Stay tuned: New star coming in 1 million years

On 30 Dec, 19:51, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 12/30/09 9:40 AM, oriel36 wrote:

On Dec 29, 4:40 pm, Sam *wrote:

Our race is simply not designed to remain in ideologies that can now
only diminish our standing and 'big bang' does exactly that so that
the biggest explosion in sciences will come not from a physical event
but when people return to their senses and actually start promoting
astronomy beyond a magnification exercise at night.

We will probably die our as a species... just like all the other
extinct species in the fossil record.


As far as I am concerned most of you seem already dead and would
infect kids with the same catastrophic/fear/dull agenda that is now
all too familiar.

I will take time out to commend you for presenting the empirical
agenda without bells and whistles or concocting any stories which come
into your head,however,there is a cruelty at the bottom of this which
has tried even my Christian beliefs to the extreme,why would an entire
race vandalise its own achievements and sabotage itself for a mistake
that can be easily explained and corrected regardless of who built
their agenda on the false premise for planetary dynamics.

It is not you Sam,you are perfectly entitled to your opinions and your
lifestyle built on those opinions but the price others pay for that is
enormous and it takes literally nothing to alter course and give up
the pretension that great distortions and errors occured to make the
idea that the rotation of the constellations around Polaris reflects
an observation which can be turned into planetary dynamics.

Again,I do not fault you personally,it is that silent acquiesence that
is so loathsome and I feel that acutely more than ever as something to
be endured rather than a point of departure for an attack on people.I
express my astronomical heritage as best I can and demonstrate how
imaging has changed things but what I cannot do is descend to an
unintelligent level where people attempt to maintain a status quo by
resorting to vacuous insults that mean nothing to me and here we part
company regardless of the central astronomical arguments.I will tell
people they can do better even if I am consigned to a miserable
condition that I would not wish on anybody for as an astronomer it is
a mutual appreciation of the celestrial arena and its terrestrial
effects which make this once noble discipline the king of science.











* * No Center
* * *http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/nocenter.html
* * *http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/infpoint.html

* * Also see Ned Wright's Cosmology Tutorial
* * *http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmolog.htm
* * *http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmology_faq.html
* * *http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/CosmoCalc.html

* * WMAP: Foundations of the Big Bang theory
* * *http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni.html

* * WMAP: Tests of Big Bang Cosmology
* * *http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101bbtest.html

* * Gerald, here is a visual representation of the time line.
* * *http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap060323.html- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On 12/31/09 7:08 AM, oriel36 wrote:
On 30 Dec, 19:51, Sam wrote:


We will probably die out as a species... just like all the other
extinct species in the fossil record.


As far as I am concerned most of you seem already dead and would
infect kids with the same catastrophic/fear/dull agenda that is now
all too familiar.

I will take time out to commend you for presenting the empirical
agenda without bells and whistles or concocting any stories which come
into your head,however,there is a cruelty at the bottom of this which
has tried even my Christian beliefs to the extreme,why would an entire
race vandalise its own achievements and sabotage itself for a mistake
that can be easily explained and corrected regardless of who built
their agenda on the false premise for planetary dynamics.

It is not you Sam,you are perfectly entitled to your opinions and your
lifestyle built on those opinions but the price others pay for that is
enormous and it takes literally nothing to alter course and give up
the pretension that great distortions and errors occured to make the
idea that the rotation of the constellations around Polaris reflects
an observation which can be turned into planetary dynamics.

Again,I do not fault you personally,it is that silent acquiesence that
is so loathsome and I feel that acutely more than ever as something to
be endured rather than a point of departure for an attack on people.I
express my astronomical heritage as best I can and demonstrate how
imaging has changed things but what I cannot do is descend to an
unintelligent level where people attempt to maintain a status quo by
resorting to vacuous insults that mean nothing to me and here we part
company regardless of the central astronomical arguments.I will tell
people they can do better even if I am consigned to a miserable
condition that I would not wish on anybody for as an astronomer it is
a mutual appreciation of the celestrial arena and its terrestrial
effects which make this once noble discipline the king of science.


It's a shame, Gerald, that you never learned algebra.

On Dec 31, 3:09*pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 12/31/09 7:08 AM, oriel36 wrote:





On 30 Dec, 19:51, Sam *wrote:

We will probably die out as a species... just like all the other
extinct species in the fossil record.

As far as I am concerned most of you seem already dead and would
infect kids with the same catastrophic/fear/dull agenda that is now
all too familiar.

I will take time out to commend you for presenting the empirical
agenda without bells and whistles or concocting any stories which come
into your head,however,there is a cruelty at the bottom of this which
has tried even my Christian beliefs to the extreme,why would an entire
race vandalise its own achievements and sabotage itself for a mistake
that can be easily explained and corrected regardless of who built
their agenda on the false premise for planetary dynamics.

It is not you Sam,you are perfectly entitled to your opinions and your
lifestyle built on those opinions but the price others pay for that is
enormous and it takes literally nothing to alter course and give up
the pretension that great distortions and errors occured to make the
idea that the rotation of the constellations around Polaris reflects
an observation which can be turned into planetary dynamics.

Again,I do not fault you personally,it is that silent acquiesence that
is so loathsome and I feel that acutely more than ever as something to
be endured rather than a point of departure for an attack on people.I
express my astronomical heritage as best I can and demonstrate how
imaging has changed things but what I cannot do is descend to an
unintelligent level where people attempt to maintain a status quo by
resorting to vacuous insults that mean nothing to me and here we part
company regardless of the central astronomical arguments.I will tell
people they can do better even if I am consigned to a miserable
condition that I would not wish on anybody for as an astronomer it is
a mutual appreciation of the celestrial arena and its terrestrial
effects which make this once noble discipline the king of science.

* *It's a shame, Gerald, that you never learned algebra.

The language of astronomy is geometry and easily available to anyone
with an interest in astronomy.The empiricists don't like this
language,I know this insofar as they find nothing wrong with Newton's
unintelligent statement on retrogrades -

"For to the earth planetary motions appear sometimes direct, sometimes
stationary, nay, and sometimes retrograde. But from the sun they are
always seen direct, " Newton

Like all empirical numbskulls who go straight from observations to
modelling he misses the point of resolving the illusion of retrogrades
by interpreting the observations properly as being due to the orbital
motion of the Earth and the other planets around the Sun with the
Earth periodically overtaking the other planets,the original view of
Copernicus which is seen and accurately described in the following set
of images -

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

Empiricists see no difference between ,they have the interpretative
faculties beaten out of them,faculties that clearly show Newton's
unintelligent approach to apparent retrogrades and their resolution
for what it is and in total disregard for the work of the great
astronomers who based their works on planetary orbital comparisons.

A monkey could spot the difference between what is correct and what is
not and seeing that this is the central argument for planetary
dynamics and especially now that it is easy enough to grasp with
modern imaging,there is no excuse for leaving this travesty to drift.

On Dec 31, 11:05*am, oriel36 wrote:

The language of astronomy is geometry and easily available *to anyone
with an interest in astronomy...

Of course, geometry is just one facet of mathematics, and of course,
you need to have a working knowledge of ALL facets in order to
continue to learn astronomy. Strike one for you.

The empiricists don't like this
language,I know this insofar as they find nothing wrong with Newton's
unintelligent statement on retrogrades -

"For to the earth planetary motions appear sometimes direct, sometimes
stationary, nay, and sometimes retrograde. But from the sun they are
always seen direct, " Newton

Unintelligible? It is YOU who is being unintelligible here, since this
statement of Newton couldn't be easier to understand. All he is saying
here is that from the Earth's surface we see apparent planetary motion
against the fixed stars (including prograde, retrograde, and
stationary modes), which we all know is due to the relative motions of
the various planets, as one overtakes and passes the other. However,
since the sun has no orbital motion, already being in the center of
the solar system, an imaginary observer there would see no retrograde
motion at all. I know, you have a big problem with this imaginary
observer because no one will ever stand on the surface of the sun, but
the rest of us don't have a problem with mind experiments.

Would you agree that an observer standing on the surface of Mercury or
Venus would see the Earth itself in motion against the fixed stars? No
one has ever stood on those surfaces, either, and yet there can be no
doubt at all that such motion of the Earth would be observed. Somehow,
I think you will deny this, too...

Like all empirical numbskulls who go straight from observations to
modelling (Newton) misses the point of resolving the illusion of retrogrades
by interpreting the observations *properly as being due to the orbital
motion of the Earth and the other planets around the Sun with the
Earth periodically overtaking the other planets...

Newton did not miss this point at all. He understood the celestial
mechanics perfectly. How else would he know that from the sun there
would be no retrograde motion at all, and that all motion would be
direct (prograde)? It is just not that hard to understand. How can you
misinterpret even the simplest of thoughts?

The only travesty here is the one where you have no idea about How
Things Really Work...

On 12/31/09 1:05 PM, oriel36 wrote:


The language of astronomy is geometry and easily available to anyone
with an interest in astronomy.The empiricists don't like this
language,I know this insofar as they find nothing wrong with Newton's
unintelligent statement on retrogrades -


What's 1/16th of a circle in radians?

On Dec 31 2009, 10:10*pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 12/31/09 1:05 PM, oriel36 wrote:



The language of astronomy is geometry and easily available *to anyone
with an interest in astronomy.The empiricists don't like this
language,I know this insofar as they find nothing wrong with Newton's
unintelligent statement on retrogrades -

* *What's 1/16th of a circle in radians?

The geometric language of astronomy exposes the utter vandalism
visited on our race's astronomical heritage by the attempt to weave
an elaborate scheme around the Ra/Dec convenience and specifically the
misuse of Kepler's observations of Mar's orbit over an 18 year
period .

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

Those lines represent the plotted motion of Mars against the
background constellations and resolved,of course,by an orbitally
moving Earth -

"Copernicus, by attributing a single annual motion to the earth,
entirely rids the planets of these extremely intricate coils leading
the individual planets into their respective orbits ,quite bare and
very nearly circular. In the period of time shown in the diagram, Mars
traverses one and the same orbit as many times as the 'garlands' you
see looped towards the center,with one extra, making nine times, while
at the same time the Earth repeats its circle sixteen times "
Kepler

Newton,in his approach to retrogrades ,believed that inserting the
Sun in the center makes the retrograde motion disappear thereby
bypassing the actual interpretation of retrogrades and going straight
to modelling -

http://www.wisegorilla.com/images/so...c%20 1660.jpg

Hence the attempt to make the the Ra/Dec framework a common factor
for observations and then modelling -

"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's attempt to go from
observations directly into solar system modelling through his
unintelligent view of retrogrades

All this is ground zero for the recent attempt to model global climate
through a minor atmospheric gas ,the original fraud by Newton being of
a much greater magnitude due to the inception of the peer review
process which protects Newton's ideology of reducing planetary
dynamics and cosmological structure to an experimental level by
attempting to use the predictive convenience of the equatorial
coordinate system as a bridge.

Western civilisation, and it is a magnificent thing ,for all its
faults, has been brought to the brink of destruction by a very small
group of people who are willing to vandalise our astronomical
heritage and force through conceptions which are a complete dishonor
to our race,our countries,our communities , families and eventually
our own dignity and integrity.I can go through the original fraud
with ease but that is not the point,the ability to work with a cleaner
and clearer link between the great astronomical cycles/planetary
dynamics and their terrestrial effects requires nothing other than the
natural goodness and intelligence that all people possess and a little
bit of courage.

On Dec 31, 6:40*pm, oriel36 wrote:
On Dec 31 2009, 10:10*pm, Sam Wormley wrote:

On 12/31/09 1:05 PM, oriel36 wrote:

The language of astronomy is geometry and easily available *to anyone
with an interest in astronomy.The empiricists don't like this
language,I know this insofar as they find nothing wrong with Newton's
unintelligent statement on retrogrades -

* *What's 1/16th of a circle in radians?

The geometric language of astronomy exposes the utter vandalism
visited on our race's astronomical *heritage by the attempt to weave
an elaborate scheme around the Ra/Dec convenience and specifically the
misuse of Kepler's observations of Mar's orbit over an 18 year
period .

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

Those lines represent the plotted motion of Mars against the
background constellations and resolved,of course,by an orbitally
moving Earth -

"Copernicus, by attributing a single annual motion to the earth,
entirely rids the planets of these extremely intricate coils leading
the individual planets into their respective orbits ,quite bare and
very nearly circular. In the period of time shown in the diagram, Mars
traverses one and the same orbit as many times as the 'garlands' *you
see looped towards the center,with one extra, making nine times, while
at the same time the Earth repeats its circle sixteen times "
Kepler

Newton,in his approach to retrogrades ,believed *that inserting the
Sun in the center makes the retrograde motion disappear thereby
bypassing the actual interpretation of retrogrades and going straight
to modelling -

http://www.wisegorilla.com/images/so...n%20solar%20sy...

Hence the attempt to make the the Ra/Dec framework a *common factor
for observations and then modelling -

"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's attempt to go from
observations directly into solar system modelling through his
unintelligent *view of retrogrades

All this is ground zero for the recent attempt to model global climate
through a minor atmospheric gas ,the original fraud by Newton being of
a much greater magnitude due to the inception of the peer review
process which protects Newton's ideology of reducing planetary
dynamics and cosmological structure to an experimental level by
attempting to use the predictive convenience *of the equatorial
coordinate system as a bridge.

Western civilisation, and it is a magnificent thing ,for all its
faults, has been brought to the brink of destruction by a very small
group of people who are willing to vandalise our * astronomical
heritage and force through conceptions which are a complete dishonor
to our race,our countries,our communities , families and eventually
our own dignity and integrity.I can go through the original *fraud
with ease but that is not the point,the ability to work with a cleaner
and clearer link between the great astronomical cycles/planetary
dynamics and their terrestrial effects requires nothing other than the
natural goodness and intelligence that all people possess and a little
bit of courage.

http://xkcd.com/675/