[geocentrism] Re: plenum effects atmosphere?
- From: "Philip" <joyphil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 11:41:39 +1000
However, I would not attribute this resistance to any force of the
plenum/firmament, but would attribute it in the conventional way to the World's
gravitational attraction.
In Christ,
Neville.
And that Neville, may be your Achilles Heel when you are forced to acknowledge
the existance of stationary satellites 22, 000 mils up, elliptical orbiting
satellites that go even further, comets in the solar system and beyond that
also go further, and even "aghast" maybe men on the moon...
Philip.
----- Original Message -----
From: Dr. Neville Jones
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, February 26, 2005 10:20 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: plenum effects atmosphere?
Robert,
I ignored your question?
A deplorable suggestion!
I do not believe that planetary orbits are elliptical. Rather, I support the
deferent and epicycle model of Apollonius of Perga. Planetary motion in this
scenario is circular and at a uniform rate.
You state that, "Another example would be the upward path of a projectile,
which is always
decelerating. The principal reason is gravity, which theogeocentrists (us)
replace with the plenum."
However, I would not attribute this resistance to any force of the
plenum/firmament, but would attribute it in the conventional way to the World's
gravitational attraction.
In Christ,
Neville.
Robert Bennett <robert.bennett@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Dear Dr. Jones,
I don't have the time
to make everything rhyme...
I would say re-adjust at the surface..... a flexible plenum.
The reason for this inquiry line about plenum boundary is to establish where
the properties of the plenum end.
Once we know the plenum properties, we can test for differences across the
boundary with experiments underwater (in a submarine?) - which we agree on -
or underground - which is now undecided.
You seem to use frictionless to mean 'undetectable'. Again a brief
exposition would help.
One example of slowing down would be planetary orbits (assuming you believe
they are ellipses). In half the orbit the planet is slowing down. Along with
Newton and Kepler I would not term this 'friction' when there is no visible
contact with anything.
Another example would be the upward path of a projectile, which is always
decelerating. The principal reason is gravity, which theogeocentrists (us)
replace with the plenum.
The plenum channels I prefer to address when the proper foundation has been
built.
BTW: You didn't address all my Qs, mostly the ones I said were for later!
Thanks for entertaining my thoughts.
Pax Christi,
Robert
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Other related posts:
