[geocentrism] Re: Challenge
- From: Alan Griffin <ajg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 12:42:57 +0100
On 28 Jul, Jack Lewis <jandj.lewis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> If you want to convince me and others that Neville's paper is wrong
> then you will have to take it apart line-by-line if necissary. Is not
> that the way in which any proof or theory should be critiqued? And when
> that has been done, to then offer an alternative e.g. your scale drawing
> perhaps? Neville is making a very important statement and it is up to
> others to demonstrate where HIS paper is wrong.
The trouble with all the people who embrace geocentrism, is that
they have totally closed minds, and it is obvious that NOTHING will
convince them. I offer incontrovertible proof that the earth is moving,
and I get answered with a preposterous theory that the speed of light
changes as it passes through space. Why should it? Or that the red shift
changes with the seasons. Why should it? Scientists give reasons for their
hypotheses. You invent hypotheses with the only reason because you want to
try to prove that black is white.
I have been through Neville's paper. His equations for the
gradient are correct. He then tells us that he substitiuted into the
equations, and produced a particular result (which suited him!) I have
substituted into the same equations and produced the opposite result. One
of us must be wrong. I have not got all Neville's calculations which led
him to his erroneous result, so I can't go through them line by line,
because he didn't publish them in his paper!
However, I have gone to the trouble of producing instructions to
draw a scale diagram of a heliocentric universe, which anyone can do
without abstruse mathematics or computer programs. This gives the moon's
shadow as moving in the correct direction across the face of the earth (as
observed). Any sensible person would infer from that that Neville has made
a mistake! Have you tried drawing the scale diagram?
Alan Griffin
Other related posts:
