[geocentrism] Re: World/Moon system
- From: Bernie Brauer <bbrauer777@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 15:03:49 -0700 (PDT)
Quote:
Even if one can momentarily lock one?s brain into conceiving of a delicate
balance between the Earth and the Moon?s gravitational forces, a balance that
would be achieved by the most precise, exact and unvarying distance between the
two bodies, then that same brain is boggled when it is confronted with the fact
that no such stable distance exists between these two bodies (or any other
two!). Indeed, the undeniable reality is that the moon regularly varies its
distance from the Earth by over 31,000 miles! When it comes closer and closer
it gets in the stronger and stronger pull of Earth?s gravity. How can it then
resist that pull and start going against that attraction? Contrariwise, as it
goes out to the apogee and is moment by moment breaking loose from Earth?s
gravitational pull at tremendous speed, how can it stop the outward movement
and start back??
Gravity doesn?t explain this. Gravity can?t explain it. Gravity doesn?t
explain the tides. Gravity can?t explain them. The same is true of the Earth?s
supposed annual orbit around the sun. The simple fact is that we are closer by
three million miles to the sun at certain times than we are at other times.
The gravitation explanation for heavenly bodies doing what they do has no
scientific evidence whatsoever behind it. It is pure nonsense from A to Z, a
contradictory, illogical, impossible notion perpetrated upon the world by You
Know Who to discredit the Bible.
Indeed, universal gravitation is a bankrupt and stupid hypothesis incapable
of explaining tides( just the same as Darwin?s "natural selection" mechanism is
now being recognized as a bankrupt and stupid hypothesis that is incapable of
explaining evolutionism).
More: http://www.fixedearth.com/tides.htm
Bernie Brauer <bbrauer777@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
from Wikipedia:
Tides may be semidiurnal (two high waters and two low waters each day), or
diurnal (one tidal cycle per day). In most locations, tides are semidiurnal.
Because of the diurnal contribution, there is a difference in height (the daily
inequality) between the two high waters on a given day; these are
differentiated as the higher high water and the lower high water in tide
tables. Similarly, the two low waters each day are referred to as the higher
low water and the lower low water. The daily inequality changes with time and
is generally small when the Moon is over the equator.
Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
1. The "smaller componet of motion" measured meassurment is
consistently consistnet?
2. The location of a or the "berrycenter of any mass is totaly irrelevant for
detection of accelerations...? .It produces tides for crying out loud...that is
observable and detctabel and it is rediculous to suppose that the gravitaional
forec or indeed any force nessisary to move that much seawater is somehow
hidden in obsurity..if the grav/acceleration force were to obsuce to measure
then it would be too obsure to create tides or aything else for matter in the
first place...
I cant get over how you guys can swollow plain and blaitent logical
contridictions with the ease of raw clams sliding down the back of your
throats..............claiming somthing is there but not there at the same time
explains nothing certianly not show it anymore reasonable then fairdust and
grimlins from the krimlin do!
----- Original Message ----
From: Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 9:54:56 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: World/Moon system
Neville J
"...but did produce evidence of a much smaller component of motion."
If I am not mistaken, every time this experiment has been repeated, this
'smaller component' just keeps on getting smaller. Sounds a lot like
measurement error to me.
"It should pull us toward the Sun and then away from the Sun. Would we feel
any of this?"
I have only once seen a comment on the Earth/Moon barycentre -- it was quoted
as being located some tens of kilometres below the Earth's surface. If we do
approach/retreat from the Sun, then it is only about one part in 11000 of its
average distance. Any effect would be difficult to measure.
Paul D
----- Original Message ----
From: Neville Jones <njones@xxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, 19 May, 2008 8:02:46 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] World/Moon system
All,
The forum has stagnated.
Experiments by Michelson-Morley, Dayton Miller, Sagnac et al., definitely
showed a sidereal rotation of either the World, the universe or both. What
upset conventional science at the turn of the 19th century and start of the
20th was the fact that Michelson-Morley, Michelson-Gale and so on did not
produce evidence of the World's supposed phenomenal speed around its alleged
orbit, but did produce evidence of a much smaller component of motion.
So, let's see if we can get a discussion going like the one that raged for
months on the celestial poles argument, which involved almost everybody and
produced many quality diagrams and lines of reasoning.
The Moon goes around the World in both models approximately in the plane of the
ecliptic. Hence the Moon's gravity should accelerate the World during part of
its orbit and inhibit the World during that part of its orbit that is 180 degs
out of phase with the first. It should pull us toward the Sun and then away
from the Sun. Would we feel any of this?
Diagrams, comments, thoughts, one-way tickets to the Gulag, ... toss them all
into the pot and let's see what comes out.
Neville.
---------------------------------
Receive Notifications of Incoming Messages
Easily monitor multiple email accounts & access them with a click. Visit
www.inbox.com/notifier and check it out!
---------------------------------
Get the name you always wanted with the new y7mail email address.
Other related posts:
