Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 1,917 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 909,040
Pageviews Today: 1,155,121Threads Today: 172Posts Today: 3,743
07:38 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson

 
FreakObserver

User ID: 45491267
United States
08/21/2013 12:21 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
STELLAR PARALLAX

As the earth moves, the stars appear to shift positions relative to one another as the position of the earth changed.

As shown in Figure 2-12, the angle between two stars, as seen from the earth, appears to change as the earth moved in its orbit. This effect is known as stellar parallax.


:parallax2:



:parallax1:



From the time of Aristotle the absence of any observable stellar parallax had served as a major barrier against the acceptance of the heliocentric theory. The argument that the stars were too far away to exhibit parallax was hardly a convincing one; it was inconceivable that the universe could be so large. The most astute naked-eye observers from Hipparchus to Tycho Brahe were unable to find a single star that exhibited a measurable parallax, and even the invention of the telescope did not improve the situation. Eventually, however, stellar parallax was observed. The first unequivocal measurements were reported in rapid succession by Friedrich Struve in 1837, Friedrich Bessel in 1838, and Thomas Henderson in 1839. By that time there were not many supporters of the geocentric theory, so the discovery was somewhat anticlimactic.

STELLAR ABERRATION

Actually, the most convincing piece of evidence for the revolution of the earth was discovered in 1729, only two years after Newton's death, and more than a hundred years before stellar parallax was finally observed. In 1727 two English astronomers, Samuel Molyneux and James Bradley, made a series of observations of the position of the star Eltanin, in an attempt to measure the parallax of this star. They found that the star did indeed appear to move in a small circle with respect to the more distant stars over a period of a year. They realized, however, that the motion was not stellar parallax, since their observations showed that the star had its maximum shift in position at the time of year when it should exhibit no parallax at all. Observations of several other stars showed similar results. The two men found that all of these stars moved in circles of 20.5" in radius, regardless of their distances.

In 1728 Molyneux died, and Bradley was left to figure out the puzzle alone. A year later he announced his solution: the apparent shift in the position of a star is due to the motion of the earth with respect to the light coming from that star. Bradley called this effect stellar aberration.

Stellar aberration is very similar to the common phenomenon that we observe when driving in a car in a rainstorm. When the car is stationary, the rain appears to be falling vertically, but when the car is moving, the rain appears to be falling toward the car at an angle. The rain is, of course, not really falling at an angle; it only appears that way because the car is moving toward the raindrops as they are falling. Thus there is an apparent change in the direction from which the rain is seen to come because of the motion of the observer.

:raintube1:


The same analysis applies to light traveling down a telescope tube. If the telescope is on a moving earth, the telescope must be tilted in the direction of motion in order to receive the light from a star that is overhead. Consequently, the starlight appears to be coming from a direction that is not the true direction of the star (Figure 5-12a).

:stellarabb1:

Bradley's discovery of stellar aberration has to be considered extremely strong evidence for the heliocentric theory - for if the earth did not move with respect to the stars, there would be no stellar aberration. If one is to deny the earth's motion in the light of this discovery, one must make some rather peculiar assumptions about the behavior of light - or else propose that all stars are acted on by a force that makes them travel in elliptical paths once a year.

The Nature of Physics, Peter J. Brancazio (1975)
Phil Plait
User ID: 31848316
United States
08/21/2013 12:26 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
clappa
Disastro
User ID: 45047234
08/21/2013 01:18 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
clappa
 Quoting: Phil Plait 31848316


Will chime in on this later but I am doing some photoshop work on comet ISON for the next hour or two.
Children of the Atom

User ID: 20257839
United States
08/21/2013 01:24 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
STELLAR PARALLAX

As the earth moves, the stars appear to shift positions relative to one another as the position of the earth changed.

As shown in Figure 2-12, the angle between two stars, as seen from the earth, appears to change as the earth moved in its orbit. This effect is known as stellar parallax.


:parallax2:



:parallax1:



From the time of Aristotle the absence of any observable stellar parallax had served as a major barrier against the acceptance of the heliocentric theory. The argument that the stars were too far away to exhibit parallax was hardly a convincing one; it was inconceivable that the universe could be so large. The most astute naked-eye observers from Hipparchus to Tycho Brahe were unable to find a single star that exhibited a measurable parallax, and even the invention of the telescope did not improve the situation. Eventually, however, stellar parallax was observed. The first unequivocal measurements were reported in rapid succession by Friedrich Struve in 1837, Friedrich Bessel in 1838, and Thomas Henderson in 1839. By that time there were not many supporters of the geocentric theory, so the discovery was somewhat anticlimactic.

STELLAR ABERRATION

Actually, the most convincing piece of evidence for the revolution of the earth was discovered in 1729, only two years after Newton's death, and more than a hundred years before stellar parallax was finally observed. In 1727 two English astronomers, Samuel Molyneux and James Bradley, made a series of observations of the position of the star Eltanin, in an attempt to measure the parallax of this star. They found that the star did indeed appear to move in a small circle with respect to the more distant stars over a period of a year. They realized, however, that the motion was not stellar parallax, since their observations showed that the star had its maximum shift in position at the time of year when it should exhibit no parallax at all. Observations of several other stars showed similar results. The two men found that all of these stars moved in circles of 20.5" in radius, regardless of their distances.

In 1728 Molyneux died, and Bradley was left to figure out the puzzle alone. A year later he announced his solution: the apparent shift in the position of a star is due to the motion of the earth with respect to the light coming from that star. Bradley called this effect stellar aberration.

Stellar aberration is very similar to the common phenomenon that we observe when driving in a car in a rainstorm. When the car is stationary, the rain appears to be falling vertically, but when the car is moving, the rain appears to be falling toward the car at an angle. The rain is, of course, not really falling at an angle; it only appears that way because the car is moving toward the raindrops as they are falling. Thus there is an apparent change in the direction from which the rain is seen to come because of the motion of the observer.

:raintube1:


The same analysis applies to light traveling down a telescope tube. If the telescope is on a moving earth, the telescope must be tilted in the direction of motion in order to receive the light from a star that is overhead. Consequently, the starlight appears to be coming from a direction that is not the true direction of the star (Figure 5-12a).

:stellarabb1:

Bradley's discovery of stellar aberration has to be considered extremely strong evidence for the heliocentric theory - for if the earth did not move with respect to the stars, there would be no stellar aberration. If one is to deny the earth's motion in the light of this discovery, one must make some rather peculiar assumptions about the behavior of light - or else propose that all stars are acted on by a force that makes them travel in elliptical paths once a year.

The Nature of Physics, Peter J. Brancazio (1975)
 Quoting: FreakObserver


Hmmm...

I think his response may be...



To which we really all know it means...

thassabutthurt
Dr. AstroModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 2308326
United States
08/21/2013 01:27 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
STELLAR PARALLAX

As the earth moves, the stars appear to shift positions relative to one another as the position of the earth changed.

As shown in Figure 2-12, the angle between two stars, as seen from the earth, appears to change as the earth moved in its orbit. This effect is known as stellar parallax.


:parallax2:



:parallax1:



From the time of Aristotle the absence of any observable stellar parallax had served as a major barrier against the acceptance of the heliocentric theory. The argument that the stars were too far away to exhibit parallax was hardly a convincing one; it was inconceivable that the universe could be so large. The most astute naked-eye observers from Hipparchus to Tycho Brahe were unable to find a single star that exhibited a measurable parallax, and even the invention of the telescope did not improve the situation. Eventually, however, stellar parallax was observed. The first unequivocal measurements were reported in rapid succession by Friedrich Struve in 1837, Friedrich Bessel in 1838, and Thomas Henderson in 1839. By that time there were not many supporters of the geocentric theory, so the discovery was somewhat anticlimactic.

STELLAR ABERRATION

Actually, the most convincing piece of evidence for the revolution of the earth was discovered in 1729, only two years after Newton's death, and more than a hundred years before stellar parallax was finally observed. In 1727 two English astronomers, Samuel Molyneux and James Bradley, made a series of observations of the position of the star Eltanin, in an attempt to measure the parallax of this star. They found that the star did indeed appear to move in a small circle with respect to the more distant stars over a period of a year. They realized, however, that the motion was not stellar parallax, since their observations showed that the star had its maximum shift in position at the time of year when it should exhibit no parallax at all. Observations of several other stars showed similar results. The two men found that all of these stars moved in circles of 20.5" in radius, regardless of their distances.

In 1728 Molyneux died, and Bradley was left to figure out the puzzle alone. A year later he announced his solution: the apparent shift in the position of a star is due to the motion of the earth with respect to the light coming from that star. Bradley called this effect stellar aberration.

Stellar aberration is very similar to the common phenomenon that we observe when driving in a car in a rainstorm. When the car is stationary, the rain appears to be falling vertically, but when the car is moving, the rain appears to be falling toward the car at an angle. The rain is, of course, not really falling at an angle; it only appears that way because the car is moving toward the raindrops as they are falling. Thus there is an apparent change in the direction from which the rain is seen to come because of the motion of the observer.

:raintube1:


The same analysis applies to light traveling down a telescope tube. If the telescope is on a moving earth, the telescope must be tilted in the direction of motion in order to receive the light from a star that is overhead. Consequently, the starlight appears to be coming from a direction that is not the true direction of the star (Figure 5-12a).

:stellarabb1:

Bradley's discovery of stellar aberration has to be considered extremely strong evidence for the heliocentric theory - for if the earth did not move with respect to the stars, there would be no stellar aberration. If one is to deny the earth's motion in the light of this discovery, one must make some rather peculiar assumptions about the behavior of light - or else propose that all stars are acted on by a force that makes them travel in elliptical paths once a year.

The Nature of Physics, Peter J. Brancazio (1975)
 Quoting: FreakObserver


Hmmm...

I think his response may be...



To which we really all know it means...

thassabutthurt
 Quoting: Children of the Atom


Who?
astrobanner2
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45501122
Israel
08/21/2013 01:32 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
Parallax & aberration explained in the Geocentric model

pray_Italy

User ID: 45499414
Italy
08/21/2013 01:39 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
I KNOW where this is going....... YEAH, finally... banana2

Just make sure you post the video here too: Thread: can anyone explain this vid on ISON?WTF (Page 28)
Disastro
User ID: 1511420
Canada
08/21/2013 11:32 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
clappa
 Quoting: Phil Plait 31848316


Will chime in on this later but I am doing some photoshop work on comet ISON for the next hour or two.
 Quoting: Disastro 45047234


Ok. I am done doctoring comet ISON photos, let's parallax!!
Hydra

User ID: 45536218
Germany
08/22/2013 05:01 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
Parallax & aberration explained in the Geocentric model


 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45501122

Has Malcolm Bowden also a video where he explains the apparent orbit of asteroid Cruithne in relation to Earth or meteor streams?

No? - You know why? - Because it disproves Geocentrism.

.
If the Moon is off, if Earth wobbles or if there is a pole shift
how can things like this, predicted decades ago, happen?

aseindia
Annular Solar Eclipse - January 15, 2010 - Rameshwaram, India
Hypertiger

User ID: 42750318
Canada
08/22/2013 10:46 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
[link to www.youtube.com (secure)]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45020590
United States
08/22/2013 11:04 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
First of all, imagine standing in front of a parked car, that is a block away, on an empty street.

Now, take one step to the side.

You can now see a little bit of the side of the car.

Take another step, and you can see more of the side of the car.

Etc.

That is parallax.

The amount of the side of the car you can see, is determined by the amount of the steps you take to the side.

Now, ask yourself, how far to the side would you have to step, to see the entire side of the car at a 45 degree angle, if you were a block away?

Answer - a lot. You'd have to cross the street, at the very least.

That's why the 120 degree angle of the Hubble photos of ISON CANNOT be attributed to parallax.

ISON is currently over 200 million miles away.

The Hubble telescope moved half the diameter of the Earth, around 4,000 miles, over a period of only a few hours, to take the photos.

That's like taking one - and only one -step to the side, and yet somehow seeing the car suddenly stick out at a 45 degree angle.

It's impossible.

Unless... the car is moving. Spinning. Turning.

Then your one step doesn't matter, compared to the movement of the car, does it?

So "parallax" is still applicable - but irrelevent.

That's how Dr. Astro is lying while telling the truth. Parallax exists, but it cannot explain the AMOUNT of turning of the ISON object.

Not can it explain how a single point of light becomes a line, then a dot, then a line again.

But look at the car again.

If it starts out at an angle, you see it's long.

Then, it turns and faces you, and it's just a small car front.

Then it keeps turning, and it's long again.

Just like the ISON photos.

To be clear, I am not saying there is no parallax going on. What I am saying is that parallax is not NEARLY adequate enough an explanation to see the AMOUNT of angular movement the ISON photos show.

That's why I think we're either seeing:

A) A LINEAR object inside ISON's coma that is spinning or spiraling (remember that Star Trek movie where the long UFO came to talk to the whales? Like that shape),

or

B) A spherical object that is jinking around inside of ISON's coma, drawing shapes like you would with a sparkler at night.

Because otherwise, "parallax" CANNOT explain the AMOUNT of movement we see, IMHO.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 7922198
United States
08/22/2013 11:10 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
Hey retards, RADAR works just fine for things in the solar system. You don't need parallax for ISON.
optimum judgment

User ID: 24021617
United Kingdom
08/22/2013 11:17 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
Nice
DVCMCM

User ID: 38180304
Italy
08/22/2013 11:18 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
clappa
 Quoting: Phil Plait


this1

Last Edited by IWASTHERE on 08/22/2013 11:19 AM
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45521605
Brazil
08/22/2013 11:24 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
First of all, imagine standing in front of a parked car, that is a block away, on an empty street.

Now, take one step to the side.

You can now see a little bit of the side of the car.

Take another step, and you can see more of the side of the car.

Etc.

That is parallax.

The amount of the side of the car you can see, is determined by the amount of the steps you take to the side.

Now, ask yourself, how far to the side would you have to step, to see the entire side of the car at a 45 degree angle, if you were a block away?

Answer - a lot. You'd have to cross the street, at the very least.

That's why the 120 degree angle of the Hubble photos of ISON CANNOT be attributed to parallax.

ISON is currently over 200 million miles away.

The Hubble telescope moved half the diameter of the Earth, around 4,000 miles, over a period of only a few hours, to take the photos.

That's like taking one - and only one -step to the side, and yet somehow seeing the car suddenly stick out at a 45 degree angle.

It's impossible.

Unless... the car is moving. Spinning. Turning.

Then your one step doesn't matter, compared to the movement of the car, does it?

So "parallax" is still applicable - but irrelevent.

That's how Dr. Astro is lying while telling the truth. Parallax exists, but it cannot explain the AMOUNT of turning of the ISON object.

Not can it explain how a single point of light becomes a line, then a dot, then a line again.

But look at the car again.

If it starts out at an angle, you see it's long.

Then, it turns and faces you, and it's just a small car front.

Then it keeps turning, and it's long again.

Just like the ISON photos.

To be clear, I am not saying there is no parallax going on. What I am saying is that parallax is not NEARLY adequate enough an explanation to see the AMOUNT of angular movement the ISON photos show.

That's why I think we're either seeing:

A) A LINEAR object inside ISON's coma that is spinning or spiraling (remember that Star Trek movie where the long UFO came to talk to the whales? Like that shape),

or

B) A spherical object that is jinking around inside of ISON's coma, drawing shapes like you would with a sparkler at night.

Because otherwise, "parallax" CANNOT explain the AMOUNT of movement we see, IMHO.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45020590


clappa
YaRight

User ID: 45573633
United States
08/22/2013 11:42 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
spockuhura
The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 23353917
United States
08/22/2013 12:08 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
Parallax error has absolutely no bearing at all with regards to something as close to earth as Comet Ison.

You fools have been distracted.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 43088908
United States
08/22/2013 12:27 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
Watch this and learn with the pros. It is a comet for god's sake.

Anonymous Coward
User ID: 24280557
United States
08/22/2013 12:37 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
bump
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 24280557
United States
08/22/2013 12:49 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
WHERE IS Dr.(?) Asstro hiding ?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 24280557
United States
08/22/2013 12:49 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
WHERE IS Dr.(?) Asstro hiding ?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 4499989
United States
08/22/2013 12:55 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
You know what I love about stuff like this? I love the fact that "we the people" are figuring out stuff on our own and do NOT need the government's help.

We need more of this stuff. It would be great if we could set aside a lot of the bias, opinions, etc. and start to work together to develop our own groups, organizations and experts to figure out what's really going on. The power of the people. We spend all our time and effort trying to get the government to do the right thing when the truth is, we don't need them. If we do it on our own, we can essentially make them obsolete.

Great job OP!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 8333117
Canada
08/22/2013 01:04 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
WRONG!

It's an angel.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 45365905
Brazil
08/22/2013 01:16 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
When will they realize that astroass is a fraud! Not tired of remembering the asteroid beginning of the year, and in accordance with our fake PHD nothing would happen! Almost six cities were decimated!
Can expect that the comet ison guard big secrets that surely astroshill not imagine!

How much time he spends TRYING rebut the various opinions of the writer here! I am a doctor in my country and post graduate in intensive care, I have a few minutes just to access the forum. The rest of my days are crowded and do not have time for anything!
Razorbackkid

User ID: 39548908
08/22/2013 01:21 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
WRONG!

It's an angel.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8333117

Or a devil.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 40487804
United States
08/22/2013 01:30 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
I be having two bank accounts. One be overdrawn, da other has one dollar. I has a pair-a-lacks. Dat be what dat really is.
74444

User ID: 74444
United States
08/22/2013 01:41 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
First of all, imagine standing in front of a parked car, that is a block away, on an empty street.

Now, take one step to the side.

You can now see a little bit of the side of the car.

Take another step, and you can see more of the side of the car.

Etc.

That is parallax.

The amount of the side of the car you can see, is determined by the amount of the steps you take to the side.

Now, ask yourself, how far to the side would you have to step, to see the entire side of the car at a 45 degree angle, if you were a block away?

Answer - a lot. You'd have to cross the street, at the very least.

That's why the 120 degree angle of the Hubble photos of ISON CANNOT be attributed to parallax.

ISON is currently over 200 million miles away.

The Hubble telescope moved half the diameter of the Earth, around 4,000 miles, over a period of only a few hours, to take the photos.

That's like taking one - and only one -step to the side, and yet somehow seeing the car suddenly stick out at a 45 degree angle.

It's impossible.

Unless... the car is moving. Spinning. Turning.

Then your one step doesn't matter, compared to the movement of the car, does it?

So "parallax" is still applicable - but irrelevent.

That's how Dr. Astro is lying while telling the truth. Parallax exists, but it cannot explain the AMOUNT of turning of the ISON object.

Not can it explain how a single point of light becomes a line, then a dot, then a line again.

But look at the car again.

If it starts out at an angle, you see it's long.

Then, it turns and faces you, and it's just a small car front.

Then it keeps turning, and it's long again.

Just like the ISON photos.

To be clear, I am not saying there is no parallax going on. What I am saying is that parallax is not NEARLY adequate enough an explanation to see the AMOUNT of angular movement the ISON photos show.

That's why I think we're either seeing:

A) A LINEAR object inside ISON's coma that is spinning or spiraling (remember that Star Trek movie where the long UFO came to talk to the whales? Like that shape),

or

B) A spherical object that is jinking around inside of ISON's coma, drawing shapes like you would with a sparkler at night.

Because otherwise, "parallax" CANNOT explain the AMOUNT of movement we see, IMHO.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45020590


Well, your opinion is just that. Interestingly, those who seem to practice this for a living, or talented amateurs like Astro disagree with your opinion.

Do you have any *evidence* that parallax isn't enough to explain the amount of movement? And what amount of movement WOULD it explain? Oh, and what *evidence* could possibly change your opinion?

And, when Astro turns out to be right, will you give him a Green Karma a week for ten weeks?
Morganite

User ID: 12261184
United States
08/22/2013 01:54 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
Absolutely delighted to see this thread pinned and relevant persons present and hopefully pondering.hf
morganite
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1416300
United States
08/22/2013 02:01 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
Parallax error has absolutely no bearing at all with regards to something as close to earth as Comet Ison.

You fools have been distracted.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23353917


We should use parallax on mars.... wait, the planets aren't moving..... Never mind.
Hydra

User ID: 45536218
Germany
08/22/2013 03:07 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
When will they realize that astroass is a fraud! Not tired of remembering the asteroid beginning of the year, and in accordance with our fake PHD nothing would happen! Almost six cities were decimated!
Can expect that the comet ison guard big secrets that surely astroshill not imagine!

How much time he spends TRYING rebut the various opinions of the writer here! I am a doctor in my country and post graduate in intensive care, I have a few minutes just to access the forum. The rest of my days are crowded and do not have time for anything!
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45365905

Any proof, that it was the asteroid Dr. Astro said it would not hit Earth?
No, Brasilian crackpot, it was a different asteroid coming from a totally different direction.

Any proof, that almost six cities were decimated?
Again no, Brasilian crackpot.

.
If the Moon is off, if Earth wobbles or if there is a pole shift
how can things like this, predicted decades ago, happen?

aseindia
Annular Solar Eclipse - January 15, 2010 - Rameshwaram, India
pool
Netizen Ribbonmind

User ID: 41235284
United States
08/22/2013 03:24 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Stellar Aberration and Stellar Parallax: Here Endeth the Lesson
Synchronicity wonders. Reading about Hypatia today.


[link to www.britannica.com]
"The earth is mother of us all, for she is just; but you, because you are unjust have pretended that she is your mother alone; and if you do not stop, I will not permit you to remain upon her."

[link to www.livius.org]

News