[geocentrism] Uranus
- From: allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2008 11:12:46 -0800 (PST)
Paul,
When you get around to addressing mine,….. because mine get to the very heart
of the issue, all you keep trying to do add "layers of argumentation" that
change absolutly nothing…..but when you get to addressing those I have given
you ,then maybe in that day you will start to see why your arguments will not
hold water...they lead to logical contradictions and or physical absurdities
.....i demonstrate that mine do not...yours do..mine are logical yours are
not..mine are based on what you can observe......... yours are based on
assuming what you can only imagine is true...
--- On Tue, 12/16/08, Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Uranus
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2008, 11:11 AM
Paul,
When you get around to addressing mine,….. because mine get to the very heart
of the issue, all you keep trying to do add "layers of argumentation" that
change absolutly nothing…..but when you get to addressing those I have given
you ,then maybe in that day you will start to see why your arguments will not
hold water...they lead to logical contradictions and or physical absurdities
.....i demonstrate that mine do not...yours do..mine are logical yours are
not..mine are based on what you can observe......... yours are based on
assuming what you can only imagine is true...
--- On Tue, 12/16/08, Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
From: Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Uranus
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2008, 10:57 AM
Allen D
The problem here is that your definition of rotation and its application is
under challenge and you will do anything to avoid discussing the issue --
contempt, prevarication, obfuscation, diversion, pretence that you posed some
other question -- it goes on and on ad nauseam. I -- and others -- labour under
the assumption that you are a reasonable man and so we try to treat with you as
though you are that reasonable man. But what we get is your fanatical defence
of your questionable definition. This puts us at a significant disadvantage
because you do not treat us as reasonable people.
To show that I at least will persevere, state plainly what is the question
which you have given me and I will address it, if you in turn will address the
question of Mercury's rate of orbital angular velocity and its rate of
rotational angular velocity. Note that standard, accepted definitions must be
used since you have also resolutely avoided explanation of your private
definition. Perhaps we can proceed with one question at a time and make some
progress.
Paul D
PS Three days in a row now you have posted the same message twice. Why so?
From: "allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, 16 December, 2008 6:13:38 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Uranus
Paul, Your nonsense is simply using the word "turn" to attempt to claim proof
for what constitutes your definition of it, which is the very thing under
consideration..!?!
Deal with what I have given you ........linguistic acrobatics and diversions
from the issue is not doing your argument any good....
"the characteristics of Mercury's motions" the nature of those motions Paul is
what we are discussion!? ...Start addressing the issue and quit trying to claim
your conclusions as the proof and premises for all your arguments?!..
Just more nonsense from you ...oh when oh when, will it ever end?......
--- On Tue, 12/16/08, Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
From: Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Uranus
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2008, 9:55 AM
Allen D
I guess you missed it. Here is the relevant portion again with the key word
highlighted -
I have a turntable and bearing/suspension system from long long ago. The
turntable weighs 2750 g. If I hold it horizontal, turn it CW (looking from
above) and wait till it slows to something in the vicinity of the radial
velocity which I can sustain without falling on my donkey and begin to turn in
the same direction at the same rate -- guess what?
And the matter of your abysmal ignorance of the characteristics of Mercury's
motions?????
I was saving this for later but I think you've earned it. It's one of your
illustrations which I have augmented. Care to comment?
Paul D
From: "allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, 16 December, 2008 4:31:12 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Uranus
"guess what? The arrow head I painted on the turntable stays pointing at
me!!! "...Guess what Paul, if you take that same aparatus down on the ground
and don't do anything .... you still get geuss what?....no rotation!......ge
we are looking for a progressive radial oreintation to a common pont that lay
within the body itself......
That I believe is synchronism. Even more -- when I stop turning (so I don't
fall on my donkey) the turntable is still turning! congragulations, when you
stoped you observed the inertial effects to CAUSE A ROTATION...oh but
wait,...... it was not rotating earlier....because it was prevented from
rotating by the mechanical friction! Just like the the moon and mercury are
prevented from rotating while in orbit!? In all your examples the synchronisim
is the fact that it is not rotating..if it were rotattion then it would not and
cannot be synchronous..
Phil shows us a rotation that is prevented and attempts to claim that
prevention of rotation demonstrates a rotation!?....and now you offer us the
fact that somthing did not rotate as evidence that it rotated?! ........... the
diversion here is yours...now answer the chalenges ..your empty, vain
accusations and words weary me....
--- On Tue, 12/16/08, Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Uranus
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2008, 8:29 AM
"guess what? The arrow head I painted on the turntable stays pointing at
me!!! "...Guess what Paul, if you take that same aparatus down on the ground
and don't do anything .... you still get geuss what?....no rotation!......ge
we are looking for a progressive radial oreintation to a common pont that lay
within the body itself......Phil shows us a rotation that is prevented and
attempts to claim that prevention of rotation demonstrates a rotation!?....and
now you offer us the fact that somthing did not rotate as evidence that it
rotated?!
That I believe is synchronism. Even more -- when I stop turning (so I don't
fall on my donkey) the turntable is still turning! congragulations, when you
stoped you observed the inertial effects to CAUSE A ROTATION...oh but
wait,...... it was not rotating earlier....because it was prevented from
rotating by the mechanical friction! Just like the the moon and mercury are
prevented from rotating while in orbit!? In all your examples the synchronisim
is the fact that it is not rotating..if it were rotattion then it would not and
cannot be synchronous... the diversion here is yours...now answer the chalenges
..your empty and vain words weary me....
--- On Tue, 12/16/08, Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
From: Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Uranus
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2008, 8:11 AM
Allen D
I have a turntable and bearing/suspension system from long long ago. The
turntable weighs 2750 g. If I hold it horizontal, turn it CW (looking from
above) and wait till it slows to something in the vicinity of the radial
velocity which I can sustain without falling on my donkey and begin to turn in
the same direction at the same rate -- guess what? The arrow head I painted on
the turntable stays pointing at me!!! That I believe is synchronism. Even more
-- when I stop turning (so I don't fall on my donkey) the turntable is still
turning! Whaddaya know!? It can't have read your various theses!
You entreat Philip to answer one of your challenges. One of the standard Allen
Daves diversionary tactics -- pretend not to have noticed the solitary
challenge to you and reply with many of yours thought up on the spur of the
moment. While you are thinking on this, note that I have noted your
non-response to my highlighting of your abysmal ignorance concerning the orbit
and rotation of Mercury (note the spelling. Not even American usage can excuse
"Murcury"). Can we expect that you will correct this oversight?
Paul D
From: "allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, 15 December, 2008 11:15:09 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Uranus
Phil,
"we are going around in "circles" getting nowhere..."
I said this is where the discussion is "going" .....(pun intended)........but
I’m going to try yet once more to get you to answer even a single challenge of
mine to you....I keep having to address your challenges or otherwise my words
mean nothing so you said... but you don’t seem to see the point of addressing
mine.......ummmm..well here is a "turntable" type example see attached and
answer!
"BUT IT WILL NOT BE SO. IT WILL HAVE TURNED 90 DEGREES AWAY FROM YOU.. You
can believe me I have actually done this several times."..I know i addressed
that many times..."
But to get them syncronous ..that does not happen does it!....Therefore, you
cannot lay claim to a effect that does not exist when they are syncronized
as your rotation..why..becuse if the are syncronised it does not exist.!? if
that persisted during the orbit you would see it and that would be a rotation
inaddition to the orbit but to get them to syncronize you must negate that
effect!....by the way which way does it rotate clokwise or counter
clockwise?...ummm.... .........as i have pointed out .....it takes a force to
prevent that rotation,........ you still show us no rotation in the same
direction of the orbit ......... At best on a good day this could only be
considered to be a prevention of rotational motion not a demonstration of a
rotation!?!
Start your day with Yahoo!7 and win a Sony Bravia TV. Enter now.
Start your day with Yahoo!7 and win a Sony Bravia TV. Enter now.
Start your day with Yahoo!7 and win a Sony Bravia TV. Enter now.
Other related posts:
