Why do you think this isn't canceled out below ground? The crust is a very thin portion of the entire earth. This is truly amazing.
HOW would the Earth know the mass distribution of the lithosphere SO AS to correctly balance out this disproportion by providing the necessary upper mantle matter where it is needed?
Certainly you cannot assume such nonsense.
Then we are back to the supposed law of universal attraction.
"The area of land in the northern hemisphere of the earth is to the area of land in the southern hemisphere as three is to one.
The mean weight of the land is two and three-quarter times heavier than that of water; assuming the depth of the seas in both hemispheres to be equal, the northern hemisphere up to sea level is heavier than the southern hemisphere, if judged by sea and land distribution; the earth masses above sea level are additional heavy loads - we include here all the mountains/hills.
But this unequal distribution of masses does not affect the position of the earth, as it does not place the northern hemisphere with its face to the sun.
A “dead force” like gravitation could not keep the unequally loaded earth in equilibrium. Also, the seasonal distribution of ice and snow, shifting in a distillation process from one hemisphere to the other, should interfere with the equilibrium of the earth, but fails to do so."
The northern hemisphere has a greater mass than its southern counterpart.
Can you understand these basic facts of science?
The northern hemisphere has a greater mass than its southern counterpart: if we apply the "law" allegedly attributed to Newton to this problem, we obtain a very direct answer, the Earth MUST revolve around the Sun with its North Pole facing the Sun 24 hours a day.
These are the very facts, plain and simple, which cannot be disputed.
No scientist, so far, has devoted any amount of time computing the aether/ether refractive index: the subject matter has been eliminated/censored from the official establishment of scientific research.
What we do know is that it exists, and therefore it has a definite influence upon the measurements taken using a sextant.
I am assuming you are wrong about Sirius as well. There are no mistakes in my argument.
The acceleration of the rate of precession is an accepted fact of science, it is called the Newcomb constant.
"Calculated precession rates over the last 100 years show increasing precession rates which produce a declining precession cycle period.
The precession rate goes up each year. The Astronomical Almanac gives a rate of 50.2564 (arc seconds) for the year 1900. In that year, the top astronomer in America, Simon Newcomb, used a constant of .000222 as the amount the precession rate will increase per year. The actual constant increase since that time is closer to .000330 (about 50 % higher than expected) and it is increasing exponentially (faster each year)."
The acceleration of the rate of precession CANNOT be explained by modern science at all.
But something even more amazing occurs.
HOW or WHY does Sirius keep up so precisely with the exponentially increasing rate of precession?
How can Sirius' proper motion stay synched up so precisely with precession, when the rate of precession itself is changing?
If any local force in here the "heliocentrical" solar system drove up the rate of precession, it would NOT also drive up the proper motion of Sirius across the sky.
In the official theory of astrophysics, Sirius is 8.6 LIGHT YEARS from Earth.
THAT IS 81 TRILLION KILOMETERS.
And yet it keeps up precisely with the exponential increase of the rate of precession.
Dr. Jad Buchwald (Caltech):
Sirius remains about the same distance from the equinoxes—and so from the solstices— throughout these many centuries, despite precession.
".... despite precession, Sirius and the solstice must remain about the same distance in time from one another during most of Egyptian history."
If any local force here in "heliocentrical" solar system drove up the rate of precession, it would NOT also drive up the proper motion of Sirius across the sky.
UNLESS we find ourselves in the FE scenario, where Sirius orbits a mere 50 km above the flat surface of the Earth, and the same aether field affects both Sirius and the Sun at the same time.
Then, the star trails pictures feature stars which are much smaller and orbit much closer to the surface of the Earth, exactly my point.