[geocentrism] Re: celestial poles argumentation

  • From: Neville Jones <njones@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 14:45:13 -0800


My replies in red:

-----Original Message-----
From: allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 15:29:50 -0700 (PDT)


1.Do you or anyone know of any examples of long term photo exposures of any stars taken over a period of months direct link to.. for the purposes of demonstrating no positional deviation every 23 hours 56 min so as to be able to take long term exposure of photo of star(s)

No, but I know that there is basically no such movement, because otherwise the (right ascention, declination) coordinate system would not work.


2. If there are no star trails or rotation about the secondary north celestial axis then any wobble in the suns motion about the earth must be local to the sun only and is not intrinsic to the stars Correct. This is the essence of the argument that allows us to disprove heliocentricity (ie the lack of connection between the Sun's motion and that of the stars) thus parallax in any case can't be a result of earths orbit/rotation about the sun or the universe wobble about the earth ..only a possible wobble in the local planetary system.


Free 3D Earth Screensaver - Watch the Earth right on your desktop!
Check it out at http://www.inbox.com/earth

Other related posts: