Hi Paul,Firstly, it's Steven with a "v" not a "ph", secondly, you can't take an exposure for the length of a whole year. When we observe the stars rotate diurnally each night, heliocentrism attributes this to the rotation of the Earth. But the Earth is also orbiting the sun, this is equivalent to a giant Earth (with the radius of one astronomical unit) rotating in 365.25 days, but no motion of the stars which would be the consequences of this effect is observed. Heliocentrism "explains-away" this slight problem but stating that the Earth has a "wobble" whereby the north-pole is always pointing towards the celestial north-pole. Well, two things, firstly this is so beautifully convenient that it's preposterous really, and secondly, what about the south-celestial pole? What would that be doing? It would be tracing out a huge circle but do we see any thing? No. Heliocentrism along with all the other deceptive variants can therefore be safely considered dead.
In Truth and love, Steven. Paul Deema wrote:
Stephen J In your post From Steven Jones Thu Oct 18 16:42:44 2007 you said -Yearly circular motion of the stars, irrespective of whether one assumes it to be real or apparent, about the ecliptic poles is *_not observed_*.During the period 2006 Mar 31 to 2006 Apr 27 under the heading "Ecliptic poles" I explained in lengthy detail why you failed to observe this phenomenon. Long story short -- you were pointing your camera in the wrong direction and using the wrong exposure.Paul D ------------------------------------------------------------------------Sick of deleting your inbox? Yahoo!7 Mail has free unlimited storage. Get it now <http://au.rd.yahoo.com/mail/taglines/default_all/storage/*http://au.docs.yahoo.com/mail/unlimitedstorage.html>.
