Geocentric Vs Heliocentric

Page 7 of 7 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Geocentric Vs Heliocentric

Post by Strangelove on Wed Feb 19, 2014 1:57 am

rodin wrote:One point at a time. 

We do not see light. We see its reflection or its incandescent source. Light has to have a source eg stars, sun, your laptop monitor. Light cannot exist by itself ergo God cannot create light without also creating a source. Unless the laws of Physics do not apply, in which case we might as well say Big Bang.

Yes, the laws of physics do not apply. That's why the first light in Genesis is a supernatural light....

...in which case I might as well say....God. He is the source of the light. As scripture said, the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters, And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

rodin wrote:etc

From the Freemasonry thread

The book in question is Dissipation of the Darkness.

I'm still not familiar with the book. Just familiar with the quote.


rodin wrote:No I would not. The evidence for this comes from other measurements

You said there was a simplistic interpretation of the MMX that leads to the conclusion the Earth rotates around the sun so...

1) Are you now retracting that claim? and...
2) Let's now see substance of your second claim that "the evidence for this comes from other measurements"


rodin wrote:I did

Oh well, I say the universe ain't simple. So there.

_________________
"Gentlemen you cant fight in here, this is the War Room!"

Arrow IMPORTANT THREADS Arrow FORUM STATEMENT OF FAITH Arrow CHRISTIAN WILDERNESS BLOGSPOT

Rev 12:6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.
avatar
Strangelove
Admin
Admin

Posts : 3141
Age : 42
Gender : Male Location : Israel of God
Join date : 2011-01-31

View user profile http://christian-wilderness-blog.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Geocentric Vs Heliocentric

Post by rodin on Wed Feb 19, 2014 8:15 am

Strangelove wrote:Yes, the laws of physics do not apply. That's why the first light in Genesis is a supernaturallight....

...in which case I might as well say....God. He is the source of the light. As scripture said, the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters, And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

Well we might as well say Big Bang, as I said. The only evidence for this creation story comes from an Old Testament whose provenance is IMO very much in doubt. You are aware that NT manuscripts start appearing from 2nd century AD. The much rarer OT manuscripts however came much later until after the Dead Sea Scrolls were found in pots in a cave just one year before the creation of the state of Israel.... I draw your attention to the infinitely (IMHO) more reliable NT, in particular John 8 44.

Einstein, Oppenheimer and most of our modern academic paradigm spring from the cult thus defined. Agreed?

Now the Dead Sea Scrolls contain the supposedly oldest OT manuscripts, pre-dating Christ, and pushing back the oldest date for extant manuscript by 600 years. The DSS bear a remarkable resemblance to the work of the convicted document faker M H Shapira. I suggest to google "Dead Sea Scrolls are just another Hoax".

Analysis of the OT stories reveals influences from Egyptian mythology etc. It seems to me the OT was a prequel to Christ written after the event. Pretty obvious what the motive would have been....

The creation story places the Earth at 6000 years old. I see evidence for a much older Earth, not just from mainstream sources. Have you checked out Expanding Earth theories?


Strangelove wrote:You would need to explain how a simplistic interpretation of MMX would lead to the conclusion that the Earth rotates around the sun?

Astronomical and other observations appear to me to have established that the Earth does indeed rotate about the Sun. However the MMX suggests that Earth is more or less stationary wrt the aether. 

I am considering the possibility that the aether is centred on Earth, at least locally. 

I do find the apparent similarity in size of Earth and Sun as viewed from Earth as being a rather too remarkable coincidence.

Just as it is easy to prove WTC7 was an artificially induced collapse, so it is possible to show that the photon is a fraud. Again google Andrew Ancel Gray's seven reasons to abandon Quantum Mechanics. Let there be light, but what is it?

ps googles are in lieu of being able to post links

rodin

Posts : 22
Join date : 2014-02-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Geocentric Vs Heliocentric

Post by rodin on Wed Feb 19, 2014 1:02 pm

I find geological evidence for an expanded Earth compelling. In order to corroborate this, I looked for evidence of an Earth with similar mass but different diameters. 

I looked at tidal rhythmites and think I found evidence for Lunar months with around 12 to 13 days. This would mean Earth rotating at under half today's value, suggesting 

1) Earth has shrunk not expanded (not what I was looking for)
2) The Earth is NOT stationary

In short my theory is that all celestial bodies form under intense energetic electro gravitational attraction until some sort of pressure density equilibrium is reached. However the energies involved are sufficient to excite atoms into ions ie plasma. Hydrogen plasma is very interesting as it could be simply free protons and electrons, eschewing the need for all that space inside an atom...   i.e. the possibility of a hyperdense energetic core, and it turns out at very high temps and pressure hydrogen is massively soluble in iron.... Cue a billion or so years of black body radiation and the ambient energy of the core drops until.... protons and electrons recombine. In a gas giant this emergent hydrogen is trapped by gravity, not so on Earth.

Now I am suspicious of many standard model paradigms, for example the viability of nuclear bombs or even the ability to convert mass into matter, and some say dinosaurs are an evolutionary hoax. However the hydrogen model allows for Earth to be blown up beyond today's diameter, to a point where giantism might flourish, before eventually deflating to its present size.

Why would a variable sized Earth be denied by mainstream science when the evidence for it is IMO overwhelming? Because then we would know oil is abiogenic not from fossils, and to all intents and purposes unlimited in supply.

rodin

Posts : 22
Join date : 2014-02-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Geocentric Vs Heliocentric

Post by rodin on Wed Feb 19, 2014 1:07 pm

...mass into energy I mean of course

rodin

Posts : 22
Join date : 2014-02-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Geocentric Vs Heliocentric

Post by Strangelove on Thu Feb 20, 2014 3:10 am

rodin wrote:Well we might as well say Big Bang, as I said.

You are entitled to your metaphysics. Except the BB theory has been scientifically falsified by Cosmic Microwave Background maps that destroy the Copernican Principle and everything that goes with it, including BB.

The rest of your comments have no relation to the topic.

rodin wrote:Astronomical and other observations appear to me to have established that the Earth does indeed rotate about the Sun.

Bring forth these observation please. And do you mean revolve around the sun?

rodin wrote:However the MMX suggests that Earth is more or less stationary wrt the aether. I am considering the possibility that the aether is centred on Earth, at least locally.

So your theory is that the aether is carried along with the Earth while the Earth orbits the sun? Unfortunately that doesn't work because the MMX was not actually a "null" result. There were fringe shifts, just no way near the shifts required if the Earth is revolving around the sun. Also, the Michelson-Gale, Sagnac, and Dayton Miller experiments established positive aether drag. That's why no scientists went with your theory at the time of MMX, instead they opted for Einsteins Special Relativity which eliminated the aether altogether.

Have you considered the possibility that the Earth is stationary? That's the easiest explanation for MMX.

rodin wrote:I do find the apparent similarity in size of Earth and Sun as viewed from Earth as being a rather too remarkable coincidence.

Relevance?

_________________
"Gentlemen you cant fight in here, this is the War Room!"

Arrow IMPORTANT THREADS Arrow FORUM STATEMENT OF FAITH Arrow CHRISTIAN WILDERNESS BLOGSPOT

Rev 12:6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.
avatar
Strangelove
Admin
Admin

Posts : 3141
Age : 42
Gender : Male Location : Israel of God
Join date : 2011-01-31

View user profile http://christian-wilderness-blog.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Geocentric Vs Heliocentric

Post by rodin on Thu Feb 20, 2014 6:08 am

Strangelove wrote:You are entitled to your metaphysics. Except the BB theory has been scientifically falsified by Cosmic Microwave Background maps that destroy the Copernican Principle and everything that goes with it, including BB.

Both BB and OT creation require suspension of laws of physics. You are prepared to accept this wrt to OT. Right there the scientific method goes out of the window.


Strangelove wrote:The rest of your comments have no relation to the topic.

Ah but they do. 

Firstly they point to over arching deception a la John 8 44 which I suggest encompasses Einstein and the removal of the aether from the standard model. The latter (again IMO) in order to facilitate the displacement of the spiritual with abject materialism. Absent spiritual defence people are open to Satanic attack. 

Secondly my tidal rhythmites research showed to me that Earth has had different diameters in the past, with correspondingly different day lengths. Since there seems to be a great deal of difficulty in establishing what is moving where in the universe due to frame of reference issues (now conflated with clocks slowing down via Einstein) the TR observations offer a way to determine once and for all whether geocentrism can remain a viable option even in theory. If I am correct, and we have an Earth whose diameter changed with a corresponding change in the rotation period of the Heavens, then this would confirm that the Earth does indeed rotate, for how could a change in local Earth diameter affect the heavens?

Thirdly if the OT is a fake, as I provide evidence to suggest is the case, so is your creation story.

You may wonder why I want to correct what I see as deceptions foisted on Christianity. To help answer this question, count the number of people currently viewing this forum... Consider that all the Churches bar one in the area where I grew up have closed. 

The current paradigm has spirituality in conflict with science. I intend to at least point towards a reconciliation of the two, not based on belief but on truth.


Strangelove wrote:So your theory is that the aether is carried along with the Earth while the Earth orbits the sun? Unfortunately that doesn't work because the MMX was not actually a "null" result. There were fringe shifts, just no way near the shifts required if the Earth is revolving around the sun. Also, the Michelson-Gale, Sagnac, and Dayton Miller experiments established positive aether drag. That's why no scientists went with your theory at the time of MMX, instead they opted for Einsteins Special Relativity which eliminated the aether altogether.

Have you considered the possibility that the Earth is stationary? That's the easiest explanation for MMX.

The slight discrepancies from null can apply equally to an entrained aether or stationary Earth surely? All frames are relative after all...  I agree Sagnac points to aether BTW.


Strangelove wrote:Relevance?

Circumstantial evidence for intelligent design

oh and ps


Strangelove wrote:And do you mean revolve around the sun?

Was that cheap point scoring or a genuine attempt to improve my proof reading, bud?

rodin

Posts : 22
Join date : 2014-02-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Geocentric Vs Heliocentric

Post by Strangelove on Thu Feb 20, 2014 3:28 pm

rodin wrote:Both BB and OT creation require suspension of laws of physics. You are prepared to accept this wrt to OT. Right there the scientific method goes out of the window.

The CMB map shows that the BB scenario cannot have happened.

It does not show that the OT creation scenario could not have happened.

The scientific method is thus in favor of OT creation over BB theory.

rodin wrote:
Ah but they do.

Not interested, sorry, not in this thread anyway. If you wanna open a thread on your "tidal rhythmites research" then go ahead.

rodin wrote:
The slight discrepancies from null can apply equally to an entrained aether or stationary Earth surely?

No the positive aether drag cannot apply to an entrained aether, it's a "hypothesis inconsistent with well established experimental data". It doesn't work. Read the abstract of the paper here:

http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1204/1204.1885.pdf

The only way out is Special Relativity.

The obvious conclusion is that the Earth doesn't orbit the sun. And no, astronomical and other observations have not established that the Earth moves. A claim you still have not fleshed out.

rodin wrote:Was that cheap point scoring or a genuine attempt to improve my proof reading, bud?

Uhm....cheap point scoring.  Razz

_________________
"Gentlemen you cant fight in here, this is the War Room!"

Arrow IMPORTANT THREADS Arrow FORUM STATEMENT OF FAITH Arrow CHRISTIAN WILDERNESS BLOGSPOT

Rev 12:6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.
avatar
Strangelove
Admin
Admin

Posts : 3141
Age : 42
Gender : Male Location : Israel of God
Join date : 2011-01-31

View user profile http://christian-wilderness-blog.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Geocentric Vs Heliocentric

Post by rodin on Thu Feb 20, 2014 4:49 pm

Well more than the CMB weighs in against Big Bang. There are the binary systems with massively divergent redshifts that expose the cosmological red shift fraud.

If I can show that the Heavens passed Earth at very different speeds (factor of 2) in the past due to Earth Density/Diameter variation would that be enough to disabuse you of the stationary Earth notion?


Are you prepared to consider that the Old Testament is not what it pretends to be, or would no amount of evidence shake your faith that it is the true Word of God?


In short, are you a truth seeker, or a believer?

rodin

Posts : 22
Join date : 2014-02-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Geocentric Vs Heliocentric

Post by rodin on Thu Feb 20, 2014 4:52 pm

Is the Aether Entrained by the Motion of Celestial Bodies? 
 What do the Experiments Tell Us?
 
 Joseph Levy 

Well right there are two red flags. The other one is

Is the Aether Entrained by the Motion of Celestial Bodies? 


If Earth really is special, then the Aether might well have Earth at its true origin.

rodin

Posts : 22
Join date : 2014-02-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Geocentric Vs Heliocentric

Post by Strangelove on Thu Feb 20, 2014 5:13 pm

rodin wrote:Well more than the CMB weighs in against Big Bang. There are the binary systems with massively divergent redshifts that expose the cosmological red shift fraud.

Exactly so we might NOT as well say BB. But you said...

rodin wrote:Well we might as well say Big Bang, as I said.

Self contradiction.

rodin wrote:If I can show that the Heavens passed Earth at very different speeds (factor of 2) in the past due to Earth Density/Diameter variation would that be enough to disabuse you of the stationary Earth notion?

No, you would need to show that the aether speed has a gradient in relation to altitude in the present day (which isn't found and is why entrained aether is refuted) and stop messing around with silly talk of "Density/Diameter variations"...who do you think you are trying to kid? Is this a big wind up?

rodin wrote:Are you prepared to consider that the Old Testament is not what it pretends to be, or would no amount of evidence shake your faith that it is the true Word of God?

Open a thread on that if you wish. I'm prepared to consider any logical arguments.

_________________
"Gentlemen you cant fight in here, this is the War Room!"

Arrow IMPORTANT THREADS Arrow FORUM STATEMENT OF FAITH Arrow CHRISTIAN WILDERNESS BLOGSPOT

Rev 12:6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.
avatar
Strangelove
Admin
Admin

Posts : 3141
Age : 42
Gender : Male Location : Israel of God
Join date : 2011-01-31

View user profile http://christian-wilderness-blog.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Geocentric Vs Heliocentric

Post by Strangelove on Thu Feb 20, 2014 5:14 pm

rodin wrote:
Is the Aether Entrained by the Motion of Celestial Bodies? 
 What do the Experiments Tell Us?
 
 Joseph Levy 

Well right there are two red flags. The other one is

Is the Aether Entrained by the Motion of Celestial Bodies? 


If Earth really is special, then the Aether might well have Earth at its true origin.

The aethers true origin is God. He created the firmament in the midst of the waters.

_________________
"Gentlemen you cant fight in here, this is the War Room!"

Arrow IMPORTANT THREADS Arrow FORUM STATEMENT OF FAITH Arrow CHRISTIAN WILDERNESS BLOGSPOT

Rev 12:6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.
avatar
Strangelove
Admin
Admin

Posts : 3141
Age : 42
Gender : Male Location : Israel of God
Join date : 2011-01-31

View user profile http://christian-wilderness-blog.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Geocentric Vs Heliocentric

Post by rodin on Thu Feb 20, 2014 8:40 pm

Strangelove wrote:No, you would need to show that the aether speed has a gradient in relation to altitude in the present day (which isn't found and is why entrained aether is refuted) and stop messing around with silly talk of "Density/Diameter variations"...who do you think you are trying to kid? Is this a big wind up?



This is not a wind up. IF I can prove that Earth Day varies (inversely of course) with Earth diameter, why do I have to bother with aether speed gradients at all? What possible aether mechanism could connect Earth diameter with heavenly bodies being pushed around in a cosmological aether current?


It seems from Levy and a few other things I have quickly scanned that aether drift is allegedly seen in gas at atmospheric pressure, in flowing water, but not in vacuum. Is this correct? Because if so the first thing I would be looking at is the effect of motion and/or Earth magnetic field on the medium. Light being electromagnetic and all that.


Have you looked up Andrew Ancel Gray's elegant debunking of the photon? It would be worth your while, since he also unravels the apparent magical mysteries of the single electron or in fact single anything double slit experiment.


Until after the weekend I will be mostly preoccupied with producing the music of the spheres. Mainly using Cubase. 

rodin

Posts : 22
Join date : 2014-02-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Geocentric Vs Heliocentric

Post by Strangelove on Sun Feb 23, 2014 5:07 am

Does the following website sum up your current thinking on Earths supposed changing diameter?

http://www.expanding-earth.org/

Which theory in this wiki article do you subscribe to?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expanding_Earth

All of these sound like atheist attempts to explain changes to the Earth without the obvious biblical flood factor.


Last edited by Strangelove on Sun Feb 23, 2014 5:17 am; edited 1 time in total

_________________
"Gentlemen you cant fight in here, this is the War Room!"

Arrow IMPORTANT THREADS Arrow FORUM STATEMENT OF FAITH Arrow CHRISTIAN WILDERNESS BLOGSPOT

Rev 12:6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.
avatar
Strangelove
Admin
Admin

Posts : 3141
Age : 42
Gender : Male Location : Israel of God
Join date : 2011-01-31

View user profile http://christian-wilderness-blog.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Geocentric Vs Heliocentric

Post by Strangelove on Sun Feb 23, 2014 5:11 am

Even if you did somehow convince me that one possible interpretation of MMX is a moving Earth in entrained ether (combined with an Earth that slowly changes diameter?) we still have the other, obvious interpretation....

....that the Earth is stationary.

_________________
"Gentlemen you cant fight in here, this is the War Room!"

Arrow IMPORTANT THREADS Arrow FORUM STATEMENT OF FAITH Arrow CHRISTIAN WILDERNESS BLOGSPOT

Rev 12:6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.
avatar
Strangelove
Admin
Admin

Posts : 3141
Age : 42
Gender : Male Location : Israel of God
Join date : 2011-01-31

View user profile http://christian-wilderness-blog.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Geocentric Vs Heliocentric

Post by rodin on Sun Feb 23, 2014 11:01 pm

I am all for a saviour that turns water into wine...

ps you missed an apostrophe two posts back tch tch

Maxlow and Neal Adams have the best video presentations of expanding Earth. Neither consider the possibility of Earth having expanded beyond its present diameter before falling back.

Still you do not address the question properly. IF Earth changes day length with diameter, that's it for an aether wind blowing the stars about, isn't it? I think I can PROVE this but unless you concede the outcome the large amount of effort on my part will be wasted, and I have 8 albums to complete...

plus you have not looked at Andrew Ancel Gray's "7 Reasons to Abandon Quantum Mechanics" etc. No one has ever given you better advice....

rodin

Posts : 22
Join date : 2014-02-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Geocentric Vs Heliocentric

Post by Strangelove on Sun Feb 23, 2014 11:30 pm

rodin wrote:Still you do not address the question properly. IF Earth changes day length with diameter, that's it for an aether wind blowing the stars about, isn't it?

Is it? Why? The aether wind doesn't "blow the stars about". The stars are "set" in the aether.

Anyway. All these expanded Earth theories are based on 2 assumptions.

Millions of years.
Continental drift.

2 assumptions I wholly reject on grounds of lack of scientific support.

_________________
"Gentlemen you cant fight in here, this is the War Room!"

Arrow IMPORTANT THREADS Arrow FORUM STATEMENT OF FAITH Arrow CHRISTIAN WILDERNESS BLOGSPOT

Rev 12:6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.
avatar
Strangelove
Admin
Admin

Posts : 3141
Age : 42
Gender : Male Location : Israel of God
Join date : 2011-01-31

View user profile http://christian-wilderness-blog.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Geocentric Vs Heliocentric

Post by rodin on Fri Mar 07, 2014 6:03 pm

In the image below count the number of lines between dark bands. There should be 26 or 27 if the Earth was rotating at a 24 hour day (or if, as you would have it, the Aether and all who sail in her was counter rotating with the same periodicity. Corresponding to 2 tides per day. Now my lying eyes see about half that. This sediment is supposed to be a couple 100 thou years old. That corresponds with dinosaurs roaming the Earth, massive ferns etc, all lifeforms suited to a lower gravity, more gentle planet. Regarding continental drift, fugget it. That is bull. But check out Maxlove and Neal Adams videos on the subjewct. Also, please look up 7 reasons to abandon quantum mechanics by Andrew Ancel Gray, first page of standard model debunking.


rodin

Posts : 22
Join date : 2014-02-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Geocentric Vs Heliocentric

Post by Strangelove on Mon Mar 10, 2014 12:55 am

Again, trying to make sediment bands correspond to uniform "2 tides per day" and saying "hey!...it doesn't work! therefore...such and such.." is pointless as this presupposition doesn't take into account any catastrophic events like those described in the bible..specifically...the flood of Genesis.

_________________
"Gentlemen you cant fight in here, this is the War Room!"

Arrow IMPORTANT THREADS Arrow FORUM STATEMENT OF FAITH Arrow CHRISTIAN WILDERNESS BLOGSPOT

Rev 12:6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.
avatar
Strangelove
Admin
Admin

Posts : 3141
Age : 42
Gender : Male Location : Israel of God
Join date : 2011-01-31

View user profile http://christian-wilderness-blog.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Geocentric Vs Heliocentric

Post by zone on Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:04 pm

rodin wrote:IF Earth changes day length with diameter, that's it for an aether wind blowing the stars about, isn't it? I think I can PROVE this but unless you concede the outcome the large amount of effort on my part will be wasted, and I have 8 albums to complete..

you can't prove it....LOL. ya don't even know what the subject is.
but, giving you the benefit of the doubt.....surely you've posted your efforts elsewhere. just cut & paste it all here. presto. no time wasted.

 Arrow

8 albums to complete?
do tell.
avatar
zone
Mod
Mod

Posts : 3653
Gender : Female Location : In Christ
Join date : 2011-01-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Geocentric Vs Heliocentric

Post by zone on Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:10 pm

rodin wrote:In the image below count the number of lines between dark bands. There should be 26 or 27 if the Earth was rotating at a 24 hour day (or if, as you would have it, the Aether and all who sail in her was counter rotating with the same periodicity. Corresponding to 2 tides per day. Now my lying eyes see about half that. This sediment is supposed to be a couple 100 thou years old. That corresponds with dinosaurs roaming the Earth, massive ferns etc, all lifeforms suited to a lower gravity, more gentle planet. Regarding continental drift, fugget it. That is bull. But check out Maxlove and Neal Adams videos on the subjewct. Also, please look up 7 reasons to abandon quantum mechanics by Andrew Ancel Gray, first page of standard model debunking.



only prob wit dat is there are 4 tides per day - 2 high and 2 low.
do you know what that means (re: your lying eyes)?
why would 4 per day look to you from your image (LOL) like ONE? (or, as you put it - half)
it's a simple answer.
avatar
zone
Mod
Mod

Posts : 3653
Gender : Female Location : In Christ
Join date : 2011-01-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Geocentric Vs Heliocentric

Post by rodin on Fri Mar 14, 2014 10:14 pm

Strangelove wrote:Again, trying to make sediment bands correspond to uniform "2 tides per day" and saying "hey!...it doesn't work! therefore...such and such.." is pointless as this presupposition doesn't take into account any catastrophic events like those described in the bible..specifically...the flood of Genesis.
lol

like the flood affected the tides. Fugget it, I thought you had an open mind and mebbe a truth seeker rather than a view justifier. Sellers was a 4x2

rodin

Posts : 22
Join date : 2014-02-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Geocentric Vs Heliocentric

Post by rodin on Fri Mar 14, 2014 10:16 pm

zone wrote:

you can't prove it....LOL. ya don't even know what the subject is.
but, giving you the benefit of the doubt.....surely you've posted your efforts elsewhere. just cut & paste it all here. presto. no time wasted.

 Arrow

8 albums to complete?
do tell.
I decided 8 was too much so I will limit to 7 and ep

rodin

Posts : 22
Join date : 2014-02-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Geocentric Vs Heliocentric

Post by rodin on Fri Mar 14, 2014 10:17 pm

zone wrote:


only prob wit dat is there are 4 tides per day - 2 high and 2 low.
do you know what that means (re: your lying eyes)?
why would 4 per day look to you from your image (LOL) like ONE? (or, as you put it - half)
it's a simple answer.
Short answer 

You don't know what you are talking about. The sediment bands are per high tide. Google it

rodin

Posts : 22
Join date : 2014-02-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Geocentric Vs Heliocentric

Post by Strangelove on Sat Mar 15, 2014 3:48 pm

rodin wrote:lol

like the flood affected the tides. Fugget it, I thought you had an open mind and mebbe a truth seeker rather than a view justifier. Sellers was a 4x2

Yes, a global flood would effect the tides and therefore sediment build up. Why wouldn't it?

The flood caused wildly variable water movements, this is just common sense...not a justification of any views.

_________________
"Gentlemen you cant fight in here, this is the War Room!"

Arrow IMPORTANT THREADS Arrow FORUM STATEMENT OF FAITH Arrow CHRISTIAN WILDERNESS BLOGSPOT

Rev 12:6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.
avatar
Strangelove
Admin
Admin

Posts : 3141
Age : 42
Gender : Male Location : Israel of God
Join date : 2011-01-31

View user profile http://christian-wilderness-blog.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Geocentric Vs Heliocentric

Post by zone on Sun Mar 16, 2014 10:31 am

rodin wrote:Short answer 

You don't know what you are talking about. The sediment bands are per high tide. Google it

and you don't know much about ecology in upper, middle and lower vertical intertidal zones.
'member those 4 tides? or do the laws of nature just stop in your world?

what do you think sediment (silt and rough) does during your missing 3 tides...and where it ends up as a result of movement in rocky tidal zones?

your big hairy high tide issue is just a marker buddy. 
just a little 'ole line that shows where the last deposit of all (4) tidal sediment (s) ended up.


you don't live on a coastline do ya..... lol!
avatar
zone
Mod
Mod

Posts : 3653
Gender : Female Location : In Christ
Join date : 2011-01-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Geocentric Vs Heliocentric

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 7 of 7 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum