Dear Philip, This is a classical situation. Two seemingly indisputable ways of measuring something and in contradiction with each other. Personally I would favour the measurable science of the eye against the relative measurements of Mars. Consider how much MS science would be destroyed if geocentrism were PROVED beyond RATIONAL doubt. That is what this forum is all about. The tenacity of MS science is man controlled not science controlled. Again that is what GWW is all about. Jack your attitude is both scientifically incorrect, and uncharitable. MS science would accept what was proved beyond rational doubt with excitement. That is what true science is about. (and I am talking of the general ethical scientific community, not those politicians who manipulate some of them) We tend to confuse the two elements here. I was not destroyed by finding a knew way of explaining electricity. The electron theory's displacement of convention was an exciting part of my life. What is the purpose of research but to find new and improved ways of looking at things. Further, I do not personally see this forum as all about destroying MS science, but rather adding to its application. And as to your science, it is irrational to insist that an interpretation of the biological science of the resolution of the eye can contradict basic geometry, and be superior to what is measured using advanced optical instruments.. I am not saying the science of the eye is incorrect. I am saying and did mean to say, that any application of this science that contradicts basic laws of geometry has to be in error. Philip. PS. Jack when you were in 7th grade, wern't you amazed at being shown how to measure the height of a tree half a mile away using a tape measure on the ground, a protractor, and a book of trig tables, without going anywhere near it? ----- Original Message ----- From: Jack Lewis To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 6:56 PM Subject: [geocentrism] Re: The resolution of Mars Dear Philip, This is a classical situation. Two seemingly indisputable ways of measuring something and in contradiction with each other. Personally I would favour the measurable science of the eye against the relative measurements of Mars. Consider how much MS science would be destroyed if geocentrism were PROVED beyond RATIONAL doubt. That is what this forum is all about. The tenacity of MS science is man controlled not science controlled. Again that is what GWW is all about. Jack ----- Original Message ----- From: philip madsen To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 12:40 AM Subject: [geocentrism] Re: The resolution of Mars Dear Philip, Photons - shmotons - whatever it is there must be a limit to what the eye can detect. Jack yes, without help.. Thats why we have amplifiers.. But without frequency waves, photons must separate, and amplifiers will or could occupy a space where no packets of energy, as photons (bullets), exist.. Light is a coherent wave, not a particle. If it has impact this is due to aether effect, which as has been said elsewhere, is responsible for matter mass and inertia. My text book does not deny there is a problem with the corpuscle theory of EMR but accepts it in conjunction with wave theory. Why? heaven forbid, an aether? Back to Mars: Put it this way.. The math cannot be wrong, the distance and the size of Mars cannot be in error, and we can see it.. Conclusion, the eye can see it.. therefore the argument why an eye should not see it is in error. Rowbotham is wrong for the same reason re his flat earth. Philip. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.8/1154 - Release Date: 27/11/2007 11:40 AM