Re: Planet X Cover-Up: Rationale?

In Article <<[email protected]> David Tholen wrote:
> Actually, the mass of Pluto has also been measured directly.  Take the
> orbit of Charon and apply Kepler's third law.  Not as accurate as a
> spacecraft flyby, but much better than in the pre-discovery-of-satellite
> days.

Ah, they went there with their little scale, did they?  Drilled into the
core to determine the composition of the core, and all?  Thumped about
on the surface of Pluto to determine if it was hollow?  It has been
MEASURED!  My, my.

But all this still does not answer Jos's question about the WOBBLE, some
4-10 times the Earth mass, the factor which would cause that WOBBLE in
our large outer planets.  Pluto is tiny, is it not?

By the way, David Tholen, you're in Hawaii, are you  not?  Are you
associated with the NEAT program, NASA affilated?

In Article <[email protected]> Ken Cox wrote:
> Christer m. Palmström wrote:
>> Let's see exactly what you are trying to say here Michael:
>> "When the masses were corrected due to the probe fly-bys
>> [the heavenly body discovered by the IRAS satellite]
>> disappeared."
>
> Nope.  You have accidentally equated the residuals with the IRAS body.

Did the probe measure all the residuals too?  Did we gather them up and
put them on the scale, the little scale the probe took along?  Did we do
a complex calculation to account for the gravity pull of every little
residual?  Would NASA provide this, the list of little residuals and
their weight and all, or is this also a secret like the pictures the
Hubble takes.  Sorry, your tax dollars pay for it, but we give these
images to our buddies, called Principle Investigators, so the public
can't have them.  This is so we can hide stuff, and how dare you ASK!