Neville J I didn't mention telescopes but I get your point. I also understand that astronomers today do not sit in freezing conditions, watering eyes straining at eyepieces and sketching intermittently on a pad with a pencil held in one of those fingerless glove things. Paul D Neville Jones <njones@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: Paul, The diffraction limit of "big expensive" telescopes is not achieved in the real world. Also, no astronomer is "directly examin[ing] the universe," but rather making observations in a terrestrial laboratory and seeking to promote and understand those observations within the currently accepted model. Neville www.GeocentricUniverse.com -----Original Message----- From: paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 18:17:37 +0000 (GMT) Jack L I doubt one person in a hundred would regard this statement as patronising. There was an attempt at humour in there -- perhaps that is what has sparked your ire? What Regner is doing that only a very small percentage of the overall population is doing -- is being a professional astronomer. He gets to use lots of big expensive exciting equipment to directly examine the universe. I don't know about you but I'm envious. Paul D ----- Original Message ---- From: Jack Lewis <jack.lewis@xxxxxxxxxxxx> To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Dear Paul, Why did you find it necessary to patronise Regner in that way? Regarding the 'real thing' what in heavens name is Regner doing that no-one else is? Jack ----- Original Message ----- From: Paul Deema To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Allen D I'd be careful about advising Regner to refer to a model. He doesn't need one. He plays with the real thing! Paul D Paul D --------------------------------- National Bingo Night. Play along for the chance to win $10,000 every week. Download your gamecard now at Yahoo!7 TV.