[geocentrism] Re: Moving Earth deception

  • From: Neville Jones <njones@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2007 06:01:35 -0800

Philip,

I don't know why. It's just a feeling. That's why I placed 'better' in quotation marks. Not a very scientific answer is it?!

Neville.


-----Original Message-----
From: pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sat, 4 Aug 2007 10:42:10 +1000
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Moving Earth deception

 but my feeling is that there must be a "better" explanation than attaching star movement to the Sun.

Neville.
I do not see why? Can you expand the problem? We have allowed for individual movements of celestial bodies as local stresses in the aether. (firmament) but I like the idea of all the stars including the sun being imbedded ...An oscillation sure raises some "dynamic" power problems quite different from a rotation..but no more problematic that the black hole!   ...
 
Philip.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2007 9:58 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Moving Earth deception

Philip,

Yes, it's an oscillation that Steven and I built into GU 2.1 and 2.2, but my feeling is that there must be a "better" explanation than attaching star movement to the Sun.

Neville.

-----Original Message-----
From: pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sat, 4 Aug 2007 08:54:32 +1000
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Moving Earth deception

Why does the universe have to "wobble ... to account for the seasons"?

Neville.

When the sun goes North and south, do all the stars do likewise?  If so then the universe must have an annual vibration north and south..  I spose that is not a wobble. but an oscillation.. 
 
Phil.

Get Free 5GB Email – Check out spam free email with many cool features!
Visit http://www.inbox.com/email to find out more!


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.4/935 - Release Date: 3/08/2007 5:46 PM

Other related posts: