On 4 Dec, 13:40, oriel36 wrote:
On Dec 3, 11:03*pm, Mike Collins
wrote:

On 3 Dec, 04:49, oriel36 wrote:

Resolving the issue is far removed from climate topics as the root
cause is empiricism itself,an approach which tried to use timekeeping
averages to model planetary dynamics and solar system structure by
doing something no astronomer would sanction - using the rotation of
the constellations about Polaris to provide a foundation for planetary
dynamics.

You still haven't explained about the "rotation" of the constellations
about Polaris.
The constellations don't rotate about Polaris. But they appear to!.

This has been explained a thousand times and were I to explain it for
another thousand you still would not get that a star returning to a
meridian and consequently the apparent rotation of the constellations
about Polaris can never correlate with constant daily rotation,

Why? You haven't explained this. The obvious explanation is that the
Earth is rotating 360 degrees with every apparent rotation of the
constellations. You haven't produced any explanation of why this is
wrong apart from the fact that you don't like the idea. You need to do
more than this or you'll never get that first convert to your views
that you crave.