[geocentrism] Re: Fwd: Fw: Re: (geocentrism) geostationary / geosynchrous sat.
- From: "Philip" <joyphil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 15:11:10 +1000
Gary, the concrete is in the fourth dimension...every microsecond is tied to
the one before it and the one after it. Gravity and magnetism are the
manifestations of its existence. Perhaps the lock or tie is stronger with
the larger bodies, and less with the inconsequential. The sun or a star have
enormous grav and mag fields. which can and do distort our space.
Remember the philadelphia experiment. The enormous field produced also
displaced the three dimensins of space in its vicinity. I'm enclined to
believe in that report...
Philip.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary L. Shelton" <GaryLShelton@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2004 11:04 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Fwd: Fw: Re: (geocentrism) geostationary /
geosynchrous sat.
> All these observations are also consistent with a geostatic scenario. The
> Sun, the stars and the Moon all go round the Earth in 24 hours because of
> their entrapment in the aether/firmament/concrete etc.
>
> Jack
Jack, does anybody know the true nature of the aether? I know Dr. Bouw
postulates that it is at once denser than anything we know and yet it can
still be passed through. I do wonder that the sun and moon are not
"trapped" within anything as unyielding as concrete. If they were, the sun
and moon would circle the earth in the same amount of time, instead of the
moon slipping in its earth orbit versus the sun. We would not have the
variegations that produce tonight's lunar eclipse, for example. Whatever
was the relationship between the sun and moon would never change if they
were in "concrete".
Sincerely,
Gary
Other related posts:
