Sharing the solar eclipse...

[Sam Wormley]

Sharing the solar eclipse...
I set up binoculars with solar filters on Sky Window® (Binocular
Mount). For about 45 minutes I was able to share the eclipse with
about 20 kids, adults (and grandparents). It was fun to watch the
moon cover a big sunspot early on.

-Sam (Ames, IA)

[lal_truckee]

On 5/21/12 10:03 AM, Sam Wormley wrote:
> For about 45 minutes I was able to share the eclipse with
> about 20 kids, adults (and grandparents).

Almost nobody around where we were and the two cars that did come came
prepared specifically for the eclipse, so didn't get the opportunity to
share. Too bad - it's exciting to relive old astronomical friends
through others' virgin eyes.

[jwarner1]

I used Show Down® and John Puts® set on Earth® and pointed toward the
South west®. Tne acquired the view with
Lens® and paper®, to get the view®, Decoded®.

[jwarner1]

oh btw: Iowa is FOR SALE - call Sam.

[jwarner1]

Hi Sam®. All we did was get a lens® and paper® and mounted it to
Earth®, to get our view®.
We did even get permission® from you® or those Other Guys®. We had a
nice view®. Used a
comera®, and lots of hpplah®. Wanna fight! ®
Will Iowans® have to have permission® and a permit® to do astronomy® in
Iowa®, soon® ?

[oriel36]

Did you explain to those present that we see a phase of the moon that
normally is not seen as the half that faces the Sun is in total
light ?.It is one of the oldest interpretations in all astronomy that
the moon disappears behind the glare of the Sun for a number of days -

http://www.knowth.com/stooke/knowth4.gif

That was from 5200 years ago in an area full of Equinox and Solstice
alignments and the moon orbiting the Earth is the single observation
that we share with our ancestors from remote antiquity .That we will
see the planet phase of Venus in less than 2 weeks as complimentary to
this one is no less remarkable and the last time humans alive will see
this phase in their lifetime.

What must it take to believe the moon rotates after witnessing a
spectacle where the half that constantly faces us remains in complete
darkness during that eclipse and all these people here who took the
time to drive out and witness it cannot feel proud of themselves that
they could manage to promote a spinning moon as it would be a disgrace
on our era in contrast to what our ancestors believed and
promoted ,again,this is where there is a level astronomical playing
field as the moon orbits the Earth.You cannot be a reasonable human
being much less an astronomer,and I don't care if you get paid for
it ,if you insist the moon spins.

[palsing]

On Thursday, May 24, 2012 10:03:35 AM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:

> Did you explain to those present that we see a phase of the moon that
> normally is not seen as the half that faces the Sun is in total
> light ?.It is one of the oldest interpretations in all astronomy that

> the moon disappears behind the glare of the Sun for a number of days...

Or more correctly, disappears every lunar month in the glare in front of the Sun...

> What must it take to believe the moon rotates after witnessing a
> spectacle where the half that constantly faces us remains in complete

> darkness during that eclipse...

... and about 2 weeks later that same half that constantly faces us is 100% illuminated. What could we possibly conclude about an object that presents first one hemisphere to the Sun and then the other, over and over again? Hmmmm? Maybe we could conclude that, with respect to the Sun, it rotates! What other possible explanation could there be?

http://tinyurl.com/bqjfjj9

[oriel36]

Bad people with minds that are rotten to the core.

A person who imagines the moon rotates along from its lunar orbital
circuit is not close to insanity,they are insane and this mockery of
astronomy cannot be countered directly with guys like this unfortunate
Palsing who are descended into supporting obscenity but by people
raising the standards of astronomy to a stable narrative.

With each lunar pass between the Earth and Sun roughly every two
weeks,a photograph of the Earth will show that the Polar coordinates
will have turned to the central Sun hence the orbital behavior of the
Earth around the Sun is completely different to the moon's orbital
behavior around the Earth,it is not a theory or an assertion but a
100% certainty.

Why would people who drives 80 miles or further to witness an eclipse
not understand the importance of the Earth's orbital behavior as
though they truly go out of their way to ignore something
good,interesting and productive or why would anyone in their right
mind conclude that they can see all sides of the moon as it orbits the
Earth as that would be what a single lunar rotation would look like ?.

[palsing]

On Thursday, May 24, 2012 1:43:11 PM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:

> ... why would anyone in their right

> mind conclude that they can see all sides of the moon as it orbits the
> Earth as that would be what a single lunar rotation would look like ?.

I don't believe that anyone ever claimed to see all sides of the moon from the surface of the Earth. Where did you get this idea? What IS claimed is that, WITH RESPECT TO THE SUN, the moon rotates. That same fellow on the Sun who sees no planetary retrogrades would also see the moon rotate from his locale, which isn't the case from our house.

http://tinyurl.com/bo7ladw

[Androcles]

"palsing" <pnal...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:f039902b-9a81-46c3...@googlegroups.com...

Isn't it time you ignored the autistic Kelleher?
http://tinyurl.com/378jnep
I know you mean well but clearly he has the mathematical age
of a child with the vocabulary of an adult.

[palsing]

On Thursday, May 24, 2012 3:41:06 PM UTC-7, Androcles wrote:
> "palsing"

You are right, I do mean well, and most of the time I succeed in ignoring his rants... but every once in a while I cave in to the urge.

I suppose it is that 'vocabulary of an adult' that gets me going, especially since the subject matter is drop-dead easy to understand.

I don't think that I have never encountered such an unteachable creature before...

[Androcles]

"palsing" <pnal...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:4c433987-7281-474b...@googlegroups.com...

He can't help it, he has Asperger syndrome.

"Asperger syndrome is a form of autism. People with Asperger syndrome are
often of average or above average intelligence. They have fewer problems
with speech but may still have difficulties with understanding and
processing language."
Unfortunately he is arrogant and quite prepared to denigrate Newton and
Flamsteed for what he does not understand himself. I gave up trying to
explain sidereal time to him 10 years ago, he's never going to understand a
telescope's clock drive.

[Chris L Peterson]

On Fri, 25 May 2012 06:12:41 +0100, "Androcles" <M...@May.2012> wrote:

>He can't help it, he has Asperger syndrome.

I've met him, and he doesn't come across with any symptoms of
Asperger's or other autism-like disorders.

He's just got very weird ideas. If he's got any mental problem, I'd
say it's more along the lines of schizophrenia.

[oriel36]

On May 25, 6:22 am, Chris L Peterson <c...@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote:
> On Fri, 25 May 2012 06:12:41 +0100, "Androcles" <M...@May.2012> wrote:
> >He can't help it, he has Asperger syndrome.
>
> I've met him, and he doesn't come across with any symptoms of
> Asperger's or other autism-like disorders.
>

I actually went out of my way to meet you,even offered to take you to
Newgrange and Knowth which was less than an hour's drive and you know
right well with my physique that none of you wold say these things to
my face but this is all besides the point,people who interpret a
spinning moon aside from its orbital circuit can interpret me any way
they like for all I care and the reason is simple -

"Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds
discuss people." E Roosevelt

> He's just got very weird ideas. If he's got any mental problem, I'd
> say it's more along the lines of schizophrenia.

I regret calling people insane in the case of the spinning moon
ideology but normally something like this is unimaginable in any era
and at such an interpretative level.If the moon turned twice as it
made a circuit of the Earth we would see all its sides twice,if it
turned 1/2 rotation for each lunar circuit we would see all sides
after two lunar circuits .The conclusion based on the observation
that we continuously see the same face of the moon as it makes a
circuit of the Earth is therefore taken out of our hands.

Weird ideas indeed !,creating an imbalance between days and planetary
rotations in order to suit late 17th century modeling creates a strain
on the mind that should not be there - there is no reason that anyone
should doubt that the experiences within a 24 hour day is anything
more or less than one rotation of the Earth and that continuity is
maintained day after day without cause and effect falling out of sync.

I have taken over a dozen years of every known insult people can throw
at me,including the obscene, but I will let you into a secret - anyone
who loves the flow of information between astronomy and terrestrial
effects is too busy to care what the world thinks of
them.Mathematicians may have got the wider population to believe that
the talented exist on a level that is intellectually superior to
normal discourse,and to some extent this is true,but it sometimes
happens that the talented fall in-between two stools in being rejected
by the community in which they make their accomplishments while never
really fitting into the wider community either.The normal for those of
talent is abnormal for everyone else and the world reacts in a cruel
way to those who are different yet I already know there are people who
can distinguish what is the new 'normal' from what is trivia or self-
seeking junk.

One thing in you favor Peterson that nobody can take away from you -
you have sheer conviction and that can move mountains, get the moon to
spin or even get the Earth to turn less than 24 hours.This may be fine
for you but the flow of information between the dynamics in the
celestial arena and planetary effects ceases and with equal
conviction,I present the reasons for returning to a stable narrative.

[oriel36]

On May 25, 6:12 am, "Androcles" <M...@May.2012> wrote:
> "palsing" <pnals...@gmail.com> wrote in message

All a person has to do is step back and watch a telescope track any
celestial object and they will see the telescope pivot on its mount
thereby creating a homocentric axis which they misinterpret as daily
rotation - it is not rocket science and about as removed from the AM/
PM system tied to the Lat/Long system as a person can get.

There is a growing danger that the wider population is seeing the
effects of astronomical atrophy as their natural interpretative
faculties are being suffocated with meaningless junk that is detached
from the visible Universe - students are being cut off from using a
part of their mind that raises them above the normal experiences of
time and space at a level beyond their daily experience.It is one of
the most notable features of the vicious strain of empiricism
inherited from Newton that history is flexible and technical premises
are variable unlike the older form of empiricism which is a very human
and enjoyable approach which can be understood clearly in a letter
written 20 years before Isaac went on a solo run with astronomy and
became a symbol for his followers for behaving in such a poor way -

http://rstl.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/1/1-22/263.full.pdf+html

[palsing]

On Thursday, May 24, 2012 11:58:01 PM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:
> On May 25, 6:12 am, "Androcles" <M...@May.2012> wrote:
> > "palsing"

Benjamin Franklin said that "Energy and persistence conquer all things"... but in your case, I think he might have made an exception.

Your dog just won't hunt.

[Androcles]

"palsing" <pnal...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:3ef1c121-d429-4f7a...@googlegroups.com...

==================================================
Kelleher refuses to step back and watch. Heck, the phases of the
Moon are evidence enough of it's rotation, yet here he is arguing
against it. He's a sandwich and a can of soda short of a picnic.

[oriel36]

Did your Catholic family not teach you that love conquers all things.

I have already seen them try to insert rotational dynamics into plate
tectonics and that is my work they are mishandling as it is derived
from astronomy and the behavior of exposed viscous compositions.If
they wanted it so badly,they should not have behaved like petty
thieves and just worked through the details between an even rotational
gradient of the crust between equatorial polar latitudes and the
uneven rotational gradient of the fluid interior.

People who love the flow between the astronomical cycles and
terrestrial effects are impelled to promote them,that is our nature
and while magnifying things is a magnificent addition to astronomy,it
is just one in a series of advancements that have been going on since
antiquity.This singular hatred of astronomy with such ridiculous
things as a spinning moon aside from its monthly orbital circuit is a
mockery of yourselves for as long as astronomers exist and have
existed,they have looked out at the moon as it makes its circuit of
the Earth as we see it.

Whatever advantage is gained by not keeping the rotating Earth in step
with the 24 hour day,and your right ascension leads to an unsightly
imbalance,it is you and your colleagues who are out of sync with
astronomy and I have watched you descend into obscenity and smallness
rather than adopt the proper principles we inherited ,not you and a
minor bunch of mathematicians chanting voodoo but we as in the people
who are alive today.

So,if the moon turned a half a rotation for each lunar circuit,we
would see every side of the moon after two circuits,if the moon turned
twice in one lunar circuit we would see it twice for each lunar
circuit so everyone can make the conclusion from that hypothesis.The
moon doesn't spin and as long as such an mindnumbingly stupid
conclusion is in circulation,nobody dares consider themselves an
astronomer.

[Mike Collins]

And if the moon turned once each lunar circuit you would see exactly what
we see now.
Your own logic has shown you to be wrong and the rest to be right.

[oriel36]

On May 25, 10:08 pm, Mike Collins <acridiniumes...@gmail.com> wrote:

If the moon turned once in its lunar circuit,we would all sides once
as an extended conclusion.In the end you are all responsible to your
families if not the younger generation and if you all can live with a
spinning moon then there is little to talk about other than a visit to
the local optician - gossip ,in other words.

The Earth does turn once to the Sun aside from daily rotation,a
remarkable event that is spectacular at the Northern latitudes
presently as the cycle approaches orbital noon in less than a month
whereas the Southern polar coordinate,acting like an orbital beacon,
approaches orbital midnight as the polar coordinates turn their
maximum distance to the circle of illumination.In most other spheres
of human endeavor there is a little joy when something new shows up
whereas here there is nothing,not the slightest sign that the mind
ignites with interest and possibilities.

You want a spinning moon and it comes at a huge price for you and
everyone else .

[Mike Collins]

Just use logic. Examine your views critically. You just keep digging
yourself into a deeper hole. Admit you're wrong!
Have the courage to face up to your former folly.

[oriel36]

If a person cannot adapt to proper perspectives ,they enter an
interpretative and intellectual 'doldrums' state where,in the words of
those who have known them briefly,"nothing ever happens and nothing
ever changes" .

Like a great pendulum that swings ,our technological advancement and
the creation of tools has reached to its highest limit and now the
swing back is towards interpretation and proper use of these tools and
that is why most of what I express looks initially unusual to those
who have not yet discovered the new astronomical playing field.All
creative talent ,in any endeavor,must experience a feeling of such
magnitude that it carries the innovator through external and internal
conflicts where the person is forced to return and pick up terms such
as discipline and responsibility in order to move forward once more
whereas most who approach astronomy never test the assertions they
inherited from previous generations and a 'spinning moon' is one such
assertion.

People need something to look at astronomically and cannot survive on
people chanting empirical voodoo at them nor an occasional event like
an eclipse or transit,there is always so much going on in the
celestial arena that is presently shut off by people relying on a
rotating celestial sphere which is Ra/Dec observing and while there
are a minority of people who can live at this level,even accept really
dumb ideas on its account,there is no flow of information between
celestial cycles and their dynamics with terrestrial effects up to an
including the experiences within a 24 hour cycle.

Unlike those who make headache inducing comments about me,I commend
people here for sticking to their principles and coming here to the
forum and not allowing it to fall into stagnation and a fate that has
happened to other forums.

[Mike Collins]

You're describing yourself again. You do need a the proper perspective
which you will get by understanding and using the correct frame of
reference. In the case of the Moon's rotation you should use the
heliocentric for the Moon' solar day or the cosmic for the Moon's sidereal
day.

[oriel36]

How great the spectacle where a planet that normally shines with the
reflective light of the Sun as we look out at it becomes temporarily
black like an eclipse for essentially transits and eclipses share the
common feature that they move between the Earth and the Sun,in the
case of the moon it orbits the Earth while Venus moves in a faster
circuit around the Sun -

http://www.masil-astro-imaging.com/SWI/UV%20montage%20flat.jpg

There is no reason why any reasonable person would conclude that the
moon spins as it orbits the Earth unless they had a hatred of what
phases represent in terms of orbital cycles and that goes for
planetary phases as well as the moon -

"Salv -.But the telescope plainly shows us its horns to be as bounded
and distinct as those of the moon, and they are seen to belong to a
very large circle, in a ratio almost forty times as great as the same
disc when it is beyond the sun, toward the end of its morning
appearances. "
Sagr. O Nicholas Copernicus, what a pleasure it would have been for
you to see this part of your system confirmed by so clear an
experiment [telescope]!" Galileo

The central topic is the Earth's orbital behavior and why we have the
seasons and natural noon cycles vary hence we sail out of the
intellectual doldrums and away from dreary conceptions such as the
'spinning moon' where men would truly disgrace themselves were they to
remain with something so unjustifiable that only the failure to
account for the experiences within a 24 hour day from the planetary
cycle matches it in importance.

So,when people set foot on the moon once more and look back at the
Earth,they will see the polar coordinates turn to the central Sun with
each lunar pass defined by the moment when the moon is between the
Earth and the Sun but this assumes that people today can just enjoy
the moon's circuit of the Earth and why we always see the same face
by simply walking/orbiting a central object with an outstretched arm
pointing at that object.

[Quadibloc]

On May 25, 3:39 pm, Mike Collins <acridiniumes...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Just use logic. Examine your views critically. You just keep digging
> yourself into a deeper hole. Admit you're wrong!
> Have the courage to face up to your former folly.

Although that's good advice, he genuinely believes that it's advice
the rest of the world is failing to follow.

To reach a correct conclusion with logic, one has to be competent in
its use, and one has to have correct data to work with. Without these
tools, one can't usefully follow the advice you are presenting.

Willingness to examine his own views critically is one of the things
he needs. But he also would need to be willing to listen to the
explanations of other people - and he doesn't trust what they say,
being convinced that they're under the sway of a harmful delusion.

If he understood enough mathematics to work out how Kepler's Equation
can be derived from the inverse-square law of gravitation and the
other laws of mechanics... he wouldn't be in his present situation.
But it's not reasonable to expect him to make the effort required to
learn that much mathematics... _and_ he devalues mathematics as a way
of knowing, preferring intuition and the "interpretive faculty".

So he basically has a philosophical view that tells him that the right
way to know about the heavens is to use the same tools that some
people use for knowing about God. Empiricism, to him, is the death of
true astronomy.

The "wonders of modern imaging" have not led him to the conclusion
that the celestial sphere is still part of the material world, and
subject to its laws, rather than belonging to the transcendent. What
it will take to bring him to the realization that the heavens, unlike
Heaven, are something we can see everyday, and so they do not partake
of the necessary inaccessibility of the truly Divine realm... it is
more than just a willingness to think critically.

Internal evidence in his posts suggests the denomination to which he
belongs. That he is in error, or perhaps even heretical, is something
he might accept if explained to him by those of respect and authority
within his faith, but an outsider's word would carry little weight.

John Savard

[Quadibloc]

On May 26, 1:45 am, oriel36 <kelleher.ger...@gmail.com> wrote:

> There is no reason why any reasonable person would conclude that the
> moon spins as it orbits the Earth unless they had a hatred of what
> phases represent in terms of orbital cycles and that goes for
> planetary phases as well as the moon -

There is a reason. It's called libration in longitude. That shows that
the Moon rotates at a uniform rate, as measured by a mechanical clock,
compared against the distant stars - while instead of always being
pointed exactly towards Earth, it moves slightly from side to side,
representing the compound motion of the difference of this uniform
rotation and its orbital motion.

We are driven to accept the Moon rotates, therefore, by *the same
reasoning that drives us to accept Copernicus* - it is not reasonable
to think of the heavenly bodies having as their basic motions
complicated motions, instead of the simple motions being
straightforward, and only the compound motions being complicated.

John Savard

[Quadibloc]

On May 26, 12:20 am, oriel36 <kelleher.ger...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Like a great pendulum that swings ,our technological advancement and
> the creation of tools has reached to its highest limit and now the
> swing back is towards interpretation and proper use of these tools and
> that is why most of what I express looks initially unusual to those
> who have not yet discovered the new astronomical playing field.

I'll admit that Moore's Law is likely to run out of steam in a few
years.

But do you really have any evidence that the pendulum is swinging
other than your own wishful thinking?

> People need something to look at astronomically and cannot survive on
> people chanting empirical voodoo at them

If it was voodoo, it wouldn't have been effective in leading to the
creation of tools.

John Savard

[oriel36]

There are so many challenges out there and dealing with the idea of a
'spinning moon' should not be one of them.

This subject is so dishonorable that even I couldn't proceed further
in any meaningful way,most already know that the idea is just plain
junk yet because of the only person to ever assert such a thing,a few
sentences after he has Venus rotating once in 23 hours,the idea of
lunar rotation is accepted.

I would be sick to my stomach were I an astronomer and insofar as the
idea is easily dispensed with,it does demonstrate what the real
problem is.

[Mike Collins]

The dishonour is yours. Generations of astronomers have refined and
validated these ideas and you have the cheek to call them all idiots or
tricksters. Your ideas are childish fallacy , your "insights" are
inconsistent fallacies. You are wrong, they are right. Your insults to the
honesty, integrity and intelligence of modern astronomers are offensive.
Admit that you're wrong and regain your honour.

[Mike Collins]

oriel36 <kellehe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 26, 10:29 pm, Mike Collins <acridiniumes...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> oriel36 <kelleher.ger...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> There are so many challenges out there and dealing with the idea of a
>>> 'spinning moon' should not be one of them.
>>
>>> This subject is so dishonorable that even I couldn't proceed further
>>> in any meaningful way,most already know that the idea is just plain
>>> junk yet because of the only person to ever assert such a thing,a few
>>> sentences after he has Venus rotating once in 23 hours,the idea of
>>> lunar rotation is accepted.
>>
>>> I would be sick to my stomach were I an astronomer and insofar as the
>>> idea is easily dispensed with,it does demonstrate what the real
>>> problem is.
>>
>> The dishonour is yours. Generations of astronomers have refined and
>> validated these ideas and you have the cheek to call them all idiots or
>> tricksters.
>

> The new challenges I face are completely different than the ones which
> have occupied me for decades just as the ones facing the astronomical
> community are unlike anything they have encountered before hence we
> both leave our comfort zones to take on the great game of life in a
> new way.I have specifically said that the assertions rather than
> people are dishonorable for indeed the idea of a spinning moon is but
> instead of going about disproving 'lunar rotation',the moon's orbital
> behavior is set against that of the Earth and the fact that the Earth
> turns in two separate ways to the central Sun .
>
> The new explanation for the seasons and the variations in the natural
> noon cycle as both reflect the same cause as is the displacement of
> the 'no tilt/no seasons' ideology with a much better perspective of an
> equatorial climate for 0 degree inclination and a polar climate as a
> 90 degree inclination - therefore all planets have a proportional
> mixture of one or the other with the Earth assigned a largely
> equatorial type climate.
>
> Unfortunately many people calling themselves professional astronomers
> do so by virtue of going through the anti-competitive peer review
> system, a system that is designed to serve those doing the reviewing
> where there is no incentive for the prospective astronomer to do
> anything other than try to please the reviewer hence a vicious cycle
> which has less to do with astronomy than self-preservation of jobs and
> reputations.The unmoderated Usenet forums changed all that and so what
> if they have disappeared as viable and vibrant entities,for a short
> time they not only exposed astronomical atrophy but demonstrated the
> possibilities of a new astronomy.

>
>
> >Your ideas are childish fallacy , your "insights" are
>> inconsistent fallacies. You are wrong, they are right. Your insults to the
>> honesty, integrity and intelligence of modern astronomers are offensive.
>> Admit that you're wrong and regain your honour.
>

> I am already dishonored for being essentially correct in multiple
> topics so that 'honor' you suggest is nothing more than intellectual
> subservience and an aggressive one at that.I have asked for nothing
> other than people can raise the standards and do better,in a world
> that rewards passing talent I have known nothing other than
> unrelenting hostility but that is this era and the hand I am dealt
> with and I just get on with the issues.In some ways it is possible to
> turn animosity to an advantage but at some stage it cannot be all
> academic politics,people are natural astronomers when the flow of
> information between celestial dynamics and terrestrial effects open up
> and the empirical approach goes on in the background rather than
> trying to being the driver of astronomy - the damage of the vicious
> strain of empiricism is breathtaking in a catastrophic way and now it
> is time to revisit the entire process and especially untangling the
> peer review process for astronomy and empiricism itself.
>
> So my dishonor has become your honor,you see no objections to a
> spinning moon nor,more importantly,the emergence of the difference
> between lunar orbital motion and planetary motions.Maybe some day that
> will change,who knows,perhaps even today.

Watch these videos of libration. They prove your theories wrong. The moon
is rotating at a constant rate and it's elliptical orbit around the
Earth/Moon barycentre enables us to see farther east and west than would be
possible if it merely faced the Earth.
This doesn't prove us right. You can't prove a scientific theory. But it
does prove you wrong.
Admit it or lose all credibility.

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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3ryt9fBOBE

[oriel36]

The moon's orbital behavior is not a theory and an imitation analogy
of walking/orbiting an object with an outstretched arm pointing
constantly at the central object is really enough for anyone for after
that,anyone can pick and choose their favorite argument and still
arrive at the same answer.The issue is really a developmental one and
specifically that Earth's orbital behavior and an imaging device on
the moon registering the change in orientation of the polar
coordinates with each monthly lunar pass between the Earth and the Sun
but who knows how many other productive avenues will open up like
that.

I am closing out 6 months of intensive labor which saw many topics
discussed and especially the development of the calendar system and
its cyclical references along with the AM/PM and Lat/Long
extensions,this alone would be enough for a lifetime yet they are
added to those other developments from plate tectonics to the reason
why twilight lengths vary with latitude.It also saw my health
temporarily collapse,it often happens when the attention is so
concentrated that the body rebels and the recovery was a lesson in
itself,a tap on the shoulder not to ignore daily concerns.

> This doesn't prove us right. You can't prove a scientific theory. But it
> does prove you wrong.
> Admit it or lose all credibility.
>

It has happened more than once that somebody repeated an assertion
back at me that originated long ago in these forums,the rotational
mechanism that binds planetary shape and crustal evolution being one
of them and it is appearing more and more it a botched state as few
have familiarity with the daily dynamics to act in a confident way
with the material - anyone can assert rotation but finding just the
right arguments makes it possible to connect the surface clues with
the rotating interior.The reason it wasn't done before,as in many
topics relating to climate,is that for far too long people calling
themselves astronomers did not act like them and to a certain extent
still don't.

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdQXtTDzB_c
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3ryt9fBOBE

If you can extract lunar rotation from libration then good for you,if
the moon rotated once for each lunar circuit you would see all sides
once just as you would the Earth - graceful and enchanting each time
I see it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxrIMHKobk0

Weathering internal and external conflicts simultaneously is quite an
experience but as a Christian with its creative aspects, it is what is
expected at some level or some shape or form.If we are not answerable
to the present then neither can we be answerable to the past or to
future generations and allowing our ancestors to speak and listening
to them has a satisfaction to it that makes you wish to improve
matters as that is the whole point of the exercise.

In any case,my challenges are not the same ones as yours or anyone
else's yet I do commend you and the few others for sticking to their
principles and coming here to express them - I can't ask for anymore
than that.

[Mike Collins]

As a Christian you would benefit from a trip to the Vatican Observatory
where you could discuss the Moon's rotation with a religious astronomer.
Guess what they will say!