Defend it?...there is nothing to deffend...Regner's mind is not allowing him to see the obvious 1.Paul's own diagram that he praised disproves HC

2. According to Regner ther is no rotation around the sun and yet the conditon HC descibes for the earth is the defintion he gives for Rotation..?

 

Regner has far bigger problems then defending HC...He can't even see his own termonolgy and  inconsistencies......Wake up ............. IT IS DEAD! ...

 

And the truth shall set you feeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee......time for some of the noble mindset you talked about earlier Regner.........Irrifutable proof...Regener can't bring himself to this...Like i said......

Steven Jones <steven@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Regner Trampedach wrote:

Don't worry, Jack - there wasn't any.    

According to you, yes, but that is what we're here for, to prove one way or another. Right now heliocentrism is under-siege and so far you've been unable to defend the crumbling hypothesis.

Steven.

    Regards,           Regner    Quoting Jack Lewis <jack.lewis@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:      

Dear Allen,  What was the clinch - I think I missed it!    Jack    ----- Original Message -----     From: Allen Daves     To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx     Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 7:15 PM    Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Heliocentrism
 is dead        It means Game point ...we win...:-)      HC is scientificaly untenable.....      It means Paul & Regner have converted to GC.....ok well ............we are  still waiting for that......:-o      Jack Lewis <jack.lewis@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:      Dear Steven,      What does this posting mean?        Jack