what's your bet?

On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 20:19:18 GMT, Sam Wormley
wrote:

When is the last time you learned something new... under the sun?

This all brings to mind the Argument Clinic,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y

Somebody's getting their money's worth, but I'm not sure who.
_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

On Nov 21, 3:31*am, Sam Wormley wrote:
oriel36 wrote:

The Earth's equatorial speed is 1669.8 km per hour and turns through
40,075 km in 24 hours but the fundamentalist ideology of empiricism
cannot accept what is pretty much this point of departure for
timekeeping and planetary dynamics.

* *Now, Jerald, why should I give a rat's ass about the tangential
* *speed of the earth's equator when it is so easy to observe the
* *rotation of the earth with respect to a star on a local meridian?


Astronomers would be expected to know the cause and effect of twilight
variations for different latitudes as the quicker the transit through
the circle of illumination,the more rapid the transition from daylight
into darkness with equatorial regions seeing the most pronounced
effect and this means knowing the rotational speeds which reflect
rotation for 15 degrees/1 hour or 1 degree/4 minutes -

http://www.ncgia.ucsb.edu/education/...s/table02.html

It is when the curtain rises on the climatological and geological
disciplines that planetary dynamics really get interesting despite the
fact that there is presently an enormous void between evolutionary
geology ,rotational dynamics and the geological signatures on the
fractured surface crust that shout out loud its presence The bulk of
the Earth's composition is governed by fluid dynamics hence the
difference between the even speed gradient of the fractured crust from
Equatorial to polar regions as opposed to the uneven speed gradient of
the viscous composition beneath it,you may not care but the mechanism
for crustal evolution and motion fits neatly with differential
rotation and the largest known geological feature of the 40km
deviation of the planet from a perfect sphere.

A person using Google Earth can see the rotational signatures on the
surface crust and especially the MAR -

http://i66.servimg.com/u/f66/11/66/76/31/a_1410.jpg

My goodness !,how dull and dismal it is when geologists can't even
discuss the possibility of planetary geodynamics and the dynamics of
the surface crust by opting for 'convection cells' which cannot
explain a global feature like the MAR.



* *None of the speed stuff has anything to do with the fact that the
* *earth rotates exactly 360° in 86,164.09+ seconds, the sidereal day.


The "speed stuff" ,as you call it,is at the core of it all for all
facts are affirmed geometrically,geographically and geologically.The
favored mantra of experiment/predictions loved by the empiricists has
Flamsteed's error at its core for Newton tried to apply the calendar
based Ra/Dec convenience to orbital dynamics,trying to shut down the
interpretative qualities which is the pinnacle of all astronomical
investigations and replacing it with speculative modelling -

"It is indeed a matter of great difficulty to discover, and
effectually to distinguish, the true motion of particular bodies from
the apparent; because the parts of that absolute space, in which those
motions are performed, do by no means come under the observation of
our senses. Yet the thing is not altogether desperate; for we have
some arguments to guide us, partly from the apparent motions, which
are the differences of the true motions; partly from the forces, which
are the causes and effects of the true motion." Newton

The empirical approach is to wrap things up in mediocrity or
bureaucracy which negate the natural curiousity of humanity hence it
is a wasted effort to contend with people like yourself who are
comfortable with that condition,what I can do is simply work with the
material such as the terrestrial effects of planetary dynamics in
geological,climatological and other terms with the hope that others
can find themselves excited enough to bring some color back into these
investigations rather than the catastrophizing pronouncements
emanating from your side.


* *Speed had to be referenced to something... you are probably using
* *a "fixed star" as a reference. Oh the horror of it all.. the
* *contradiction that must be going on among the jumble in your head!

Even I was surprised at how simple the proof actually is when using
different latitudinal speeds to explain why twilight varies between
latitudes with the longer twilights experienced away from the
equator,this cause and effect requires known rotational speeds
indicative of a rotating spherical Earth.As dawn breaks here on the
Western shores of Europe,there is always some hope that men can dwell
on the technical details of planetary dynamics long enough to marvel
at the great human heritage which we inherited but have temporarily
distorted for wordplays and exotic speculative ideas that exist only
in the imagination of the the mediocre.

In article uLBNm.138598$5n1.37456@attbi_s21,
Sam Wormley wrote:

oriel36 wrote:
On Nov 20, 5:27 pm, Sam Wormley wrote:

snip

You cannot deny this observable fact, Gerald.

The only observable fact is the shock that people can knowingly ignore
the basic planetary facts found on any world globe which organises
planetary geography/geometry around the daily rotational
characteristics of the Earth. [...]

A telling admission, that the only observations Gerald will accept are
obtained by introspection. His evaluation of a statement is determined
by his emotional reaction: if he finds it "shocking" he'll dismiss it
out of hand, without bothering to investigate its basis or reassess his
comprehension of what's being said.

For me this just tends to confirm my conjecture (which has also been
expressed by many others) that there's no possibility of effective
communication with him.

--
Odysseus

On Nov 21, 2:22*pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
oriel36 wrote:

The "speed stuff" ,as you call it,is at the core of it all for all
facts are affirmed geometrically,geographically and geologically.The
favored mantra of experiment/predictions loved by the empiricists has
Flamsteed's error at its core for Newton tried to apply the calendar
based Ra/Dec convenience to orbital dynamics,trying to shut down the
interpretative qualities which is the pinnacle of all astronomical
investigations and replacing it with speculative modelling -

* *Actually not! The tangential speed of the rotating earth is latitude
* *and radius dependent, whereas the rotation rate of the earth about
* *it axis is directly observable independent of latitude and radius.

* *The earth rotates exactly 360° in 86,164.09+ seconds, the sidereal
* *day, and is directly observable from any location.

It is unconscionable that not a single individual in this forum has
ever affirmed the fact that any given location on the planet rotates
at a rate of 15 degrees per hour and once in 24 hours regardless of
the latitudinal speed indicative of a spherical Earth.

I have never seen so many gloat over an unintelligent condition and
while I commend you for your open honesty there is nothing that can be
said for those who withdrew from these astro forums knowing that one
of great human tragedy exists and summed up in your ideology which
tries to explain planetary dynamics using the rotation of the
constellations around Polaris.

People no longer have time for cheats yet this large scale betrayal is
different,it doesn't come from a pseudo-authority but from people at
what should be a reasonable level of intelligence who are familiar
with the brief outlines of clocks,planetary geography which organizes
the 24 hour day around the rotation characteristics of the Earth and
even allowing for the intricate reasoning which transfer the average
24 hour day to daily rotation as a 'constant' there is nothing really
there that would hinder a thorough comprehension of the meshing of
geocentric timekeeping with planetary dynamics.What can I say,it is as
though a cruel joke is being played out with some perverse
satisfaction involved in attempting to conceal or diminish the
achievements of my astronomical ancestors and if nobody here feels
dismayed for the efforts of those great men,then I certainly do.

The loss of planetary facts is the loss of intelligence and that is
where things stand at the moment,when people shun what is good and
decent for a silly 17th century error they are participants in the
destruction of the future for our civilisation and the kids who rely
on our responsibility to create a stable background,you and your
colleagues work against what is good for mediocre and unintelligent
speculative nonsense.

On Nov 21, 8:37*pm, Odysseus wrote:
In article uLBNm.138598$5n1.37456@attbi_s21,
*Sam Wormley wrote:

oriel36 wrote:
On Nov 20, 5:27 pm, Sam Wormley wrote:

snip

* *You cannot deny this observable fact, Gerald.

The only observable fact is the shock that people can knowingly ignore
the basic planetary facts found on any world globe which organises
planetary geography/geometry around the daily rotational
characteristics of the Earth. [...]

A telling admission, that the only observations Gerald will accept are
obtained by introspection. His evaluation of a statement is determined
by his emotional reaction: if he finds it "shocking" he'll dismiss it
out of hand, without bothering to investigate its basis or reassess his
comprehension of what's being said.


No person who takes the same of astronomer can link the rotation of
the constellations around Polaris directly with the planetary dynamic
of daily rotation -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTTDWhky9HY

Apart from being offensive in the extreme,not just in terms of
planetary dynamics but also the antecedent geocentric timekeeping
astronomies,it does not even represent the lowest rung in the
astronomical ladder as it ignores the basic planetary facts of shape
known to all astronomers since antiquity.

The technical details are clear enough,the level of indoctrination
into 'sidereal time' reasoning is the shocking part for nobody,not one
single individual has ever affirmed that the Earth turns at a rate of
15 degrees per hour but a different nonsensical value and I am called
an absolute madman for promoting the fact that the Earth turns once in
24 hours.What does that make you ?.






For me this just tends to confirm my conjecture (which has also been
expressed by many others) that there's no possibility of effective
communication with him.

--
Odysseus

On Nov 21, 9:12*pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
oriel36 wrote:

No person who takes the same of astronomer can link the rotation of
the constellations around Polaris directly with the planetary dynamic
of daily rotation -

* *Don't be so silly, Gerald. Because of the earth's rotation about its
* *axis, people in the northern hemisphere will certainly see constellations
* *appear to circle the north celestial pole in a counter-clockwise
* *direction hour after hour.

* *I would hope you would go outside right now and directly observe
* *this pattern for at least several hours.


I know the pattern like everyone else here but I see a product of the
calendar unlike those who can no longer reason like men and adopt the
reasoning of one single person (Flamsteed) .Again,no astronomer worthy
of the name can consider the rotation of the constellations around
Polaris as a basis for planetary dynamics.

You made a gracious,if funny,empirical offer before so let me make a
counter offer,I will be in California from the middle of December and
I am available to discuss the links between planetary dynamics and
climate in a way that the Copenhagen summit cannot (incidentally,I
will be passing through that Danish city around that time), not only
that but the planet definition problem,the new explanation for the
seasons and a better explanation which links planetary spherical
deviation with crustal evolution/motion through a common mechanism
based on differential rotation.I may regret the offer but it is a once
off thing for those who already know there is much to do.

Newton and his precepts no longer govern the thinking of men so get
use to it,contemporary dynamicists are going to have to adapt very
quickly to modern imaging and start behaving like real me for a
change.

On Nov 21, 11:47*am, oriel36 wrote:

It is unconscionable that not a single individual in this forum has
ever affirmed the fact that any given location on the planet rotates
at a rate of 15 degrees per hour and once in 24 hours regardless of
the latitudinal speed indicative of a spherical Earth.

OK, this single individual will happily affirm the fact that any given
location on the planet rotates at a rate of 15 degrees per hour and
once in 24 hours... with respect to the sun, of course... with respect
to the fixed stars, well, the result is a tiny bit different, which is
just what we would expect considering that in 24 hours our sun has
traveled a degree or so along its 360-degree orbit, thereby overtaking
those fixed stars by 4 minutes or so. Nothing unintelligent about
this, it is a simple enough observation that anyone can make.

You can now stop repeating this claim over and over and over again, ad
nauseum, it is becoming very tiring...

\Paul

On Nov 21, 5:30*pm, oriel36 wrote:

Newton and his *precepts no longer govern the thinking of men so get
use to it,contemporary dynamicists are going to have to adapt very
quickly to modern imaging and start behaving like real me for a
change.

This statement alone says volumes about your psyche. Volumes and
volumes. You are clearly delusional, and you are clearly all alone in
your thinking.

Newton's calculus and other contributions will be with us forever, and
there is nothing you can do about it, except perhaps do some reading
and learn a thing or 2... but then, you have so far proven to be
absolutely unteachable...

\Paul

On Nov 14, 8:03*pm, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Sat, 14 Nov 2009 10:49:11 -0800 (PST),oriel36

wrote:
The Ra/Dec system is fine as long as you know that it is a calendar
convenience and that no astronomer worthy of the name would consider
the rotation of theconstellationsaround Polaris as a basis for
planetary rotational and orbital dynamics.

I've never met an astronomer (or anybody else) who would remotely
consider the rotation of theconstellationsaround Polaris as "a basis
for planetary rotational and orbital dynamics".

The said rotation is merely an observation, and is a consequence of our
rotation, not a basis for it.
_________________________________________________

Chris LPeterson
Cloudbait Observatoryhttp://www.cloudbait.com

Here you go Collins,get Peterson to explain why only the dumbest could
draw a direct correlation between the rotation of the constellations
around Polaris and daily rotation through 360 degrees for this is
ground zero for the same guys who do the carbon dioxide/global warming
correlation.

This guy wasted my time and won't do it again.

On 22 Nov, 03:08, palsing wrote:
On Nov 21, 5:30*pm, oriel36 wrote:

Newton and his *precepts no longer govern the thinking of men so get
use to it,contemporary dynamicists are going to have to adapt very
quickly to modern imaging and start behaving like real me for a
change.

This statement alone says volumes about your psyche. Volumes and
volumes. You are clearly delusional, and you are clearly all alone in
your thinking.

Newton's calculus and other contributions will be with us forever, and
there is nothing you can do about it, except perhaps do some reading
and learn a thing or 2... but then, you have so far proven to be
absolutely unteachable...

\Paul

I'm quite happy with the standard explanatiions. But you claim to have
the "true" explanation. I'm still waiting for you to explain it!