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

• From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
• To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
• Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 10:48:35 -0800 (PST)

```IN BLUE...

Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
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!  GOOD..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 Only the botom one could do that, make
them indistiguishable. We observe the nightly and annaul are indistinguishable.
but the Top one would not do the same thing as the bottom one, only the bottom
one would make them indistinguishable.......Thus HC is not tennable!?-- if you
ignore time. I did not side step you or ignore you i answered that 3 times. in
fact i answered it the same way i show it here....
I do not see how this is necessary to make HC tenable however.
Because that is the only way the annual and the nightly will coincide so as
not to be distinguishable from each other
if they are not in distinguishable from each other then HC is not
tenable....you agree they would not give the same photo...?....Only the bottom
view would make the nightly and annual in distinguishable from each
other...........that is what we observe in reality but the top view would give
a different photo a photo that is not observed in reality..!?
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?
your are confusing what we observe in reality with What HC would produce if
it were true..The two are not the same. That is the point!..No one is
questioning what we observe. The point is HC cannot reproduce what we observe.
what we observe is no difference between the nightly and annual star trails.
however, you just admitted that those two drawings would not show the same
thing?....Only the bottom one would show the same annual and nightly star
trails. The top one would not, unless it were the same as the bottom one but
you just said it was not. The top one is HC but it would not show the same
thing as the bottom one. ONly the bottom one could reproduce what we observe in
reality. The two cannot show the same thing as what we observe in reality and
not show the same thing...?

---------------------------------
Make the switch to the world's best email. Get the new Yahoo!7 Mail now.
```