[geocentrism] Re: Moon landings?

  • From: "Robert Bennett" <robert.bennett@xxxxxxx>
  • To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 12:01:57 -0500

Philip,

Comments inserted.

Pax Christi,

Robert

> -----Original Message-----
> From: geocentrism-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:geocentrism-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Philip
> Sent: Monday, February 21, 2005 5:28 AM
> To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Moon landings?
>
>
> Hang on here.. Lets not our static earth confuse our rotating
> earth thinking.
> a vertical launch in aspect, will still have the horizontal
> vector of the rotating earth in the direction toward the east. In
> other words whilst rising vertically under power, it will be
> sliding sideways towards the east. This would happen if you
> pointed it east or west. Graphically on a graph it would be a
> curved course. Remember my example of a ball falling from your
> hand in a glass carriage,as it passed the station? Or didn't you
> read it.? to you the ball fell in a straight line to your feet.
> But to the person on the platform, it fell in a curve towards the
> direction the carriage was travelling...
>

RB: In different reference systems, events are equivalent but not
trajectories.

> Boggles the mind doesn't it.. People in a concorde doing greater
> than the speed of sound can still speak normally..

RB: relative to the vocal cords the air speed in the cabin is zero. (with
the windows closed)

Here where I
> am near Brisbane, if the earth is rotating, am moving at near
> twice the speed of sound and notice nothing...

RB:  the equivalence of inertial frames?  You are also rotating upside down,
in the land down under...   ~(:^)>

Does a radio
> signal take longer to go round the world easterly than westerly?

RB: Without question.  The Sagnac effect shows this conclusively. Here's a
Zealie site on the state of the art.
http://www.phys.canterbury.ac.nz/research/laser/ring_open.shtml

Why haven't you heard of this experiment before in the scientific press?
BECAUSE IT IS A SOLID DISPROOF OF RELATIVITY!

btw - If we can ever put the distractions of chauvinism, hoaxes and inter
denominational rants behind us, the Sagnac effect would be an excellent
place to start a scientific GC defense and a deconstruction of
HC/AC/Relativity.  Maybe some day......

>
> I think my polar launch just might answer some questions.
>

RB:  ...or raise some new ones.

> Phil
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Gary Shelton
>   To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   Sent: Monday, February 21, 2005 6:59 PM
>   Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Moon landings?
>
>
>   Dr. Jones,
>
>   I don't have much to solidly contribute here, but I read your
> piece and it
>   seems to me that you are saying that the rocket will run out of fuel
>   reaching the moon, or certainly that it won't have enough for the return
>   trip.  And this is for either GC or HC, correct?  Has this been
> echoed in
>   other places for backup?
>
>   Also, I assume when you say a rocket is launched "eastwardly" or
>   "westwardly" you are referring to an attitude change in said
> rocket once it
>   is already launched, for all rockets launch straight upwards, correct?
>
>   Further, I would ask you if the "launch direction" would be
> predicated upon
>   the position of the moon at the time of intercept?  I mean, in
> the GC you
>   are saying we launch westwardly, since that is the direction of
> the moon's
>   travel, but what if the moon were sunk way down in the east at
> the instant
>   the decision were made to "aim" the rocket eastwardly or
> westwardly?  Would
>   it not be therefore possible to shoot a rocket eastwardly in our GC
>   worldview?  And, conversely, shoot a rocket westwardly to meet a HC moon
>   sunk way down in the west?
>
>   Would not the interception of the moon be a perfectly feasible
> manner, in
>   either case, given enough fuel?
>
>   Sincerely,
>
>   Gary Shelton
>
>
>   > All,
>   >
>   > Can I have some more opinions on the alleged Apollo Moon landings and
>   whether they conflict with the Bible, please? So far, the
> silence has been
>   deafening from some of you.
>   >
>   > Regards,
>   >
>   > Neville.
>
>
>
>   --
>   No virus found in this outgoing message.
>   Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>   Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.1.0 - Release Date: 2/18/05
>
>
>
>


Other related posts: