I think I'm a little bit dense or am just thinking a bit slow, because I know Babylonian god of Nibiru was a pseudoscientific planetary object was described by Zecharia Sitchin, but I can't quite see the point of the humour. (Perhaps the missing planet Vulcan have been a little esoteric?)
To reiterate, clearly; "It isn't an asteroid, because it does not appear on the original image from which the GSC was created, nor on several other images takes in different colours and epochs."
The GSC catalogue was lifted from Schmidt images. If the star isn't on the plate, it is therefore neither an asteroid or star - confirmed with nothing at the location with other plates.
Sadly spending just a few frustrating hours look at various images and internet and on-hand databases certainly doesn't lend to much levity from my point of view at the moment. Perhaps I should have instead done something else - well maybe next time.
|