[geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- From: "philip madsen" <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 08:27:19 +1000
I've heard it from others and God knows I've experienced it personally.
Paul I thought you claimed to be an athiest.. Maybe we are infecting you...
Phil
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Deema
To: Geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2007 11:08 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
Allen D
Hooray!!! At last!! Some agreement! Thank you.
Is it now possible that I may not be quite as confused as you keep suggesting?
I'll forgo commenting on all the petty little differences and
misunderstandings and try to build on this milestone. (Note -- that's a
milestone NOT a millstone!) but before I get to that, I think I must address
two matters -- unanswered questions and unclear communication.
I don't ask what may appear to be pointless questions with any intention of
diverting your attention or confusing you or wasting your time. I do so because
I have a purpose in mind but you resolutely avoid answering these questions for
some reason or other and not just mine either -- I've been following your
debate with JA. Perhaps you decide that you know best whether there is any
point and unilaterally disregard the question, in it would seem, ignorance of
my purpose in asking it. This just wastes my time and hampers the advance of
the discussion. You may simply be afraid that if you don't answer correctly
that this will weaken your position. Well life involves risks -- take one! You
may profit from the exercise.
Now -- Unclear Communication! You have a reputation for this on this forum --
I've heard it from others and God knows I've experienced it personally. I'll go
out on a limb here and guess that it doesn't stop there. I'll guess that you
experience this with most of the people with whom you interact at a level
greater than a simple interrogative designed to elicit the price of a cup of
coffee. Instead of simply blaming others eg me, for failing to understand your
offerings, consider first the possibility that you haven't clearly communicated
your thoughts. More frightening but necessary, consider considering the
possibility that you may, however faintly, be mistaken. Consider interacting
with that person to clarify the situation. That includes responding to
questions asked. Adopt a conciliatory, cooperative approach -- it works much
better that antagonism. You would give me hope if you would -- as an exercise
perhaps -- take the few moments of time necessary to answer the basketball
question and give me your impression of the url I gave you. [Proof reading
before transmission, I gain the feeling that this could be interpreted as an
attempt at domination. Perish that thought. I'm solely interested communication
on the path to truth and understanding]. Philip has taken the trouble to do the
latter even though he is not participating directly in this discussion.
Remember though -- no more than three lines of 12 pitch Arial font text. Then
later, in a new adventurous spirit, you might consider the problem I posed in
the question of The Plank!
OK -- got that off my chest -- to business. From your last post -
Ok Paul..I reread this part again........and i did misread you here.......
I DON'T UNDERSTAND ANY OF THIS. THE DAILY (nightly) SET OF TRAILS IS CENTRED
ON THE NCP WITH THE RADIUS OF EACH CIRCULAR ARC DEPENDANT UPON THE ANGULAR
SEPARATION OF THAT STAR FROM THE GEOGRAPHICAL POLAR AXIS.( NCP inserted here
for my clarification)..... THE ANNUAL SET OF TRAILS IS CENTRED ON THE NEP WITH
THE RADIUS OF EACH ARC DEPENDANT UPON THE ANGULAR SEPARATION OF THAT STAR FROM
THE ECLIPTIC POLAR AXIS.(NEP ) DEPENDING UPON THE WIDTH FIELD OF VIEW, MANY
STARS MAY MAKE TRAILS IN EACH PHOTO RECORD...each star must follow a path that
roatates around thoese two axis [ PD I would have said that the path is
centered on the axis but yes. ]
ok......I think i can agree on this with you......so how does this expalin
why we do not see both....these facts would demand that we see both...?..My
understaning of your explination is that they are somehow the same or are
viewed the same..?
Now -- My understaning of your explination is that they are somehow the same
or are viewed the same..? I'm not too sure exactly what you mean here so I'll
try to explain and hope that you grasp my point. If you followed my short
exchange with JA on how I visualised the process which led me to accept his
thinking as illustrated in his "Drawing1.bmp", you will have seen the two
drawings I sent him in my two posts Re: Is geocentrism supported by facts
(Supplementary) From Paul Deema Tue Nov 6 18:23:19 2007 and (same thread) Wed
Nov 7 11:12:46 2007 which pretty much explain the mechanics of how I visualised
these actions.
The first thing to do in solving any problem is to reduce it to its essential
parts, if possible simplifying in the process. If the problem involves two (or
more) components -- treat each component separately. In this exercise, I look
at the daily (this means happens once per 24 h) you call it nightly, phenomenon
and ask "What do we need to do in order to record this event?" Well we all know
the answer to that one -- nail a camera to the Earth, point it at the centre of
rotation -- Earth or stars, it matters not -- chock the shutter open, wait an
hour or three, remove the chock, print the picture -- Voila! Star trails.
It gets more difficult to visualise the other part. We can't see the ecliptic
plane, or the axis at the centre, or its inclination to the Earth's axis but we
opine that they exist, not physically but as intellectual entities. So we then
devise a substitute for the ecliptic disk, nail the camera to it, point it
straight up, chock the shutter open for a month or three, pull the chock, print
the picture and look. You say there will be no trails about the axis, I say
there will. The debate then becomes an exploration of the actions and the
mechanics involved.
I've kept this deliberately general. The object is to agree on the principles
involved, the names of the parts etc. Are you still with me? Please try to
limit discussion to just these few points.
Paul D
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Bingo Night. Play along for the chance to win $10,000 every week.
Download your gamecard now at Yahoo!7 TV.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.26/1119 - Release Date: 8/11/2007
5:55 PM
Other related posts:
