[geocentrism] Re: 2 Axes of rotation - drawing brand new for you

  • From: Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: Geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 18:31:57 +0000 (GMT)

Allen D
In reference to 15.png, you said -
However, the most interesting thing I find is that if someone accepts that 
those two are not equivalent then how do you argue that the top one produces 
the same view as the bottom one? The bottom one will produce indistinguishable 
nightly and annual star trails that is what you have to accomplish in order to 
make HC tenable. But the bottom will not show the same thing as the top the top 
is HC..?......How can the top one produce indistinguishable star trails nightly 
and annual if the are not equivalent?............. The difference is one of 
looking at the real rotational motion v just looking in a different direction 
while in a real rotation
In case you think I have suggested that the top model and the bottom model 
would produce the same view -- absolutely perish the thought! Your bottom model 
is another way of stating something I asked you to consider but which you side 
stepped and that was to shift the Earth's axis 23.5 deg so as to bring it into 
alignment with the ecliptic axis. And then of course the daily and nightly 
would be indistinguishable -- if you ignore time.
I do not see how this is necessary to make HC tenable however. It isn't needed 
to make the other planets behave the way we say the Earth moves -- especially 
in the case of Uranus -- so why do you say this in relation to Earth?
Paul D


      Make the switch to the world's best email. Get the new Yahoo!7 Mail now. 
www.yahoo7.com.au/worldsbestemail

Other related posts: