[geocentrism] Re: Celestial Poles
- From: Bernie Brauer <bbrauer777@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2007 17:51:21 -0800 (PST)
"......the celestial poles argument does not disprove the heliocentric model."
N.T.J.
1 ......and the HC ecliptic pole and celestial pole arguments do not disprove
the Geocentric model.
2 "......the celestial poles argument does not disprove or prove the
heliocentric
model."
Bernie
Neville Jones <njones@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dear All,
I respected Regner's request not to immediately respond to his last posting,
but instead have been giving this whole matter very careful consideration.
There is now no doubt in my mind that the 24-hour images about the ecliptic
polar axis are always going to be snapshots of the diurnal rotation in the
heliocentric model and I concede, therefore, that the celestial poles argument
does not disprove the heliocentric model.
Steven and my web site will be amended in the near future, God willing, to
reflect this retraction.
I would just like to thank you all for some excellent debating and for the many
illustrations that several of you have provided. I hope that none of you feel
that your efforts were either wasted or unappreciated.
This topic will not be closed yet, since Allen has not had a chance to fully
digest Regner's post. If he concedes, as I have, then we will close it off,
otherwise he will now have one more to convince!
I hope that our little forum family is strengthened by this discussion and that
each one of us has learnt something from it, I know that I have. If, however,
anyone feels disappointed, then I apologise to you for building your hopes up.
Best wishes,
Neville
www.GeocentricUniverse.com
---------------------------------
Be a better pen pal. Text or chat with friends inside Yahoo! Mail. See how.
Other related posts:
