These are not "Bullshit".
They certainly are. They're all very well explained by the model, you just chose to ignore,
"Everything builds on something else: you must understand the building blocks to understand the later results." If you can't prove step 1 below, the whole "house of cards" falls down.
You simply STATE that the mythical Aether produces whirlpools. You have not even provided proof it exists (step 1). After you do that, you then need to show it CAN produce whirlpools (step 2). Once you do that, you need to show that these whirlpools do what you claim they do like set positions of stars (step 3). All you do with your model is jump to step 3 assuming Aether exists and has whirlpool creating properties.
You simply STATE that the Sun is in the center of the Earth. You have not proved it (step 1). Everyone, observationally, knows it is in the sky. Then you apply non-existent Aether to perform all the magic that somehow makes it appear in the sky. You have not explained how seasons are formed (step 2). If so, where? quotes please.
I ignore nothing. Something has to exist before I can ignore it.
Your lack of understanding astronomy does not constitute "Bullshit". Ask any astronomer.
You don't even understand the equatorial alignment objection. It disproves DET. It is something you REALLY need to look into and understand
And yet you've failed to even acknowledge the problem with your argument. You claim i don't understand?!
I failed to acknowledge the problem because there is no problem. What problem specifically?
You totally don't understand.
- The moon's face ALWAYS faces the Earth. The phase shadow is what moves. I have provided you pictures of this. Have you even looked at them? It is not my fault you can't or won't see. All you are capable of is ignoring what you're shown.
- Using YOUR rotation of the Moon, the moon CAN NOT rotate to a FULL Moon then, with a FULL Moon showing ALL THE TIME, rotate to make Lunar Eclipses. THAT is TOTAL BS. It makes no sense. Your model relies on this therefore your model doesn't make sense.
I did not assume FET/DET is wrong. I looked at the model. I considered it. As an amateur astronomer, I considered what I do and how it would be done on your model - on your hemidisk. I found a discrepancy. You need to answer it.
And then you came up with one argument which was swiftly refuted but you refused to admit you were wrong.
All you managed to do is swiftly prove you know nothing about astronomy. There is nothing to admit to.
You NEVER have shown how an equatorially mounted telescope points 40° at the N. Celestial Pole in Denver and needs to point 90° to be parallel to the hemidisks axis (since it is physically
IMPOSSIBLE for the telescope to be pointing in 2 directions at the same time). Stop saying you did - much less swiftly.
This directly disproves DET.
Most of the stuff with DET is not provable. Can you prove there is even a Sun IN the Earth? Has anyone viewed it? Is there ANY proof of it? Can you prove Aether even exists and has the properties you say it has (e.g. creates whirlpools)? As you say, you can't possibly determine lots of stuff. Nothing is measurable/verifiable/demonstrable.
The proof is the fact it matches observations. I'd love it if you could suggest any form of proof that isn't this. REers constantly claim it isn't enough, but they can never manage that simple ask.
What observations? How have you observed the Sun in the Earth? How have you observed the Moon "near the Sun" in the Earth? How have you observed Aether? You have NO proof based on observation.
We observe the Sun in the sky. We observe the Moon in the Sky and it is very often FAR away from the Sun. This proves, observationally, your model is wrong. We have never observed Aether nor have any experiments shown it to exist.
What measurable/verifiable quantities do you have for this model? Just vague hand-waving.
Until my objection is answered, why should I spend more time on a model that has basically no actual measurements, just hand-waving?
You shouldn't, if all you're capable of doing is ignoring what you're told.
You are absolutely right. I shouldn't. No one should.
I don't buy what your selling because it is WRONG or makes NO SENSE. I am capable of thinking - not just blindly believing your hand-waving because you "said so" (what I'm told).
I have disproved your DET based on REAL telescope setups. DET does not work/describe what we do in the REAL world. DET fails. No amount of BSing on your part will change that.
Unfortunately, I am swiftly coming to the conclusion that you are just another troll. Making vague statements and accusations like:
- "They're all very well explained by the model, you just chose to ignore"
- "you've failed to even acknowledge the problem with your argument"
- "was swiftly refuted but you refused to admit you were wrong"
- "I'd love it if you could suggest any form of proof that isn't this."
- "if all you're capable of doing is ignoring what you're told."
Look at your responses in your last post. No real measurements. No real proofs. Making me do all the work off your stupid comments.
This is getting tiring. If you actually have any proofs or measurements I will listen. If all you have are vague hand-waving explanations at best and accusations at worst, I am done with your DET BS. I have provided a major disproof of DET. Until it is answered (it can't because it is IMPOSSIBLE), the DET fails. No one should consider it.