[geocentrism] Re: translational motion of the earth......
- From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 09:18:29 -0800 (PST)
Regner claims there is no rotataion aound the sun. However, when you show him
a camera orentied radialy to an axis (sun) on 24 hour intervals over the
course of one orbit of that axis (a year) regurdless of the path it took to get
there, he claims it is called a rotation...."it's that simple".....LOL
Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: Paul,
You and Regner are definitely two of a kind. Your explanations are self
contradictory..........Your diagram either shows the camera pointing in the
same angle (90o to the ecliptic) or it is not (parallel to the ecliptic) six
months latter.. You show that six months latter it is not looking at the
ecliptic. You say in six months it will be looking 47 degrees in a different
direction. Will a camera that was pointing 90o to the ecliptic then as you say
rotates to 47o in a different direction from that 90o still be looking at the
same latitude on the celestial sphere?....Paul, Paul, your whole explanation
here to attempt to explain why would could not be looking at the ecliptic 6
months latter the only way to do that is tho show a rotation not on the same
latitude/great circle but to a different latitude, and yet in the same argument
you insist that we would not see any difference!? ..Which is it? If it does not
change the latitude then how does it prevent you form seeing the
ecliptic if you are still looking at the same latitude on the ecliptic? Will
47 degrees looking in another latitude change our view of the night
sky?.......The ecliptic axis is only 23.44 degrees from the celestial axis. If
I look at the ecliptic do I see the same stars as I do on the celestial? Is
that the same latitude? If I double that angular distance from the ecliptic
will I see the same stars or even the same latitude that the same stars are in?
In six moths will we see the same latitude of the "great circle" in the sky or
not?.....LOL.....Find a position and stick too it quite jumping back and forth.
I don?t mean a different star due to the constellations moving ( they stay in
the same latitude of the celestial sphere all year long, every year) I want to
know if 47 degrees will have us looking in a different stars on a different
latitude? If we are not looking at the same latitude then you prove your on
position untenable. Your arguments are mutually exclusive and
self contradictory....You need to look at some geometry and get a
clue.....That goes for you too Regner, you should know better.... LOL..
Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Allen D
I don't know how you received the picture but on Yahoo it was not really
readable. If it was like this for you also, you will have to download it then
you will be able to read it. You see -- again you appear to have decided what
I said without reading it because if you had (and understood) then you would
not have said what you have said here. Hint -- see particularly the text in the
bottom right hand corner.
Regarding being a closet geocentrist -- you knew wrong.
Paul D
----- Original Message ----
From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, 15 November, 2007 3:22:55 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: translational motion of the earth......
Congratulations Paul !.
Your diagram shows and just proved that if the earth did in fact go around
the sun according to HC then the fixed camera focused ~parallel to the ecliptic
(north or south) axis, over the course of six moths will be pointing in a
entirely different direction and thus looking a different stars in a different
ecliptic latitude of the celestial sphere in the sky ( not just different stars
on the same ecliptic latitude) A wopping 24 degrees in a different direction
altogether with entirly different stars ....NOW GO DO THAT AN SEE IF THAT EVER
HAPPENS IN REALITY........hint....IT DOES NOT!!! .........Paul, I knew you were
a closet geocentrist all the time.....:-)
Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Greetings interested parties!
Comments in this colour
From j a Wed Nov 14 20:45:30 2007
What Paul is saying is the same thing I've been trying to get across. An
ally! When attempting to record an annual trail; as the camera moves to the
next photo op it also gets tilted by the rotation on the nightly axis. Tilting
the camera for the next photo alters where any particular star will fall on the
photo plate. Surley you must see how altering the camera angle while collecting
for a single trail (whether nightly or annual) would alter the trail?
From j a Wed Nov 14 21:49:52 2007
Didn't we determine that 23'56" was the proper time to record the annual
star trail and that at 24hours we would not record a star trail? NO 24 hours
exposures.. Sorry -- this time Allen got it right!
From Allen Daves Wed Nov 14 23:43:00 2007
I think I understand what you are getting at now..?...........Allen! Can I
truly stop trying now?
Well I've got a picture for you all anyway. Please tell me if you don't
understand this.
Paul D
---------------------------------
Make the switch to the world's best email. Get the new Yahoo!7 Mail now.
---------------------------------
Make the switch to the world's best email. Get the new Yahoo!7 Mail now.
Other related posts: