[geocentrism] Re: Is geocentrism supported by facts (Supplementary)
- From: Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2007 11:21:36 +0000 (GMT)
Philip M
Your comment here about zodiac signs rotating has been at the back of my mind
for years probably but I don't know the stellar map at all well. Indeed there
is only one star in the sky I can identify and certainly one (possibly two)
constellations. I've been interested in the planets pretty much to the
exclusion of all else. Point here is that I think your observation on the
zodiac signs' rotation might well be instructive but my laziness kind of gets
in the way of following it up.
Paul D
----- Original Message ----
From: philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, 6 November, 2007 9:02:42 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Is geocentrism supported by facts (Supplementary)
Paul, apart for my being orthogonalised,? I think you have shown what I had
concluded... that the mystery remains.... unresolved. Ja likewise shows us
this.
But we know there is annual rotation of the stars... We can see it.. Allen,
you can observe what your eyes see.. The signs of the zodiac move around once
a year.. What more proof do we need for a bunch of cave dwellers.
Proves Bernie was right all along.. If the earth was moving that fast, space
wind would blow our hair off'n our head..
Philip.
National Bingo Night. Play along for the chance to win $10,000 every week.
Download your gamecard now at Yahoo!7 TV.
http://au.blogs.yahoo.com/national-bingo-night/
Other related posts:
