On Friday, November 17, 2017 at 6:49:39 PM UTC, palsing wrote:

Sorry, Gerald, the fact remains that you know very little actual astronomy, and the few subjects that you choose to discuss here are dwarfed by the huge list of astronomy subjects that you don't choose to discuss.... which is just as well, because you would no doubt butcher them, too.

You don't get to walk away from something you just called beautiful, in this case Newton's idiosyncratic description of a timekeeping facility known as the Equation of Time.

"Absolute time, in astronomy, is distinguished from relative, by the equation of time. For the natural days are truly unequal, though they are commonly considered as equal and used for a measure of time; astronomers correct this inequality for their more accurate deducing of the celestial motions...The necessity of which equation, for determining the times of a phænomenon, is evinced as well from the experiments of the pendulum clock, as by eclipses of the satellites of Jupiter." Principia

You don't have the intuitive power to untangle assertions that do not work including the description of Huygen's in the matter of the Equation of Time and the orbital period of the Earth much less the 20th century junk that exploited Newton's attempt to make timekeeping look like time.

Don't worry, you can have your slogans, stock phrases and moaning in my direction , many of the insights I brought to humanity will eventually make it into circulation.