Yo Von…

  • Thread starter Thread starter JackBootedThug
  • Start date Start date
Floyd Eye said:
Where did you go ? I know it was very anticlimactic from Chesterfield. My wife and her friend went down to my wife’s cousin’s land down in Cherokee Pass. It got dark as night. They saw 3 simultaneous “sunsets”. Amazing the difference a 2 hour drive makes. She said traffic was bad. It took her 3 hours to get home from Caledonia, which is normally a 45 minute drive.
Click to expand...

^ St. Francis River east of Ironton. Actually drove through Caledonia on my way to Potosi on my way to my cabin. Bypassed most of 21 before it got real bad.

VonBonfire said:
It's all religious in nature, everything. Sun worship, therefore a sun centered universe. Yet in Gensis the sun isn't even created until the 4th day.
Click to expand...
Oh I know. It's all good. Sorry.
 
Floyd Eye said:
Berong to us.
Click to expand...
IMG_8323.jpeg
 
Aynirar27 said:
If you are skeptical of the cosmology (and eclipse really isn’t cosmology anyways) why do you feel comfortable talking about eclipses we know are going to take place 20 or so years from now.
How did we know exactly what time this one was going to happen, down to the minute depending on your location?
Click to expand...
Yes, should have said conventional astronomy. I feel comfortable because it's ultimately a mathematical model that yields the predictions, and the "story" associated with the math — planets in orbit or ceiling lights on a firmament, etc. — should yield the same results. That said, if you know that the math is only possible with the current model I'd be interested in testing that assertion.
 
VonBonfire said:
It's all religious in nature, everything. Sun worship, therefore a sun centered universe. Yet in Gensis the sun isn't even created until the 4th day.
Click to expand...
It's a tough call after that eclipse. Worship the sun, moon, both? ?‍♂️?
 
acceptance said:
That said, if you know that the math is only possible with the heliocentric model I'd be interested in testing that assertion.
Click to expand...
Neither model is fully provable.

Job 38 4-11

“Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding. Who determined its measurements—surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it? On what were its bases sunk, or who laid its cornerstone, when the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy? “Or who shut in the sea with doors when it burst out from the womb, when I made clouds its garment and thick darkness its swaddling band, and prescribed limits for it and set bars and doors, and said, ‘Thus far shall you come, and no farther, and here shall your proud waves be stayed’?
 
acceptance said:
Yes, should have said conventional astronomy. I feel comfortable because it's ultimately a mathematical model that yields the predictions, and the "story" associated with the math — planets in orbit or ceiling lights on a firmament, etc. — should yield the same results. That said, if you know that the math is only possible with the current model I'd be interested in testing that assertion.
Click to expand...

The math and the story are not two separate things. Thats why it’s a proven science
 
"Thales thought the Earth must be a flat disk or mound of land and dirt which is floating in an expanse of water."

"Tycho Brahe built giant quadrants to make more accurate measurements of the movement of the Sun during eclipses, and some people used techniques to measure the eclipse that we still use today."

"...An heir to several noble families, Tycho was well educated. He worked to combine what he saw as the geometrical benefits of Copernican heliocentrism with the philosophical benefits of the Ptolemaic system, and devised the Tychonic system, his own version of a model of the Universe, with the Sun orbiting the Earth, and the planets as orbiting the Sun."
 
acceptance said:
Seems you're wrong, as usual. Thales apparently thought the stars were balls of dirt on fire BTW.
Click to expand...

Seems Thales is the incorrect one in this instance lol.

Eclipses don’t only happen on earth ya know? They can be seen happening on other planets, using math that accounts for the universe in general, not just our planet. Surprise…. It’s the same math
 
My point is that accurately making predictions about the eclipse doesn’t prove a given model correct.
 
acceptance said:
As far as I understand the ancients were making repeatable predictions for eclipses and they had all kinds of models of the solar system.
Click to expand...
There are no provable models. They all contain discrepancies.
 
acceptance said:
As far as I understand the ancients were making repeatable predictions for eclipses and they had all kinds of models of the solar system.
Click to expand...
Yea dude. The earth sun and moon moved the same back then too lol
 
acceptance said:
As far as I understand the ancients were making repeatable predictions for eclipses and they had all kinds of models of the solar system.
Click to expand...
The Anasazi in Chaco Canyon had mapped out the moon's 18.6-year cycle on a rock wall, using a shaft of moonlight projecting through a crack in another nearby monolith.

XllzWxB.jpg
 
Arch Stanton said:
The Anasazi in Chaco Canyon had mapped out the moon's 18.6-year cycle on a rock wall, using a shaft of moonlight projecting through a crack in another nearby monolith.

XllzWxB.jpg
Click to expand...
Yea definitely. People were smart a long time ago too
 
VonBonfire said:
There are no provable models. They all contain discrepancies.
Click to expand...
I guess I’m confused by the way you guys keep using “models”.
It’s all the same “model”. Earth doesn’t have different rules than other planets. It’s all the same.
 
Aynirar27 said:
I guess I’m confused by the way you guys keep using “models”.
It’s all the same “model”. Earth doesn’t have different rules than other planets. It’s all the same.
Click to expand...
Tube amps still sound better than modelers.

:poop:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top