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

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. 

Other related posts: