Problems with Heliocentrism

[Sparko]

Your statement is nonsensical. How can "he Sun-balloon distance overwhelms the Earth-balloon"? What is the "Earth-balloon"? And "only the horizon-balloon line determines the angle at any given time." is not established.

And your conclusion does not follow.

Therefore the objection remains. Helio is invalidated by the change in balloon sun angle of greater than 5 thousands of 1 degree.

JM

huh?? THAT makes no sense.

Hey John. Go outside and face the sun. Now tilt your head back. WOW the angle of the sun moved!!! MAGIC!! How did it DO that??? AMAZING!!! It's like you are controlling the sun or something!! You da MAN, John! YOU da MAN!

[JohnMartin]

derp. You keep proving us right. Your trolling is getting weaker. You can do better than that.

And now a false accusation. Apparently when I don't want or need to follow your demands then you accuse me of avoiding the problem. Not so. I have worked out that you are a lawyer who doesn't deserve wasting my time especially when we have gone over the topic previously.

JM

[Sparko]

And now a false accusation. Apparently when I don't want or need to follow your demands then you accuse me of avoiding the problem. Not so. I have worked out that you are a lawyer who doesn't deserve wasting my time especially when we have gone over the topic previously.

JM

What makes you think I am a lawyer??

[klaus54]

Your claims assume far too much within the NM model and also ignore much contrary evidence in other models. Your claims have no teeth.

JM

Which was a non-response to this:

I'm sorry, but Google doesn't appear to have a Gibberish to English translator.


Gravimeters work perfectly in line with Newton's Law and that creepy "gravity" thingy.

What's the Magick Aether explanation of how gravimeters work so well?

[klaus54]

And now a false accusation. Apparently when I don't want or need to follow your demands then you accuse me of avoiding the problem. Not so. I have worked out that you are a lawyer who doesn't deserve wasting my time especially when we have gone over the topic previously.

JM

What? That your trolling is getting weaker?

[klaus54]

You've avoided the problem. The Helio model remains invalidated.

JM

No, I haven't.

{Roy: Please add "airline scheduling" and "great circles" to the list.}

[klaus54]

I don't know simply because I haven't thought about it. Why do you think a gravimeter works according to NM when NM has unsound principles? To say the gravimeter works according to an unsound model means the gravimeter is also unsound and therefore irrational. Does it not?

JM

Because NM principles ARE sound, one of a plethora of evidence of which is gravimetric surveying.

[klaus54]

Yes in NM gravity is an attractive force.

JM

What is it in MA gravity?

[JohnMartin]

huh?? THAT makes no sense.

Hey John. Go outside and face the sun. Now tilt your head back. WOW the angle of the sun moved!!! MAGIC!! How did it DO that??? AMAZING!!! It's like you are controlling the sun or something!! You da MAN, John! YOU da MAN!

Let the sun = S
Let the earth = E
Let balloon vertical above the ecliptic = BN
Let balloon below the ecliptic = BS

The angle traced out by the BS-S-BN is less than 5 thousandths of 1 degree. When the horizon is seen between S and BN, S and BS, then the horizon must fall within 0.005 degrees of the ecliptic. This means that all views of the sun from the balloon which include the horizon must have an angle of less than 0.0025 degrees. As this angle is very small, there should be no visible difference to the naked eye between the horizon to sun distance in any of the balloon pictures of the sun.

We see in the four pictures of the sun-horizon from the balloons that show great variation in the horizon-sun lengths. This great variation is indicative of a far larger angle than 0.0025 degree. The large variation in sun-horizon lengths indicate a large variation in angle from E-S-BS, E-S-BN, beyond 0.0025 degrees and BN-S-BS beyond the 0.005 degrees. These variations in angles are not expected in the Helio model and therefore both invalidate the Helio model and provide strong evidence for a sun location that is far closer to the earth than 93 million miles.

The balloon pictures invalidate the Helio model.

JM

[JohnMartin]

What makes you think I am a lawyer??

Many of your statements are sophistic.

JM

[JohnMartin]

Which was a non-response to this:



What's the Magick Aether explanation of how gravimeters work so well?

I have already answered this question. The gravimeter discussion is not on the topic of Helio.

JM

[klaus54]

Let the sun = S
Let the earth = E
Let balloon vertical above the ecliptic = BN
Let balloon below the ecliptic = BS

The angle traced out by the BS-S-BN is less than 5 thousandths of 1 degree. When the horizon is seen between S and BN, S and BS, then the horizon must fall within 0.005 degrees of the ecliptic. This means that all views of the sun from the balloon which include the horizon must have an angle of less than 0.0025 degrees. As this angle is very small, there should be no visible difference to the naked eye between the horizon to sun distance in any of the balloon pictures of the sun.

We see in the four pictures of the sun-horizon from the balloons that show great variation in the horizon-sun lengths. This great variation is indicative of a far larger angle than 0.0025 degree. The large variation in sun-horizon lengths indicate a large variation in angle from E-S-BS, E-S-BN, beyond 0.0025 degrees and BN-S-BS beyond the 0.005 degrees. These variations in angles are not expected in the Helio model and therefore both invalidate the Helio model and provide strong evidence for a sun location that is far closer to the earth than 93 million miles.

The balloon pictures invalidate the Helio model.

JM

The balloon is on Earth, thus on the ecliptic plane.

{Roy: Please add "ecliptic plane" to the list.}

[klaus54]

I have already answered this question. The gravimeter discussion is not on the topic of Helio.

JM

No you haven't.

The gravimeter discussion is completely apropos the Helio issue.

[klaus54]

What is it in MA gravity?

Yes in NM gravity is an attractive force.


JM

And your answer is...

[Sparko]

Many of your statements are sophistic.

JM

I am trying to get you to think for yourself and reason out the answers for yourself. Lawyers dont do that. they just want you to answer their questions. I pose a situation or example and ask you to reason out the why behind it. Is that so wrong? dont you want to think for yourself?

or are you upset that my questions expose your trolling for what it is? my counters to your claims are simple and easily understood. I dont resort to math formulas or scientific jargon. I use example like simple geometry to show that a flat eath cant have eclipses, or perspective to show you how the horizon would work on a flat earth, and so on. There is no room for you to troll, so you are forced to just ignore my posts, or make some completely ridiculous answer that nobody believes you yourself believe thus exposing your troll.