Or maybe its the lack of evidence and useful predictions. All you're doing is mixing 9 parts bullfeathers to one part fact, and that fact was discovered by actual scientists who were not working to your theories. You just trawl through their work looking for numbers that can be misinterpreted to fit your idiot patterns.
You are completely unable to use your secret knowledge to make a useful or accurate prediction which is verified subsequently.
I used Sitchin's interpretation of the Enuma Elish to find Saturn's rings pointing at Pluto at perihelion. Researchers have discovered our water came from the asteroid belt, thats another verified prediction.
Genesis predicted a water covered world before landmasses and life. Scientists thought the first few hundred million years was a magma hell but have since dated Earth's oldest 'rock' (zircon) to about 4.4 bya and it formed in water. The reason rock is so hard to find from this period is the surface was pummeled around 4 bya, but the rock we do find shows evidence of liquid water.
One current theory is island arcs and eventually continents and life began appearing not too long after an event called the late heavy bombardment - about 4 bya the Earth was plastered by large objects loaded with heavy (and radioactive) elements. An event that likely triggered plate tectonics by thinning and cracking the crust like an eggshell and churning up the insides.
But its possible impactors created original cores to proto-continents. If a 300 hundred mile wide object hit the Earth slowly enough it could produce a highland above water. Differentiation and erosion would modify the cores and plate tectonics built them up and moved them around forming occasional supercontinents.
If researchers had actually followed this 'secret knowledge' we'd be further along in our understanding of Earth and the solar system.
Scientists had claimed the Earth could not form here with its water, so they imported the water. Now they're telling us based on earthquake data the mantle has plenty of water too and the Earth must have formed surrounded by water.
But the early solar wind was supposed to remove water from the inner planets pushing it out to the snow line, the point where water vapor condensed. Thats why the asteroid belt has a dry inner half and wet outer half. So how did the Earth form surrounded by water if its been here the entire time? What numbers did I misrepresent?
250 is divisible by 30 yes, but you rounded those numbers. Pluto and Saturn aren't actually in an orbital resonance so this neat alignment (if it happens at all) certainly doesn't happen every time Pluto is at perihelion.
I made my calculations with Saturn and Pluto in conjunction which is more or less the alignment I'd expect if Pluto was ejected. Now I understand orbits precess in a variety of ways including ascending nodes, but currently Pluto does ascend the ecliptic a few degrees ahead of Saturn. That makes sense since Pluto would have been ejected from Saturn at a ~26.7 degree angle thereby reaching the ecliptic before Saturn.
Now like I said, orbits change and I'd be skeptical of such artifacts surviving over 4 billion years. But that aside, the 250 and 30 were to show Pluto spends enough time near perihelion for Saturn's rings to point at it regardless of where Saturn is in its orbit.
Now its possible Saturn is past the alignment point when Pluto nears perihelion and will need 20 years to come into alignment, but if Pluto spends ~20 years near perihelion that would be enough time. As Pluto leaves perihelion and is climbing up away from the other planets its angle from Saturn decreases so at some point after making its turn Pluto will leave Saturn's equatorial plane. The alignment does occur when Saturn and Pluto are near conjuction.
In addition to the 2:1 (~40 AU and 20 AU) ratio in Pluto's orbit created by subtracting Saturn's distance to the Sun, Pluto and Charon form a double planet which suggests both formed from the same object that split during a significant disruption. That suggests a gravitational tug of war (or impactor) although one planet could have caused it I suppose, but I'm not sure about that.
Pluto's in a completely different orbit, in a completely different plane. I'm not saying it's impossible that it could have been a satellite of Saturn that was ejected, but if it had been there would be no reason for some part of it's orbit to occasionally lie in the equatorial plane of Saturn at any specific time. Indeed any two bodies in orbit around the same centre, whatever their orbital and rotational alignments, are going to intersect each other's equatorial planes fairly regularly. This doesn't mean anything.
I considered that back when I drew my diagram long ago, I may have missed something but I couldn't find another planet's equatorial plane intersecting with Pluto's perihelion (or aphelion), just Saturn.
Now we here on Earth can see Saturn's rings edge on but there's no apparent mechanism for Saturn launching the Earth into this orbit. We'd be launched into a Pluto-like orbit tilted to the other planets.
Are we delving into numerology now? Because that certainly doesn't mean anything astronomically.
Not numerology, just the 'coincidence' Pluto's apehelion and perihelion form a 2:1 ratio when Saturn's orbital distance is subtracted from it. I'd expect mathematical relationships between 2 objects separated by a disruption, that may be one of them.
