Neptune: FET failed to predict, but RET did so and continues to do so

Quote

You seem to be doing that thing you do where you just bring up the same things I've already answered again and again until I get bored.

As you know the calendar is based on astrological observation. Not religion. The calendar and indeed time itself are diligently altered to ensure synchronicity. The fact they haven't altered the days of the week to match the fantasy planets tells you all you need to know. I've said all this several times. What is wrong with you?

I'm sorry but I keep missing the part where you show how adding 2 more days to the week would improve synchronization of celestial observations of Uranus and Neptune.

The number of days in a year is based on the the movements of the sun.  The number of days in a month are (roughly) based on the movements of the moon.  What celestial movements are the days of the week based on?

They are based on the number of planets + the sun and the moon.

They are based on the number of planets + the sun and the moon.

Nope.  The 7 day week was in use long before the Romans switched from their 8 day week and named the days after the celestial objects.  Try again.

Thork cracks me up. There is no way that someone can be this willfully obtuse and serious at the same time.

Thork cracks me up. There is no way that someone can be this willfully obtuse and serious at the same time.

This is why accusations of him trolling are not, as he claims, baseless.

Quote from: Thork on March 24, 2012, 08:09:20 AM

They are based on the number of planets + the sun and the moon.

Nope.  The 7 day week was in use long before the Romans switched from their 8 day week and named the days after the celestial objects.  Try again.

I just checked, and the Chinese also have a 7 day week, with no indication that they changed into it, at least in recent centuries. And they don't have deities or planets for each day.

Evidence is gathering very fast that indicates humans like 7 day weeks, so very different civilizations have adopted it, just like everyone ended up embracing the base 10 for their numbers. These are just handy numbers that people feel comfortable with, even though better alternatives seem to be easy to find.

Evidence is gathering very fast that indicates humans like 7 day weeks

That's your argument? Very scientific I'm sure. Humans 'like' 7 day weeks?

just like everyone ended up embracing the base 10 for their numbers.

That is because humans all over the world have 10 digits, 5 on each hand. It makes it easy to do simple arithmetic. Its not because humans 'like' counting in 10's.

These are just handy numbers that people feel comfortable with, even though better alternatives seem to be easy to find.

No, its because we have 10 digits on our hands.

The use of 10 digits for a numbering system may be seen to arise from counting on our 10 fingers. Count on your fingers up to ten, put a mark in the sand and continue counting on fingers.

I just checked, and the Chinese also have a 7 day week,

If you are wondering why the Chinese decided to have a 7 day week all those years ago, its because their are 5 planets + the sun and the moon and they named the days to match astrological observation. As I have said all thread long.


My argument is without flaw. Yours however are dreadful. Humans just 'like' 7 day weeks? What a ridiculous piece of conjecture. That can't be the best RET has to offer.

My argument is without flaw.

Except for the part where you keep ignoring the fact that the ancient Babylonians and Jews were using 7 day weeks long before the Romans.

Quote from: Thork on March 25, 2012, 09:12:35 AM

My argument is without flaw.

Except for the part where you keep ignoring the fact that the ancient Babylonians and Jews were using 7 day weeks long before the Romans.

Give it up Markjo. Your clumsy no nothing posts are making RET take a proper beating.

The Latin names of the Planets were simple translations of the Greek names, which in turn were translations of the Babylonian names, which go back to the Sumerians.

Although the pagan planetary seven day week would thus have a pagan origin, it is noteworthy that the notion of a seven day week nevertheless might still be Jewish, since the example of the significant Jewish community of Ptolemaic Alexandria, already using a seven day week, could well have suggested the use of the seven planets for a similar cycle.

Its the same in every major civilisation for all time. Its no coincidence. Everyone all over the world matched their days of the week to the 5 planets + the sun and the moon. Its just a fact. Its how it is.

You'll now probably make some equally useless post like "Sigh, but you keep ignoring the Aztecs, or keep forgetting about the Inuit people". I didn't 'ignore' any facts as you put it. Just because something random jumps into your head does not mean I ignored it. You however keep ignoring Google before you fire off your low content single sentence baseless and frankly fraudulent objections.

Since "every major society" includes those that have weeks ranging from 3 to 9 days, and sometimes longer, what is your criteria for "major society"? As has been pointed out, the pre-Christian Romans had 8.

If you are wondering why the Chinese decided to have a 7 day week all those years ago, its because their are 5 planets + the sun and the moon and they named the days to match astrological observation. As I have said all thread long.

Source? In [here, about halfway down the page, they explain:

Although the Western-style week is a modern phenomenon in China, the names of the Western days of the week were known from antiquity. The nomenclature of the seven planets -- naming of the days after the Sun, the Moon, Mars, Mercury, Jupiter, Venus, and Saturn -- had come overland from the West in the first millennium AD, resulting in a system of names translated into Chinese.

It is not because of the number of existing planets, it is because they copied it from the West! Nice work, Thork.

Thork, even if every culture that ever used a 7 day week named after the naked eye visible celestial bodies, how does that prove that there can't be any planets that are not visible to the naked eye?

It is not because of the number of existing planets, it is because they copied it from the West! Nice work, Thork.

And sooooo .... Markjo's claim about the Chinese having 7 day weeks before ... is wrong. They also realised they should have week days matching the movements of the heavens and copied.

We are on page 12 now and still have no evidence for Nepday or Urday. Every example all perfectly the same. The same days give the same planets, in all languages. Its too overwhelming to be coincidence. The conspiracy's mask has slipped and its ugly twisted face is there to see for anyone with the wit to grab a quick glance at it. Round Earth theory is just stinking up this thread now; rotten, repulsive and wrong.

Thork, even if every culture that ever used a 7 day week named after the naked eye visible celestial bodies, how does that prove that there can't be any planets that are not visible to the naked eye?

It proves no one has adjusted them, despite them apparently not matching astrological observation any more. Stop it Markjo. You are becoming like a fly in my pint ... endlessly buzzing around in circles and mildly irritating.

Quote from: markjo on March 25, 2012, 11:17:04 AM

Thork, even if every culture that ever used a 7 day week named after the naked eye visible celestial bodies, how does that prove that there can't be any planets that are not visible to the naked eye?

It proves no one has adjusted them, despite them apparently not matching astrological observation any more.

So what?  How is this important enough to justify reinventing the calendar?

Quote from: Thork on March 25, 2012, 11:26:26 AM

Quote from: markjo on March 25, 2012, 11:17:04 AM

Thork, even if every culture that ever used a 7 day week named after the naked eye visible celestial bodies, how does that prove that there can't be any planets that are not visible to the naked eye?

It proves no one has adjusted them, despite them apparently not matching astrological observation any more.

So what?  How is this important enough to justify reinventing the calendar?

Its in this thread - several times. I'm not repeating myself again so you can write another one sentence reply. You would get more out, if you put more in. Its a shame you are a moderator because you need a warning for low content posting. Polite or not, its low content. You have bored me out of the thread and killed another topic.

Quote from: markjo on March 25, 2012, 11:34:37 AM

Quote from: Thork on March 25, 2012, 11:26:26 AM

Quote from: markjo on March 25, 2012, 11:17:04 AM

Thork, even if every culture that ever used a 7 day week named after the naked eye visible celestial bodies, how does that prove that there can't be any planets that are not visible to the naked eye?

It proves no one has adjusted them, despite them apparently not matching astrological observation any more.

So what?  How is this important enough to justify reinventing the calendar?

Its in this thread - several times. I'm not repeating myself again so you can write another one sentence reply. You would get more out, if you put more in. Its a shame you are a moderator because you need a warning for low content posting. Polite or not, its low content. You have bored me out of the thread and killed another topic.

If it seems that I keep asking the same question over and over again, it's because I have yet to find a satisfactory answer.

The 7 day week had  been in use for over 1500 years by the time Uranus was discovered.  If astronomers didn't feel the need to add an extra day to the week, then why should we care what the astrologers think?

By the way Thork, modern astrologers seem to have dealt with the modern planets just fine without feeling the need to add 4 extra days to the week.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planets_in_astrology#Modern_planets

It proves no one has adjusted them, despite them apparently not matching astrological observation any more. Stop it Markjo. You are becoming like a fly in my pint ... endlessly buzzing around in circles and mildly irritating.

Why are you now shooting yourself in the foot? It proves no one has adjusted them. I could not say it better. But I already added that nobody could have adjusted the seven day week, even if "they" wanted. And you, Thork, should tell us who are the "they" you keep talking about. Maybe the Pope? Or maybe the President of the United States? Or the Illuminati? I have not found one single idea of who "they" are which is not totally stupid. It would take something like a new UN agency with power to compel every Congress in every member country to pass a law changing the length of the week.

In my country, to pass a law moving some holidays around took Congress more than a year of deliberations and a National Law. And there was a very solid economic argument to do so: giving people more opportunities to do some tourism, so the industry could recover. Exactly why would the Congress of any nation dedicate more than a passing minute to changing the length of a week?

Quote from: Thork on March 25, 2012, 11:26:26 AM

It proves no one has adjusted them, despite them apparently not matching astrological observation any more. Stop it Markjo. You are becoming like a fly in my pint ... endlessly buzzing around in circles and mildly irritating.

Why are you now shooting yourself in the foot? It proves no one has adjusted them. I could not say it better. But I already added that nobody could have adjusted the seven day week, even if "they" wanted. And you, Thork, should tell us who are the "they" you keep talking about. Maybe the Pope? Or maybe the President of the United States? Or the Illuminati? I have not found one single idea of who "they" are which is not totally stupid. It would take something like a new UN agency with power to compel every Congress in every member country to pass a law changing the day of the week.

In my country, to pass a law moving some holidays around took Congress more than a year of deliberations and a National Law. And there was a very solid economic argument to do so: giving people more opportunities to do some tourism, so the industry could recover. Exactly why would the Congress of any nation dedicate more than a passing minute to changing the length of a week?

Eurch! you see, you haven't read the thread either. Markjo just makes the thread go round and round and round. This has all been addressed.

Why not change the days? They changed the entire solar system model? they shifted from the Julian to Gregorian calendar in 1582 and lost a bunch of days in the process. They did that because they found the calendar didn't match astrological observation. So, why would they not do it again when they found extra planets? To this day they still add/remove leap seconds etc meaning we have to change every computer and clock in the world to match. It is picking and choosing on behalf of RErs in order to bend reality towards their model. But of course, inaccurate.
Dates, days, time; it is all linked to astrological observation. To say some bits aren't important is to concede yet another death star style weakness in round earth theory.

They change the date and time regularly to match what happens in the heavens. FRom missing out 10 whole days in 1582 to adding leap seconds to this day. Making the week match the heavens would be easy. "On Monday, we'll instead extend the week. That  will be Urday. On Tuesday that will be NepDay. Then we'll start over. Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, saturday, Sunday, Urday, Nepday. Boom. Job done. Print some new calendars. The week now matches the heavens again.

They haven't done it, but did it for everything else. So RET fail. What did you even think the argument has been for the last 4 pages? They haven't made the week match the RET heavens. Everything else fits. seconds, dates, seasons etc. conclusion. No Nepday ... No Neptune.

They haven't made the week match the RET heavens. Everything else fits. seconds, dates, seasons etc.

That's because the everything else is based on the movements of the sun and/or moon, not the number of celestial objects that can be seen.  The number of days in a week is pretty much arbitrary.  Why else would the Romans have an 8 day week?

7 days, 7 planets in the sky.  That matches up pretty well.

24 hours in a day, 24 beers in a case.  Matches up pretty well.

24 hours in a day, 24 beers in a case.  Matches up pretty well.

Lol, I didn't mean it seriously.  If Thork is obsessed with having the days of the week match celestial objects there's a match for him.

Quote from: markjo on March 25, 2012, 02:18:43 PM

24 hours in a day, 24 beers in a case.  Matches up pretty well.

Lol, I didn't mean it seriously.  If Thork is obsessed with having the days of the week match celestial objects there's a match for him.

Of course it would be nice if it matched with sun-day and moon-day which you just conveniently erased. No Nepday .. no Neptune.

Of course it would be nice if it matched with sun-day and moon-day which you just conveniently erased. No Nepday .. no Neptune.

Well not everyone has a day for the sun or saturn.  In Spanish and Portuguese they're the day of the lord and shabbat.

Quote from: Thork on March 25, 2012, 02:26:50 PM

Of course it would be nice if it matched with sun-day and moon-day which you just conveniently erased. No Nepday .. no Neptune.

Well not everyone has a day for the sun or saturn.  In Spanish and Portuguese they're the day of the lord and shabbat.

Absolutely no one has a day for Uranus or Neptune. Digging around for exceptions to a 5000 year old rule isn't helping your case. PS- Old Portuguese as I have demonstrated does relate to Saturn and Spain has also been addressed in this thread.

The number 7 has a great deal of significance beyond the number of naked eye celestial bodies. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_%28number%2

Quote from: Thork on March 22, 2012, 06:31:37 AM

Why not change the days? They changed the entire solar system model? they shifted from the Julian to Gregorian calendar in 1582 and lost a bunch of days in the process. They did that because they found the calendar didn't match astrological observation. So, why would they not do it again when they found extra planets? To this day they still add/remove leap seconds etc meaning we have to change every computer and clock in the world to match. It is picking and choosing on behalf of RErs in order to bend reality towards their model. But of course, inaccurate.
Dates, days, time; it is all linked to astrological observation. To say some bits aren't important is to concede yet another death star style weakness in round earth theory.

They change the date and time regularly to match what happens in the heavens. FRom missing out 10 whole days in 1582 to adding leap seconds to this day. Making the week match the heavens would be easy. "On Monday, we'll instead extend the week. That  will be Urday. On Tuesday that will be NepDay. Then we'll start over. Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, saturday, Sunday, Urday, Nepday. Boom. Job done. Print some new calendars. The week now matches the heavens again.

They haven't done it, but did it for everything else. So RET fail. What did you even think the argument has been for the last 4 pages? They haven't made the week match the RET heavens. Everything else fits. seconds, dates, seasons etc. conclusion. No Nepday ... No Neptune.

Of all the people you mention, only one could decide about the names we give to the days. And that was Pope Gregory XIII, who would have taken his bible and read the Genesis, and decide to continue with seven names, because the Bible had to be taken literally. Every single person you mention here has had only one prerogative, and it is to solve the inaccuracies and inconsistencies of the way we measure time. I don't even care if you think they have done the insertion of leap seconds and leap days correctly, that is not even the subject of this thread.

You can try to convince every county's legislative body that they should send people to work seven days and then rest for two. That is your time and effort. But the people at Greenwich and the people at NIST and other similar institutions in almost every country in the world can only interpret the information they have and recommend the addition of a leap second every 15 or 30 years, and the addition (or maybe deletion) of a leap day every 10000 years or so. That is the whole extent of their power, and each country can follow or reject the recommendation. They cannot change the names

Quote from: Cat Earth Theory on March 25, 2012, 02:21:12 PM

Quote from: markjo on March 25, 2012, 02:18:43 PM

24 hours in a day, 24 beers in a case.  Matches up pretty well.

Lol, I didn't mean it seriously.  If Thork is obsessed with having the days of the week match celestial objects there's a match for him.

Of course it would be nice if it matched with sun-day and moon-day which you just conveniently erased. No Nepday .. no Neptune.

hahah what epic trolling.  No day of the week, no planet.  That is rich.

Honestly Thork, there is no reason to add more days to the week when we are discovering planets around other stars, reclassifying what a planet is, and generally less focused on attributing meaning to the days of the week.  I can understand you saying Neptune does not exist (i mean sort of, a decent telescope will show it clearly) but it is really at this point irrelevant to the days of the week.