DWQA QuestionsCategory: Physical UniverseA viewer asks about this post on the Internet: “For years it has been speculated by conspiracy theorists and some astronomers that “Google Sky” had been censoring what’s known as Planet X or Nibiru from the general public’s view online. Now, shockingly, a massive swath of Google Sky that had been previously blacked out and censored has been made visible by Google for your viewing pleasure. The image below shows the system as censored by Google for years. It’s not known why Google unrestricted access to what could be the planetary system which was written about by the late Zecharia Sitchin who wrote numerous publications on the planet “Nibiru.” In the image below, shot in 2015, you can clearly see the ‘winged disk’ as described by Sitchin and others. It’s almost uncanny!” Is this Nibiru? Why the prior censoring and now uncensoring?
Nicola Staff asked 2 months ago

This is not Nibiru. This is simply speculation. Nibiru is out there but it is not visible at the present moment by Earth-based telescope inspection. Whenever censoring is done, it is to prevent scrutiny of that area of the heavens with respect to other bodies out there. And censoring is suspended simply because it is easier to keep a secret about something that is out in the open than to put a cloak over it and warn the world away and thereby signal there is something special, something covert, something that is a deep secret being withheld, and that stimulates curiosity and draws attention to the enterprise. Whereas, if information is readily available to all there is no indication of anything being amiss. It is easiest to keep a secret that is already out in the open but simply not being pointed to so people can make the connections with something of a deeper meaning. As is usually the case, when people make a fuss about something falsely, it will end up discrediting them, so these kinds of conjectures are frequently encouraged and impulsed to people so they will develop a poor track record as a whistleblower, and will then be less effective in convincing people when they are truly on to something important.