So none of you want to think about the above?
So I take it you completely ignored what I said? How I pointed out it is still spouting the same ignorant crap as has been spouted before and been refuted before?
How I even explained simply why it is wrong?
Anyhoo, seems you state the sun has to be moving in order for your model of an eclipse to work, so thanks for confirming geocentricity for me...
Nope. In that regard you cannot distinguish between GC and HC. The 2 are related by a simple rotation.
If the observation works in the GC model, it works in the HC model.
So no, the sun doesn't have to move.
The sun's apparent motion being greater (by a decent amount, I haven't checked to see at what point it beats the rotation of Earth) than the moon's apparent motion indicates the shadow will move west to east.
This is just relative motion.
It doesn't matter if Earth is fixed with the sun and moon both circling around us.
It doesn't matter if Earth rotates with a fixed moon and circling sun.
It doesn't matter if Earth rotates with a fixed sun and moon circling backwards.
It doesn't matter if Earth rotates, and orbits the sun, with the moon orbiting with Earth around the sun with the moon also orbiting Earth.
It doesn't matter if that entire system is moving around the galaxy.
The results are all identical and related by simple rotations and translations of the entire system and thus all observations of relative positions will be the same in these models.
Here is a diagram which helps to explain it (note: It is corrected for the orbital motion of the Earth-Moon system, so Earth stays in the same spot):
The sun is on the left. The moon is in the middle, and Earth is to the right.
They start all nicely aligned (including the observation point on Earth).
Then after some time, they are no longer so nicely aligned.
The moon has moved a bit along its orbit, an angle θM, making its shadow move through an angle of Earth of θS.
Earth has rotated, an angle θR, counteracting some of the motion of the shadow, reducing it to θs.
So no, the argument you linked is pure bullshit based upon childish ignorance.
But like I said, actually THINKING about the inverse square law of light destroys your model completely...
No. You have the FE and RE models confused.
Stars have roughly the same intensity regardless of where you are (as long as you can see them and they are a decent amount above the horizon so atmospheric scattering isn't an issue). If they followed an inverse square law, their intensity would drop massively.
So FE models with stars sitting just above Earth get destroyed completely by that inverse square law.
Meanwhile the RE model is just fine.
And before you say anything, the difference in our orbit is rather insignificant when it comes to how hot or cold Earth is in comparison to the much greater effect of axial tilt.
Good thing you've also stated you are not here to think, then, ain't it?
So - you have admitted to being geocentricists who are not here to think...
What, then, ARE you here for, precisely?
It seems to be you that doesn't want to do any thinking and instead just want to spout childish crap.
I didn't want to oversimplify...
You did.
Except that is exactly what your link did, to the point of pure stupidity.
It was akin to saying "The moon appears to move west so the shadow must as well", completely ignoring how shadows work and the relative motions of the moon and sun.
Plus, you still cannot think about how this destroys your mad cosmological model:
hyperphysics.phyastr.gsu.edu/hbase-/vision/isql.html
Perhaps that is because it doesn't?
In fact, that address doesn't even exist.
Did you mean this one:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/vision/isql.htmlWhere it talks about the inverse square law, which destroys the FE entirely?
You seem to like asserting pure bullshit repeatedly without backing any of it up.
Yeah, we get it - you refuse to think about alternative viewpoints, cannot extrapolate from known physical laws to observed phenomena, hate all science that challenges your beliefs, and are full of mad quivering paedo virgin-rage for all who are not as autistic & hate-filled as yourself...
You are a weaponised idiot, nothing more...
Now stop wasting my time and fuck off.
Good job describing yourself.
Now how about you stop wasting everyone's time and either fuck of or start justifying the pure bullshit you have been spouting.
"The moon can only appear the same to an observer on the ground if it rotates"...
Wtf is wrong with you to say such a thing?
Absolutely nothing.
Do you know why?
Because it is a simple fact of reality.
Try viewing an object from various angles, without it rotating, and seeing if it looks the same.
You can either move the object around you (ensuring it always faces the same direction, so your movement is just translation, not rotation), or you can walk around it.
Either way, without it rotating you will see different sides.
Here is a video, maybe that will help you understand:
It is the exact opposite of observable reality...
No, that is observable reality.
It might be different to your acid trip, but not to reality.
Why are you so mental?
Just give this shit up & admit you have no idea what the stupid moon is or how it works & it doesn't matter a single jot that you don't...
Join the rest of humanity ffs!
Once again, describing yourself. Why don't you follow your own advice?
That statement is bullshit...
PROVE IT!
If you had the ability to think you'd know that...
No, you wouldn't.
If you had the ability to think and chose to do so and looked at it honestly and rationally you would find no problem with it.
Now fuck off.
Again, follow your own advice.