On Nov 6, 7:34*pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 11/6/10 1:56 PM, oriel36 wrote:

What is it exactly that readers want ?.

* *Many wish you would quit inserting yourself into threads and spewing
* *nonsense that is clearly contradicted by observations, Gerald.

You don't want to explain the 24 hour rotation that is February 29th
and the attached day/night cycle to that rotation,it clearly tells you
that there are no more that a full 365 rotations in any orbital cycle
and that the accumulative 1461 rotations correspond to almost 4
orbital cycles,the intricate structure where the orbital cycle drifts
in increments of 6 hours through Mar 1st each non-leap year until the
extra day/night cycle of Feb 29th reigns in the fractional difference
accumulated each year.

The correct answer is that none of you want to know the most basic
astronomical cause and effect of all where 365 1/4 rotations each
orbital cycle (not calendar year) corresponds to 365 1/4 days.The
correct correspondence is not just a brilliant achievement inherited
from antiquity but also for this present generation who may no longer
face the stranglehold of people who would make this world a poorer
place every day if they could for no good reason.There is presently
no number to call,no authoritative group who can deal with an error of
this magnitude but at least you know where you stand in attempting to
split 365 1/4 rotations from 365 1/4 days by defying common sense in
introducing an extra rotation every year.

It is not a question of you being wrong,it is a valuation issue at the
moment,who values their intelligence enough to adapt to a system where
daily rotation corresponds with the day/night cycle once more.