-----Original Message-----
From: paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 18:59:22 +0000 (GMT)Neville J
If I may butt in here -- I don't believe ANY heliocentrist has EVER said that the Earth rotates simultaneously on two axes. And I'm not aware that helicentric theory adopts any position which would require it. Explanation?Paul D
----- Original Message ----
From: Neville Jones <njones@xxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, 29 October, 2007 6:40:33 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Is geocentrism supported by facts?
Dear Philip,
In geocentrism the celestial sphere is not imaginary but real.
The ecliptic is a circle. A circle that is drawn on the celestial sphere, just like the circle which is the celestial equator is drawn around the sphere, but the ecliptic is inclined to the equator.
I know you Aussies can't play football ("soccer" for our American cousins), but take a football and hold it between one finger of each hand.
You could imagine the ball rotating about an axis that joins these two fingers, right?
Position your fingers on either end of a different axis through the ball and you could imagine the ball rotating about this axis, right?
The heliocentric system requires just such a rotation about two axes simultaneously. The geocentric system requires rotation about only one. By use of star trails we can determine which model is wrong. (I was careful to say which one was wrong, rather than which one was correct.) This is why Steven and I are laying claim to the heliocentricity proof reward, since disproof is a definite form of proof.
I hope that you have a happy happy hour!
Neville
