Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 1,978 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 990,601
Pageviews Today: 1,223,122Threads Today: 236Posts Today: 4,517
09:34 AM

Back to Forum
Back to Forum
Back to Thread
Back to Thread
Message Subject U - moon ("laid back" crescent) shows that position of Sun Earth and Moon has changed- update 2012: PROOF!!!! on page 6, new info on page11
Poster Handle Anonymous Coward
Post Content
On layman's terms field rotation is the virtual rotating movement of the whole sky, due to Earth's rotation.
For the naked eye this movement is too slow to notice.
 Quoting: emerald_glow

Then I guess you never watched a sunrise or sunset. Diurnal rotation, which is what you just described, can be noticed in short time intervals by naked eye observations with an appropriate fixed reference point. Furthermore, observing the moon by naked eye when it is rising or setting will show a noticeable amount of field rotation from non-polar locations compared to its orientation at the meridian (what would generally be considered the "normal" view by most laymen).
When observing an object with naked eye, we simply follow that tiny movement with turning our head.
 Quoting: emerald

Which is an altitude-azimuth perspective, and is therefore subject to field rotation. It's the same for all non-polar aligned perspectives, including those of the siderostat and heliostat.
[link to adsabs.harvard.edu]
The only difference between that and a naked eye field rotation is that it is the diurnal rotation of the apparent field of the eye, rather than the optical field of an instrument. There is no substantive difference in the outcome, which is a moon showing an apparent rotation which you characterized as a "U - moon" and "laid back" crescent, which as I already showed above, is due to field rotation and is eliminated in a simultaneous polar aligned view.
No matter how I hard try to agree with Mr Astro, I just cannot find any connection...
 Quoting: emerald

That's Dr. Astro to you. I cannot know for certain whether you're incapable of understanding field rotation, or if you simply refuse to understand it because you would have to admit that there was nothing odd about the apparent orientation of the moon. In any case it doesn't really matter, I'm not trying to convince you, I've already long since written you off. It is entertaining to see your responses though.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro

That's probably the biggest bunch of bunk I've ever read in my whole entire life, and that's saying quite a lot, because we're fed so much during our courses, of which you seem to play a substantial part here on this site!

So many things to say. Where should I begin? Well, for one thing, field rotation is flawed in your understanding and application because there's a fundamental difference in applying its concept to stars out there which are not at all fixed in orbit to Earth like the moon is. duh! (If you can't understand this easy enough concept, I can try to explain this better to you subsequently.)

Another thing is that I watched the moon during the whole entire night not a few weeks ago, and at no point did the moon have a different orientation at near the horizon as it did at its highest point in the sky. Theories are only as good as when they can stand under the scrutiny of real observation. And as such, yours Fails.

What's that saying, if you can't wow them with something, dumbfound them with BS? I could probably remember the exact saying, but my brain I think has been reduced a few 10 or 20 points just from reading your post!

Still, it's great to see you back in your full verbose but utterly lacking any real understanding ways. Welcome Back jack.
Please verify you're human:

Reason for reporting: