On Jan 30, 11:19*pm, John wrote:

This discovery transformed the unproven heliocentric theory
of Copernicus into a rigorous predictive theory that outperformed the
traditional geocentric theory of Claudius Ptolemy and his successors.
The discovery paved the way for Newton’s theory of gravitation. It
remains one of a small number of cases where a simple mathematical
rule for seemingly complex and confusing data has been found.

How long some people can get away with this empirical propaganda is
anyone's guess but far from confusing and complex ,the insight of
Kepler in respect to orbital geometry can now be understood by almost
any adult with an interest in the astronomy of planetary dynamics and
how the solution was arrived at using apparent retrogrades and the
background stars as a gauge for the variation in orbital speeds of
planets.

It takes little effort to match Kepler's observation of Mars as seen
from an orbitally moving Earth with modern time lapse footage of the
Earth overtaking Jupiter and Saturn once the viewer comprehends the
basic insight behind the Earth's orbital dynamic first proposed by
Copernicus -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ke...retrograde.jpg

http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap011220.html

Like all astronomers since antiquity who followed the apparent
stoppings and retrogradations of planets,the periods and the degree of
retrogradations are never alike as reflected in Kepler's
representation,Ptolemy came up with the equant as a
solution,Copernicus with the epicycle whereas Kepler came up with the
variable orbital speed and non circular orbital geometry for this
refinement to the insight of Copernicus.

The elaborate scheme of Newton to use the Ra/Dec framework as a common
denominator between observation and prediction/modelling eschews the
original interpretation for orbital dynamics which uses orbital
comparisons -

"PHÆNOMENON IV.
That the fixed stars being at rest, the periodic times of the five
primary planets, and (whether of the sun about the earth, or) of the
earth about the sun, are in the sesquiplicate proportion of their mean
distances from the sun." Newton

What you call "complex and confusing data" is actually distorted and
crude interpretation of the great astronomical works,in an era where
it is even possible to see planetary orbital geometries in action by
way of the Fomalhaut system,people are stuck in a celestial sphere Ra/
Dec framework which originated with Flamsteed and was built on by
Newton.

There are now multiple ways to extract variable orbital speeds from
direct observation,such as the fortuitous daily rotational and orbital
characteristics of Uranus or by inference such as the difference
between natural noon and 24 hour noon as expressed by constant daily
rotation ,all these can be worked on and explained by the orbital
characteristics of our planet and any other planet.

It is time for a new astronomy which 21st century imaging allows but
that takes astronomers to realize that endeavor and not followers of
Ra/Dec geometry