How Asteroids are Discovered

I will ask the question before I provide the FE'rs the answer.

Do you know how and more specifically WHY asteroids are discovered by DIFFERENT astronomers and not the same astronomers?

I'm curious to see what responses I will receive.  This will be amusing.

Yes, an astronomer tells the location of the asteroid to another astronomer and that second astronomer accounts for celestial gear shifting and verifies the location of the asteroid.

Yes, an astronomer tells the location of the asteroid to another astronomer and that second astronomer accounts for celestial gear shifting and verifies the location of the asteroid.

Wrong

Quote from: Pongo on January 01, 2013, 06:06:31 PM

Yes, an astronomer tells the location of the asteroid to another astronomer and that second astronomer accounts for celestial gear shifting and verifies the location of the asteroid.

Wrong

Please, tell us the answer, oh master of Google

Yes, an astronomer tells the location of the asteroid to another astronomer and that second astronomer accounts for celestial gear shifting and verifies the location of the asteroid.

Explain the mechanism of celestial gear shifting, which I assert does not exist.

im pretty sure they cant because it just dosent fit in with what we observe happening all around us. strange considering they are supposed to put most weight behind a theory that can be directly observed. which our model can and theirs once again relies on invisible mechanisms that cant be tested for

The mechanism is unknown, but the movement is visible.

The mechanism is unknown, but the movement is visible.

No, the movement is not visible. The stars rotate around two points in the sky without changing distance from each other. That's not movement that any sort of gear can produce. Comment on this.

Quote from: RE or FE? on January 01, 2013, 09:58:44 PM

Quote from: Pongo on January 01, 2013, 06:06:31 PM

Yes, an astronomer tells the location of the asteroid to another astronomer and that second astronomer accounts for celestial gear shifting and verifies the location of the asteroid.

Wrong

Please, tell us the answer, oh master of Google

Dear Edmond - if you think the answer is attainable via a search engine then it clearly shows you are incapable of basic logical application.  You really have to Google this?  Duuuuuuuude....go back to sleep and wait for your next serving.

The mechanism is unknown, but the movement is visible.

Answer the OP.

You're not Stephen King. Your lackluster attempt to build suspense is only causing myself, and others I'm sure, to lose what little interest there ever was to hear the round-earth explanation for a problem that's only a problem when one tries to make a flat-earth round.

I will ask the question before I provide the FE'rs the answer.

Do you know how and more specifically WHY asteroids are discovered by DIFFERENT astronomers and not the same astronomers?

I'm curious to see what responses I will receive.  This will be amusing.

Your question does not make sense to me.  Why is the "same astronomers" plural?

Quote from: Tom Bishop on January 02, 2013, 01:56:19 PM

The mechanism is unknown, but the movement is visible.

Answer the OP.

I'm not sure what the question in the OP is. Asteroids are discovered by different astronomers, and not the same astronomers, because finding asteroids is like finding a needles in a haystack.  It's a giant where's waldo game, and not everyone will find all the same asteroids.

Asteroids stand out from the stars because they are moving at a slightly different speed around the celestial system. Astronomers use photo-telescopes which take pictures of small thumb-sized sections of the sky every night at the same time for weeks on end, and then compare the images for a change of star configuration.

Quote from: Tom Bishop on January 02, 2013, 01:56:19 PM

The mechanism is unknown, but the movement is visible.

No, the movement is not visible. The stars rotate around two points in the sky without changing distance from each other. That's not movement that any sort of gear can produce. Comment on this.

Hey, Tom, where's your explanation?

You're not Stephen King. Your lackluster attempt to build suspense is only causing myself, and others I'm sure, to lose what little interest there ever was to hear the round-earth explanation for a problem that's only a problem when one tries to make a flat-earth round.

I'm not building suspense but thank you for the admission that you have doubt in your mind regarding your ability to argue my point before it is even made.  Your unintentional admission is proof alone you doubt the existence of a flat Earth.

I simply wanted to hear explanations before I provided the accurate, indisputable, irrefutable answer.

Quote from: RE or FE? on January 02, 2013, 09:42:25 PM

Quote from: Tom Bishop on January 02, 2013, 01:56:19 PM

The mechanism is unknown, but the movement is visible.

Answer the OP.

I'm not sure what the question in the OP is. Asteroids are discovered by different astronomers, and not the same astronomers, because finding asteroids is like finding a needles in a haystack.  It's a giant where's waldo game, and not everyone will find all the same asteroids.

Asteroids stand out from the stars because they are moving at a slightly different speed around the celestial system. Astronomers use photo-telescopes which take pictures of small thumb-sized sections of the sky every night at the same time for weeks on end, and then compare the images for a change of star configuration.

Hint: You are so close...yet unable to see what I see.

Quote from: Pongo on January 02, 2013, 09:48:29 PM

You're not Stephen King. Your lackluster attempt to build suspense is only causing myself, and others I'm sure, to lose what little interest there ever was to hear the round-earth explanation for a problem that's only a problem when one tries to make a flat-earth round.

I'm not building suspense but thank you for the admission that you have doubt in your mind regarding your ability to argue my point before it is even made.  Your unintentional admission is proof alone you doubt the existence of a flat Earth.

I simply wanted to hear explanations before I provided the accurate, indisputable, irrefutable answer.

When you ask a question to flat-earthers is it because you are unintentionally admitting that you doubt a round-earth and also doubt your ability to argue it?  Thankfully defending flat-earth theory is no where near as difficult or worrisome.

Quote from: RE or FE? on January 03, 2013, 06:14:32 PM

Quote from: Pongo on January 02, 2013, 09:48:29 PM

You're not Stephen King. Your lackluster attempt to build suspense is only causing myself, and others I'm sure, to lose what little interest there ever was to hear the round-earth explanation for a problem that's only a problem when one tries to make a flat-earth round.

I'm not building suspense but thank you for the admission that you have doubt in your mind regarding your ability to argue my point before it is even made.  Your unintentional admission is proof alone you doubt the existence of a flat Earth.

I simply wanted to hear explanations before I provided the accurate, indisputable, irrefutable answer.

When you ask a question to flat-earthers is it because you are unintentionally admitting that you doubt a round-earth and also doubt your ability to argue it?  Thankfully defending flat-earth theory is no where near as difficult or worrisome.

Pongo - you haven't been paying attention.  I have summarily beaten the proverbial poop out of any FE argument that has been posed to me.  I do this and enjoy this because it is EASY.  I just want a toe to toe substantiated argument from an FE'er capable of understanding how to argue.  And by argue I don't mean berating each other.  At the risk of insulting your intelligence you need to learn the basic structure and principles of how to argue.  Your premises all have to be true in order for your conclusion to be true.  I see post after post where FE'rs argue points where their premises are false and yet they somehow seem to think their conclusion is a truth.  WTF???  This is basic logic 101.  Either you and the rest of the FE crew don't get it or you are  intentionally being obtuse.  Which is it?

You still have yet to answer the OP.  It appears as if I am going to have to once again answer it for you.  And once again...my premises will be true therefore my conclusion will (by default) be true as well.

Dear Edmond - if you think the answer is attainable via a search engine then it clearly shows you are incapable of basic logical application.  You really have to Google this?  Duuuuuuuude....go back to sleep and wait for your next serving.

You're not Stephen King. Your lackluster attempt to build suspense is only causing myself, and others I'm sure, to lose what little interest there ever was to hear the round-earth explanation for a problem that's only a problem when one tries to make a flat-earth round.

Indeed.


If you have a point to make, make it. If you have a question that needs answering, answer it. Asking a question you supposedly know the answer to only reveals your lame rhetorical gambit. We are bored by this limp-armed gesticulated impression of wit.