Geocentricity and Stellar Parallax

[peteos]

The Coriolis affect would still be there if the universe were a rotating shell of matter.

Where does the air above my head stop being stationary with the earth and start rotating with the Universe?

 

[RichardT]

[delete post]

 

[RichardT]

Where does the air above my head stop being stationary with the earth and start rotating with the Universe?

The rotating plenum ether finds itself above the earth's atmosphere.

 

[Hnefi]

So what? Peter tells me that you will scoff anyway.

Did he also tell you that your ideas are insane?

 

[notto]

The rotating shell of matter finds itself above the earth's atmosphere.

That certainly is convenient! (adhoc)

It's turtles all the way down.

 

[peteos]

The rotating shell of matter finds itself above the earth's atmosphere.

Well then how does the rotating matter have anything do to with the Coriolis affect? Moving air masses is certainly in the earth's atmosphere, is it not?

 

[RichardT]

Well then how does the rotating matter have anything do to with the Coriolis affect? Moving air masses is certainly in the earth's atmosphere, is it not?

If you want to talk about the ether, how the Coriolis affect would work, please start a new thread. This thread is about Stellar Parallax. I've already discussed the Coriolis effect before.

 

[peteos]

If you want to talk about the ether, how the Coriolis affect works within a rotating shell of matter, please start a new thread. This thread is about Stellar Parallax.

Most certainly.

 

[Opcode42]

Please tell me this poster is joking?

There cannot seriously be people in the 21st century so blind and stupid can there?

Geocentric universe? What the hell are they going to bring back next, a flat earth and disease caused by demons?

 

[RichardT]

Please tell me this poster is joking?

There cannot seriously be people in the 21st century so blind and stupid can there?

Geocentric universe? What the hell are they going to bring back next, a flat earth and disease caused by demons?

Well, you obviously know nothing about absolutely everything now do you (that's the impression I get, because any idiot could have written what you wrote).

This is what always seems to happen, I start a thread about an issue where I want an absolutely serious discussion of it, and these "people" that I could not distinguish from any uneducated person come up and tell me that I'm stupid.

 

[TheOutsider]

I'm curious as to why there haven't been any other Bible Literalists to help RichardT prop up his little "theory". Are they scared or is there really no one else around here who agrees with him?

 

[Loudmouth]

Within the MTBS. It takes the sun 365 days to do a full revolution while the stars are always following the sun.

Evidence please.

But it doesn't matter if the permeating plenum ether medium is moving faster than the speed of light simply because the known laws of physics would work within it.

Evidence for the plenum ether, please.

 

[ReverendDG]

Yes. But it doesn't matter if the permeating plenum ether medium is moving faster than the speed of light simply because the known laws of physics would work within it. If it wasn't for the scriptures I too would be unaware of it. The quantum grains which are found all over space are taken by Dr. Bouw to be the planck particles, I would need to study this more though because I wouldn't know if this were possible myself. Anyway, this thread is about the parallax of the stars, not the Ether. If you want to talk about the Ether, start another thread.

why start another thread? you want us to assume your nonsense about the ether so you can claim the stellar parallax works with it, but you haven't shown your basic idea is remotely sound


what evidence do you have for your even basic idea? what evidence do you have for the ether, if you can't even produce evidence for ether existing then why would the rest even be meaningful?

 

[ReverendDG]

Well, you obviously know nothing about absolutely everything now do you (that's the impression I get, because any idiot could have written what you wrote).

This is what always seems to happen, I start a thread about an issue where I want an absolutely serious discussion of it, and these "people" that I could not distinguish from any uneducated person come up and tell me that I'm stupid.

but the idea of it even being rational is absurd. we have been into space, we know a lot about the mechanics of planetary interaction, they show your view to be wrong,
people are just amazed that you can cling to an idea that has been shown wrong for more than 50 years.. oh wait you are a creationist...
yeah theres no "serious" about this, because you can't even produce evidence for anything.
and you think people would not wonder about your intelligence?

 

[Paulos23]

Honestly dude, Occam's Razor.....

 

[lemmings]

Why is it that the sun rotates around the Earth, and everything else rotates around the sun? Why doesn’t the sun rotate around Venus, it’s the same size as the Earth? Or Jupiter, it’s over a thousand times bigger than the Earth?

You have stated that geocentricism is coherent with gravity and relativity, why is it then that the Sun’s mass does not influence the Earth?

 

[Lord_Marx]

What I don't get is how Pluto's gravity is enough to attract a moon, yet the sun does not even affect Mars...

 

[RichardT]

You have stated that geocentricism is coherent with gravity and relativity, why is it then that the Sun’s mass does not influence the Earth?

It seemingly must. I said this before, when choosing the sun as a reference frame, the earth must seemingly orbit the sun in order to satisfy the laws of gravitation / relativity. As long as this occurs, the universe is satisfied. The ether would be a permeating medium that would direct the absolute motions of the universe. There is really no physical difference between the geocentric theory and the modern heliocentric view. They are both correct coordinate systems. (Show me the flaws in this reasoning)

"all masses, all motion, indeed all forces are relative. There is no way to discern relative from absolute motion when we encounter them … Whenever modern writers infer an imaginary distinction between relative and absolute motion from a Newtonian framework, they do not stop to think that the Ptolemaic and Copernican are both equally true."

- E. Mach

"We know that the difference between a heliocentric theory and a geocentric theory is one of relative motion only, and that such a difference has no physical significance."

— Sir Fred Hoyle

According to Dr. Bouw, if the universe didn't rotate, it would collapse.

From the abstract:

"The purpose of this paper is mathematically to demonstrate that whether or not the creation is geocentric, the universe has to rotate as a solid body in order for it to exist. This is done by examining the very foundations for the laws of physics, which laws relate properties such as mass, distance, and gravity by fundamental constants. It is the values of these fundamental constants which requires the rotation of the universe and, furthermore, specifies that the rotation period is of the order of one day."

From the conclusion:

"We have shown that Planck particles, which are also known as maximons or massive superstrings, are not fluctuations in a vacuum state resulting from the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, but rather are constituents of a superdense medium, the firmament, in which the entire universe is embedded and which dictates the properties of space and time. The firmament's density is 3.6x10^93 gm/cm3. Each Planck particle has a mass of 2.18x10^-5 grams, a size of 1.6x10^-33 cm, and the firmament has a tempertature of 1.4x10^32 K."

MASSIVE SUPERSTRINGS AND THE FIRMAMENT

 

[MattMarriott]

Trying to prove that "there is in fact no problem with respect to Stellar Parallax in one Geocentric model" (1) equals to a discussion about who was piloting the WTC "planes" on 9/11.
There were no planes (2) on 9/11, there was no Stellar Parallax before End Times begun (3), and there is still none short before the end (4).
But there is still time left. And that time is less than ever before. That's why it is vital for you to understand the simple laws of End Times Reductionism. (5)
Notes
(1) This discussion.
(2) http://911-for-dummies.blogspot.com/
(3) http://end-times-history.blogspot.com/
(4) http://good-astronomy.blogspot.com/
(5) http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22End+Times+Reductionism%22

 

[RichardT]

What the...