Why are you avoiding the rest of the post?
How many question marks [?] are in the rest of your post? None.
So what is avoided?
I explained everything to you, using the Wikipedia article you kindly provided. Perhaps you are satisfied with the answers?
I am satisfied with my answer, yes.
To summarise the answers so far:
- Time is wrong because our measurement of time is wrong. The Earth is indeed slowing down, but not consistently and not at the rates you think it is.
- We do have several other ways of measuring time. I gave one example for the sake of simplicity, but we have methods such as Mean Solar Time/Universal Time and Ephemeris Time. The differences between these more accurate measurements of time and UTC (Co-ordinated Universal Time) is fixed by the way of implementing leap seconds and the like to "catch up".
- Getting rid of leap seconds would be costly, and potentially redundant (given the other forms of time), but there is a proposal to do exactly that. I'm sure you read about it - it's in the Wikipedia article you linked here. Now hopefully you understand why I have been assuming that you didn't read the article entirely, as your question was answered here.
I am not trying to shame you or attack you. Perhaps I was hasty in my assumption that you didn't read the article - perhaps you misunderstood it or you didn't make the connection that it was the answer you were after. Or perhaps you understood it all and there is another reason why you were asking a question you already knew the answer to. Still, go and read the various articles I have linked to in this summary, and hopefully you'll get a better understanding of what the facts are.
Are there any further issues? I'm rather enjoying looking this stuff up.
All of these factors cause the mean solar day, on the average, to be slightly longer than the nominal 86,400 SI seconds, the traditional number of seconds per day. As UT is slightly irregular in its rate, astronomers introduced Ephemeris Time, which has since been replaced by Terrestrial Time (TT). However, because Universal Time is synchronous with night and day, and more precise atomic-frequency standards drift away from this, UT is still used to produce a correction (called a leap second) to atomic time, in order to obtain a broadcast form of civil time that carries atomic frequency. Thus, civil broadcast standards for time and frequency usually follow TAI closely, but occasionally change discontinuously (or "leap") in order to prevent them from drifting too far from mean solar time.
Universal Time - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Lets look at this:
All of these factors cause the mean solar day, on the average, to be slightly longer than the nominal 86,400 SI seconds, the traditional number of seconds per day.
We would have a
consistent adding of Leap seconds, like every 4th year having a Leap day. You would have a natural effect that is precisely consistent in appearing to be a 'slowing down' of the earth's rotation.
As UT is slightly irregular in its rate, astronomers introduced Ephemeris Time, which has since been replaced by Terrestrial Time (TT). However, because Universal Time is synchronous with night and day,
2 known factors of UT
- irregular in its rate
- synchronous with day and night
Simply put, the rotation of the earth is irregular. So the irregularity of adding leap seconds can be attested to the irregular rate, aka, the slowing of earth's rotation.
and more precise atomic-frequency standards drift away from this, UT is still used to produce a correction (called a leap second) to atomic time,
A correction due to the differences in time and the irregular slowing of earth's rotation.
in order to obtain a broadcast form of civil time that carries atomic frequency. Thus, civil broadcast standards for time and frequency usually follow TAI closely, but occasionally change discontinuously (or "leap") in order to prevent them from drifting too far from mean solar time.
So, in the end, we have 2 factors at work.
- a consistant slowing, which is just a flaw from 2 different legnths of days.
- a change of time from Earth's slowing rotation, irregular.
As I posted before:
Through the 8 year span of 1972-1979, 9 seconds were gained, but from 1999-today, only 2 seconds have gained. This is inconsistent, an completely unlike the Leap Year.
The inconsistency shows the slowing rate of earth's rotation.
Are you simply trying to discredit the 1 second every 18 months? If you are, you completely missed it.
This is my original post regarding the Leap Second on this thread where you began posting regarding it:
So, I tried to find the defense, and they say the earth loses 1 second every 200-250 years. That works great for the long timeline, but the empirical evidence we know and see in the Leap Second proves that number to be way off.
Actually, I misread the 'defense'. It actually says:
"The Earth slows down 2/1000th of a second about every 200 years."
As part of Kent Hovind
Another post says:
"The earth is slowing down by about 1 second every 200,000 years simply by tidal friction, not including the solar events (which have a much smaller impact since they are tenuous)."
How long will it take for the world to stop revolving or will it keep going forever? - Yahoo! UK & Ireland Answers
So it is not 1 second every 200 years, it is one second every 200,000 years.
My friend, that's wrong. We know that is wrong. We know the irregular rotation is causing irregular Leap seconds, and these irregularities are happening much more often than once every 200,000 years. Forget 1 second every 18 months, 1 second every 18 years would destroy the long hypothesized timelines.
Yes, I am satisfied with my answer.
Other oddities that makes one doubt the Time of the Gaps Fallacy:
REASONS FOR BELIEVING IN A YOUNG EARTH
