Dear James, I know I've asked this question before but I think it has either been missed or ignored or maybe its been answered and I missed it! Question. If the earth did orbit the sun what would the star trails then look like? Because we don't see any that is our reason for rejecting heliocentrism. So in a heliocentric model what would the star trails look like? Jack ----- Original Message ----- From: j a To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 4:48 PM Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Is geocentrism supported by facts? (Supplementary) Paul, I'm glad you liked the diagram. Keep looking for the flaw - If A-centrism is true, then there must be one. As for your 3 loud points. "1. the camera must be aligned on the axis of the pole you are photographing; 2. the exposure must be appropriate to the length of time required for the phenomenon to occur; and 3. the base line of the observer has no repeat NO effect on the resulting image." 1) I see no reason why the camera must be aligned to the axis. A camera not aligned with the nightly axis will still record the star trails. The point is, if I took a camera and aimed it at a spot halfway between the two axis (annual & nightly) and recorded star trails every night for a period of time; according to your statement I would have recorded nothing, but in reality I would have recorded the nightly trail but no annual trail, there is no reason not to record both if in fact there is a second axis of rotation. Thats what my far right diagram is about, a point on the nightly circle must travel the annual circle. 2) Yes, I agree exposure time is important, but this is a practical detail about recording data and has nothing I can see with deciding what that data tells us. 3) I agree with this, which is why I used a base line of zero for my drawing. JA...