun).
      http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/red_asteroids_001025.html

So known KBO's would not be likely to take the path the Zetas have laid
out for Planet X between now and May 2003, right?
(http://www.zetatalk.com/theword/tword03h.htm)

In Article <DL337.70436$WI.9004086@typhoon.hawaii.rr.com> David Tholen wrote:
> you differenced the right ascensions of KX76 and your Planet X and
> came up with 12 degrees, and then tried to suggest that they're not on
> opposite sides of the sky.  The evidence therefore shows that you don't
> even know the units of your own right ascension numbers, and
> certainly not those of KX76.  Tell me, is Planet X really at about 5
> DEGREES of right ascension?

Pardon my ignorance, I chose the word "degree" in preference to "span"
or "step" or some such.  My SkyMap has for RA or Dec search assignment
an "h" and "m" and "s" and I didn't relate this to a clock.  My
appologies.  There are 36 RA or Dec HOURS around the sky, then in either
direction, right?  There are 360 degrees in a circle.  So degrees seemed
a reasonable term.  We don't have 36 hours in a day, at least not
lately, so that a RA or Dec would be termed an "hour" was not intuitive.

Regarding fessing up, you STILL have not answered my question, directly,
Dave, when I asked:

In Article <3B472E7B.77941EC3@zetatalk.com> Nancy Lieder wrote:
> By the by, David, as an astronomer in Hawaii, do you get employed
> in any way by NASA?  Are you associated with the NEAT program?
> As a professor, a phD, are you in line to become one of their Principal
> Investigators?  Have you been one of those in the past?  I asked these
> questions before, and you ignored them.

You answered that the University of Hawaii is not a NASA branch, and
that the NEAT program was in fact a Principal Investigator arrangement
with NASA, I believe.  Are you, or have you ever been, a Principal
Investigator, received data provided by NASA? Information that was given
to you and your associates, but not to others due to this arrangement?
Did you work on the NEAT program, in any capacity?  Do the University of
Hawaii and NASA collaborate - share expenses, equipment, and results?
Does NASA have a right to ask you to withhold information and
discoveries you might be aware of?  Can they punish you by refusing
future collaboration, or a failure to get future Principal Investigator
assignments, or the like?  Can they influence your employer, which I
assume to be the University of Hawaii, to make your life miserable?

So if you answer my question “Have you eaten a hamburger at the Jiffy
Burger located in Hawaii?” with the answer “the Jiffy Burger calls them
Hawaii Burgers, not hamburgers”, you have NOT answered the question,
you’ve evaded it.