[geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2007 09:20:56 -0800 (PST)
I answerer both your questions..... :-)
Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Allen D
Since JA is away for a bit, may I attempt to entertain you in the interim?
I looked back over that collection of drawings you sent me ... From Allen
Daves Tue Nov 6 19:36:53 2007. I couldn't help concluding after a quick scan
that you seem to be describing things the way I have been describing them for
some time and the way JA has been describing them recently. Realy ..i got the
impressin that you were bouncing between arguments never mind they are mutualy
exclusive.....so i address them all ...... This is that, if heliocentricity is
the reality, then star trails around the NCP (as observed -- no argument here)
will be evident, Yes no matter what time of year or how long the exposures are
taken as it will be a photo graph of the same thing, all year long....... as
will similar trails (different stars but still -- big argument) around the NEP,
no not similar trails but entirely different sizes for each star due to the
different distance to the axis..stars cannot have the same distance from two
axis offset by 23.44o simultaneously ..They would
have to in order to explain why you cannot see them both..or you would have to
explian how the nightly (smaller) rotation about the NCP has dominance over
the NEP such that it is even possible to obscure that rotation if it existed,
when you cannot reproduce such a obserdity with a replica model of the earth,
sun &axis.....
but that because the latter is not observed, then heliocentricity is shown to
be false. Is this the nub of the argument?
You see, some little time in the past, when I pointed out to you that the
distance to these stars was such that no observer baseline possible could have
any non trivial effect on the size and shape of these trails but you stated
that even the latitude from which they were observed would have a noticeable
effect. You haven't rescinded this statement but as I said, the impression I
gained was that you are now basically wearing the clothes I laid out for you.
You do see my predicament? I see your predicament, the problem is that you do
not see your own predicament.... I stated that other MS scientist have made
that statement as well...I also said that regardless of that issue...lets
assume that is correct.... " the stars are too far away to affect the
baseline."........for the sake of argument.... ..who cares!.....it is the
distance of the star from the rotational axis not the distance to the
star!!!!..If the stars are too far away then scale is irrelevant for the
diagrams.......If the stars are not too far away then the baseline would have
an effect. Then there would be a whole another component of observable motion.
In either case either one of those is a problem of HC that make it
untenable...Those issues, which ever one you subscribe to, are not problems for
me. I?m simply showing you where the fault lies no matter which side of that
fence you want to sit on in this annual star trail issue.....
Now if the nub of the argument in fact is as stated above -- that these
trails have not been detected -- I have no knowledge of how you have attempted
to detect them. Do the experiment..you can produce star trails even rotating
a camera around a 12' disk..but your position is yes that is true..yes you can
see rotation on a 6000 mile disk but we cannot observe rotation on a 150million
km disk...!?? What is so hard to understand the diagrams label it for you and
show you how to construct a model of the earth sun axis of rotation with a
camera..?
It may be buried in the verbiage, but I can't see it. My impression is that
you believe that the NEP centred star trails will be visible in photos of the
NCP centred star trails taken on a single occasion but it is not clear. Is this
so?
This post contains two questions. I have no idea what you mean by a "single
occasion" ....... the diagrams are pretty self explanatory.....try asking me a
question about the diagrams ......This just is there is two axis of rotation
those axis diverge not converge. what produces a star trail is the distance of
the star from the axis not the distance to the star...all stars cannot be the
same distance from both axis simultaneously...If the rotation exist there must
be two different sets for each star which in fact would just create a big
blur.. but do the experiment even a casual attempt will demonstrate that a
camera in rotation about 2 axis offset from each other will be most discernable!
---------------------------------
National Bingo Night. Play along for the chance to win $10,000 every week.
Download your gamecard now at Yahoo!7 TV.
Other related posts:
