[geocentrism] Re: Moving Earth deception
- From: "Jack Lewis" <jack.lewis@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2007 09:44:45 +0100
Dear Neville,
Could it be that in the helio system, their supporters say that because the
pole star is so very far away that the angle subtended from it to the Earth's
position, 6 months apart, would make no difference to the observed circles of
stars around the pole star? A very convenient cop-out?
Jack
----- Original Message -----
From: Neville Jones
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2007 11:50 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Moving Earth deception
"Walter van der Kamp used such assumed association of stars with the Sun to
deduce a 58-light-day radius (it may have been 60"
Well yes, I can see why he might have even with the complications that might
raise. .. But may I add some thoughts.. as it applies to the celestial
poles..
First up, in the GS system the earth is not tilted, but stands tall vertical
and Proud. The tilt is an invention necessary to explain the seasons in the HC
universe. (no one seems to have mentioned this.
Yes, the World is not tilted, but the Sun's orbital plane most definitely is
tilted, at approximately 23.5 degrees to the plane of the celestial equator. Do
you not have GU 3.0 ? Oh, I see that you do not. Well, for a small
consideration, ...
Anyway, the movement of the Sun against the (infinitely far away in the HC
system) background stars traces out the ecliptic. This ecliptic is explainable
either by the Sun being in orbit around the World (correct interpretation), or
the World being in orbit about the Sun (emperor's new clothes interpretation).
In this perspective, with this orientation of the earth, as the sphere of the
cosmos moves North and South with its annual oscillation, will the changing
distance change the angle of view (which causes the polar star to circle) in
the same manner as what we see. Also Our system does not provide a base line
for the geometry to measure distance (of the polar star) , as perhaps the HC
system did. But maybe the distance travelled vertically as measured against
the latitudes of the earth, relative to the angle of the cone, as viewed from
the pole, might give you something to work with.. Trig is tricky like that..
in establishing the distance to the polar star. I never did much with cones.
Not relevant. Back to the celestial poles page!
Neville.
Phil.
Other related posts:
