Is Today's Planet 9 Sitchin's Planet X, loosely speaking?

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Because of Pluto's having been downgraded from a planet categorization, a newly discovered 'planet' would get the designation of the 10th Planet, aka Planet X.

The recent speculation off such an additional 'planet' is based upon more irregularities in the orbist off all the planets of our solar system, than can be accounted for by the otherwise generally accepted model of planetary formation. That is, without some externally, and as yet undiscovered, factor(s) then all the planets should lie along the equatorial plane of the Sun. But they don't.

Sitchin, in his series of books, postulated that there must be a Planet X that exists on a highly elliptical orbit, with an approximately 3,600 year orbit. And that we are getting ready for its next visit to our neighborhood, based upon his reading of ancient accounts including the OT. Obviously, the periods of 3,600 and somewhere between 10K to 20K listed below don't jibe.

Perhaps closer is the theory proposed by Warren Cruttenden in that of a brown dwarf star being a binary companion to our Sun. With this he proposes an explanation for the ~26,000 year Precessional 'wobble' of the Earth's axis that gave rise to the Zodiacal Ages that were given recognition by the Mesopotamians, Egyptian, and Greeks (and Mithraists and esoteric Christians to boot).

This tilt doesn't jibe with how astronomers say the solar system formed: 4.6 billion years ago, gravity started to pull together a vast, scattered cloud of gas and dust, causing it to spin into a disk. The center of the circle collapsed into a hot, dense ball of gas — the sun — and the remainder accumulated into planets. Because the sun came from the same disk as everything else, it should be spinning on the same plane. But it's not.

“It's such a deep-rooted mystery and so difficult to explain that people just don't talk about it,” Brown said.

Enter Planet Nine. Based on Batygin and Brown's previous calculations, the hypothesized planet weighs five to 10 times as much as Earth and is, on average, 20 times farther from the sun than Neptune. It takes Planet Nine 10,000 to 20,000 years to orbit the sun.

Cruttenden's Binary Research Institute's position on the new Planet 9 hypothesis:

What’s Tugging on our Solar System?
Something Bigger Than a 9th Planet Gravity Waves May Be Key!

Astrophysicists around the world, including Mike Brown and Konstantin Batygin at Caltech, believe there is a large force tugging on our solar system. It has led them to speculate that a massive 9th Planet exists somewhere beyond the known planets.

The Binary Research Institute acknowledges there is large force tugging on the southwest underbelly of our solar system. We have been pointing this out for the better part of ten years in various papers and articles. These arguments on the BRI website show the precession observable, the Sun’s apparent lack of angular momentum relative to the planets, the unusual motion and position of unbound space probes, the elongated orbits of the minor planets, etc. are best explained if there is a very large object pulling on our solar system. But we do not think it is a 9th Planet. The force appears to be too great.

The common theme between all three concepts is that the hidden object must have been a 'captured' rogue object in order for it to have such a divergent orbital plane. Sitchin's thesis is that the Mesopotamian heavenly gods, the anthropomorphic Annunuki originated on (or 'in' rather) Planet X and stop in to visit us when they are in the neighborhood. According to Sitchin's proposal then, the last visit was approximately 1600 BCE.

If there is a binary brown dwarf, then it would likely have a fair number of moons or 'planets' ala Jupiter, which has over 70 moons.

Cruttenden's theory includes that because the orbit of the brown dwarf, relative to our Sun is also elliptical, that the Earth's precessional wobble is not constant. Instead it has a variable rate based upon the respective position of the binary planet to us. This provides a fourth possible means of dividing time between the zodiacal ages, possibly allowing for such as a period of 2,000 years to be accurate at some parts off the Great Year Cycle. Cruttenden claims that the U.S. Naval Observatory has data that verifies this regarding the Earth's wobble.