North - South

[cikljamas]

More on Souther Cross

Do you remember post #2 and "Polaris" argument?

How about this:

Have you ever seen the Southern Cross (constellation Crux) from 28 degrees north? This is perhaps a northern most record to capture the complete view of this small but notable southern constellation. This time-lapse video shows stars moving over the southern horizon of Tenerife, Canary Islands. The video is made of a sequence of many short-exposure images. As added by the photographer "The video is the result of nearly two hours of continuous shots. To my knowledge this is the first ever imagery of full Southern Cross, including the lower star Acrux from this northern latitude. I was at Teide National Park at altitude of 2300 meters, probably the place with darkest and most transparent sky on the island. The atmospheric physics contained in this view is interesting too. However, due to atmospheric refraction and the high altitude, the star is visible only for a few minutes in mid-May in early evening. and practically.

No "altitude" or/and "refraction" excuse will suffice to cover up the only possible solution that we can use to convincingly explain this phenomena, and that one and only convincing explanation is of course FLAT EARTH theory and nothing but the FLAT EARTH obvious fact!

[cikljamas]

Al, i have to remind you to just three last questions to which you haven't even try to answer so far:

Question no 1:

Look up to me. My question (unanswered by you) was very simple and plausible. I repeat: Why would airliners fly from New Zealand to Brasil in wrong direction which means doubling millage, throwing away enormous sums of money and wasting passengers precious time?

Would you like me to believe that they are all out of their mind?

I challenge you to take a long exposure photograph while moving 30 km per second and get a sharp image like this with which you are waving all along, and if you can't do it then you have to admit that your loving round-helioc.theory has been dead (flatten out) long time ago.

Question no 2:

What we have to determine is HOW and WHY all stars shifts 180 degree at January 3th with respect to their position above the Earth at July 3th.

Heliocentrists assert that the 180 degree shift of all the stars with respect to the Earth happens due to for 180 degree (also) changed position of the Earth with respect to the Sun.

Now, we just don't care about the position of the Sun, because when we look up to the sky at midnight January 3th we see 180 degrees shifted stars with respect to their position which had been at midnight July 3th.

How it happened?

The Earth still stays in exactly the same geometrical position with respect to the allegedly fixed stars, the only difference is that the Earth has been moved straight forward (from the geometrical point of view) for certain amount of miles (negligible regarding position of practically endlessly distant stars (according to heliocentrist's dreams)) after she had allegedly bypassed the Sun making half a circle around it.

So, the Earth is in exactly the same geometrical position at midnight January 3th as it was at the midnight July 3th. So, who is a sucker here and now?

In order to be shifted for any degree with respect to the Earth (which is still in exactly the same geometrical position after alleged 6 month revolution around the Sun), all the stars have to turn around the fixed Earth.

This is so simple and so obvious argument against heliocentrism that i can't put into the words my amazement and astonishment with the extent of heliocentric audaciousness and arrogance.

Aren't you also amazed with this proportion of heliocentric arrogance?

Question no 3:

Look at this: Is the southern cross ( crux) visible from Australia all year round?

Have you noticed something interesting in above link?

Completely wrong answers!

No, the Southern Cross is not visible from Australia all year round!!!

I advice anyone who now read these words and live in Australia to watch the sky next two months very carefully and i promise you, you will not be able to see Southern Cross at any time of any southern spring nights. Only next few nights from now on is the last chance for you to see Southern Cross briefly (right after sunset), and that's it. After early September (which is right now) through late November no Southern Cross above Australia. On top of that, first next chance for Australians to see Southern Cross clearly in the Sky is 1st January next year around midnight!!!

The Southern Cross is the southern antipode (direct opposite) to the northern circumpolar constellation Casiopeia. Casiopeia is visible on any clear night of the year from most locations in the Northern "hemisphere", why isn't the very same case with the Southern Cross if the Earth is rotund???

[aljhoa]

Guess why!

Our Solar System is a Vortex

Our Galaxy is a Vortex


Al

[cikljamas]

Look at this: Is the southern cross ( crux) visible from Australia all year round?

Have you noticed something interesting in above link?

Completely wrong answers!

No, the Southern Cross is not visible from Australia all year round!!!

I advice anyone who now read these words and live in Australia to watch the sky next two months very carefully and i promise you, you will not be able to see Southern Cross at any time of any southern spring nights. Only next few nights from now on is the last chance for you to see Southern Cross briefly (right after sunset), and that's it. After early September (which is right now) through late November no Southern Cross above Australia. On top of that, first next chance for Australians to see Southern Cross clearly in the Sky is 1st January next year around midnight!!!

The Southern Cross is the southern antipode (direct opposite) to the northern circumpolar constellation Casiopeia. Casiopeia is visible on any clear night of the year from most locations in the Northern "hemisphere", why isn't the very same case with Southern Cross???

Guess why!

[aljhoa]

We could discuss that too, but not here. All i can say for now is that you are again victim of "scientific" lies. Read this:

This is just the tip of the iceberg, and many similar results will undoubtedly soon be reported. We hope that these results will cause biologists to give more serious consideration to the possibility that the Biblical record of a recent creation is historically accurate.The most reasonable interpretation of the data, then, is that the human race is in fact about 6000 years old.

This is Photoshopped Picture

Aboriginal Australians - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Al

[cikljamas]

@ Al, don't be a troll, this is not a thread about the origin of a man.

We could discuss that too, but not here. All i can say for now is that you are again victim of "scientific" lies. Read this:

This is just the tip of the iceberg, and many similar results will undoubtedly soon be reported. We hope that these results will cause biologists to give more serious consideration to the possibility that the Biblical record of a recent creation is historically accurate.

Watch this: ARK on Mt. Ararat: WHY the media BLACKOUT on the real history of Ararat? - YouTube

Not so long ago I already told you (in another thread) a story about a nazzi-comunist forum in Croatia ("forum.hr"). Today i have registered there under the brand new nick and i posted just one single post in the thread that deals with the similar issue ("Sun revolves about the Earth or vice versa?"). Guess how those nazzi-comunist bastards reacted? They banned me right away, and you know why? Because i have presented them a few so strong arguments against heliocentrism with which they are aware they just can't compete under no circumstances, and they know they can't compete with them because these arguments are 100 % irrefutable proofs against their heliocentric-nazzi-comunist-pedophile-liberal-atheistic lies.

Here is the copy of my original post:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWcT4YppncI

Al, i know that you like to use from time to time google translate, so if you are in the mood you can try to translate these words of mine also.

When you (nazzi-comunist bastards) are so desperate all that you can do is to show me your nazzi-comunist-pedophile-liberal-atheistic filthy tongue.

[aljhoa]

I Know ... Tom Jones

He who knows not and knows not that he knows not, is a fool ... shun him.
He who knows not and knows that he knows not, is ignorant ... teach him.
He who knows and knows not that he knows, is asleep ... wake him.
He who knows and knows that he knows, is a wise man ... follow him.

6 Millennia

vs

100 Millennia Dreamtime
Dreamtime beliefs and social customs


Al

[cikljamas]

I Know ... Tom Jones

He who knows not and knows not that he knows not, is a fool ... shun him.
He who knows not and knows that he knows not, is ignorant ... teach him.
He who knows and knows not that he knows, is asleep ... wake him.
He who knows and knows that he knows, is a wise man ... follow him.

[aljhoa]

and there was no reason to accept the Copernican theory, except for its mathematical simplicity. Tycho Brahe's system ("that the earth is stationary, the sun revolves about the earth, and the other planets revolve about the sun") also competed with Copernicus'.

100,000 Years W/O Dogma

The structure of the Aborigine universe was about the same throughout Australia. It consisted of three planes: the earth, the sky, and the underworld. The earth was circular and flat covered by the dome of the sky which stretched out to the horizon. The sky was the plane upon which super-natural beings or the ancestral-heroes lived. The Aborigines believed that the sky "was a rich country with a plentiful water supply." (Mudrooroo, 31) The stars represented the campfires of the beings that lived in the sky plane. Some myths include that the sky was held up by giant props at the corners of the earth. The Aborigines also believed that certain shaman, or medicine men, had the ability to travel between the earth plane and the sky plane. They did this by means of trees between heaven and the earth. One such tree was seen in the night sky in the Milky Way. Under the plane of the earth was the underworld plane. The underworld plane was much like the earth plane and inhabited by people like those from the earth plane. Certain celestial objects were also explained in Aboriginal mythology.

http://www.astronomy.pomona.edu/archeo/australia/australia4.html

Al

[cikljamas]

But of a ll discoveries and convictions, nothing may have
produced a greater effect on the human spirit than the
doctrine of Copemicus. The world had scarcely been
acknowledged as round and complete in itself when it
was obliged to forgo the tremendous privilege of being
the centre of the universe. Never, perhaps, has a greater
demand been made on mankind: for through this
recognition so many things went up in smoke: a second
paradise, a world of innocence, poetry and piety, the
evidence of the senses, the conviction of a poetic-
religious faith; no wonder people did not want to let all
this go and mobilised all possible resistance to such a
doctrine, which authorised and demanded of those who
accepted it a hitherto unknown, indeed unimagined
freedom of thought and grandeur of attitude. '
Friedrich Nietzche

How terribly wrong!!!

The greatest truths often flatly contradict the senses, in
fact they almost always do. The movement of the Earth
around the Sun - to all appearances [dem Augenschein
nach] what could be more absurd? And yet it is the
greatest, noblest, most momentous discovery man has
ever made; to my mind more important than the whole
Bible. Friedrich Nietzche

How terribly wrong, sad and pathetic!!!

Has the self-belittlement of man [die Selbst-Verkleinerung
des Menschen], his will to self-belittlement, not
progressed irresistibly since Copernicus? [...] Since
Copemicus, man seems to have got himself on an inclined
plane - now he is slipping faster and faster away from the
centre into - what? into nothingness? into a 'penetrating
sense of his nothingness'? ... Very well! hasn't this been
the straightest route to - theoW ideal? (CM, III, 25)
Friedrich Nietzche

How deadly right, and totally insane in the same time!!!

As for materialistic atomism, it is one of the best-refuted
things there are; and perhaps no scholar in Europe is still
so unscholarly today as to accord it serious significance
except for handy everyday use (as an abbreviated means
of expression) - thanks above all to the Pole Boscovich
who, together with the Pole Copernicus, has been the
greatest and most triumphant opponent of appearance
[Gegner des Augenscheins] hitherto. For while
Copemicus persuaded us to believe, contrary to all the
senses, that the earth does not stand firm, Boscovich
taught us to abjure belief in the last thing of earth that
'stood firm', b e l i e f in 'substance', in 'matter', in the earth-
residuum and particle atom: it was the greatest triumph
over the senses hitherto achieved on earth. (BGE 12)
Friedrich Nietzche

How awfully inappropriate to put in the same sentence one of the greatest physicist of all time () and one of the most miserable astronomers of all times (Kopernik)!

Who were the greatest admirers of that lunatic Nietzche? Two other great lunatics: Adolf Hitler and Josif Visarionovič Staljin!

However, his (Thomas KuhnThus the popular view that Copernicus was a modern scientist who overthrew an unscientific and long-outmoded viewpoint is mistaken both by exaggerating the difference between Copernicus and the Ptolemaic astronomers and in underestimating the scientific credentials of work carried out before Copernicusand there was no reason to accept the Copernican theory, except for its mathematical simplicity. Tycho Brahe's system ("that the earth is stationary, the sun revolves about the earth, and the other planets revolve about the sun") also competed with Copernicus'.

At the instance of , the Catholic Church's 1758 Index of Prohibited Books omitted the general prohibition of works defending heliocentrism,[95] but retained the specific prohibitions of the original uncensored versions of De revolutionibus and Galileo's Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems. Those prohibitions were finally dropped from the 1835 Index.

Well, here we must quote Walter Van Der Kamp once more:

In short, the convinced Copernican proposed the right thing for the wrong reason. He supposed that a water-filled telescope would conclusively prove the heliocentric theory. But to translate a Dutch expression:

[cikljamas]

Al, exit heliocentrism NOW and FOREVER!
After reading this post you will stop dreaming about heliocentric fairytale once and for all, i promise you!

So, listen very carefully!
Not only that nobody is (and never will be) able to answer to this question: What could be the possible cause for fixed spatial orientation of the Earth's axis?...but "fixed spatial orientation of the Earth's axis" is also the ultimate flaw in heliocentric theory, and now i am going to show you HOW and WHY:

See this illustration:



Now, in which direction the Earth's axis is oriented at July 3th comparing it with January 3th? It's oriented in the same direction isn't it? You have to be aware that the so called celestial equator presents the same plane which cuts the Earth's "equator". That is to say that the Earth is really the center of the Stellatum. All stars are centered to the Earth, there is no doubt about that. Just a little help from your friend:



What we have to determine is HOW and WHY all stars shifts 180 degree at January 3th with respect to their position above the Earth at July 3th.

Heliocentrists assert that the 180 degree shift of all the stars with respect to the Earth happens due to for 180 degree (also) changed position of the Earth with respect to the Sun.

Now, we just don't care about the position of the Sun, because when we look up to the sky at midnight January 3th we see 180 degrees shifted stars with respect to their position which had been at midnight July 3th.

How it happened?

The Earth still stays in exactly the same geometrical position with respect to the allegedly fixed stars, the only difference is that the Earth has been moved straight forward (from the geometrical point of view) for certain amount of miles (negligible regarding position of practically endlessly distant stars (according to heliocentrist's dreams)) after she had allegedly bypassed the Sun making half a circle around it.

So, the Earth is in exactly the same geometrical position at midnight January 3th as it was at the midnight July 3th. So, who is a sucker here and now?

In order to be shifted for any degree with respect to the Earth (which is still in exactly the same geometrical position after alleged 6 month revolution around the Sun), all the stars have to turn around the fixed Earth.

This is so simple and so obvious argument against heliocentrism that i can't put into the words my amazement and astonishment with the extent of heliocentristic audaciousness and arrogance.

Aren't you also amazed with this proportion of heliocentristic arrogance?

Tom Jones-In Dreams

Tom Jones - I Have Dreamed - Live

[aljhoa]

Australian Aboriginal mythology,
Dreamtime is a place beyond time and space in which the past, present, and future exist wholly as one.
Tribespeople could enter this alternate universe through dreams or various states of altered consciousness,
as well as death, Dreamtime being considered the final destination before reincarnation.

The Dreaming establishes the structures of society, rules for social behavior, and
the ceremonies performed to ensure continuity of life and land. The Dreaming governs the laws of community,
cultural lore and how people are required to behave in their communities.
The condition that is The Dreaming is met when people live according to law, and live the lore:
perpetuating initiations and Dreaming transmissions or lineages, singing the songs, dancing the dances,
telling the stories, painting the songlines and Dreamings.
Dreamtime - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Al

[cikljamas]

How ironic, you have already gotten your answer in post (guess the number) #1. I bet you didn't figure out the true meaning of the figure 87 which illustrates (represents) a dipping needle on the "equator". Maybe you could deign at least now (after full 9 pages) to pause and think it over before you yell your next (long time ago already answered) question, what do you say? See post #20 also (page 1), and cut it out (being so desperate and yelling funny-old (already resolved) questions), O.K.? Yelling your funny questions resemble very much to this:



edit: Oh, i forgot post #23, also page 1, which represents special explanation (about the true meaning of the figure 87) which was dedicated to no one else but you. And now, full 9 pages afterwards we should (according to you) deal with the same question(s)?

And, don't you dare to answer me to that question about alarming (to any reasonable man) duration (which speak more then 1000 words) of "the opposite-side (of the Earth) flights" (Australia- South America...New Zealand-South Africa...etc.) which last 40 - 56 hours instead of just 17 hours or so!

[aljhoa]

Al, all your contribution to this thread boils down to waving with some suspicious photographs and yelling funny questions.

After you show me in details HOW and WHY something works in reality (not in photoshop)...

Look up to me. My question (unanswered by you) was very simple and plausible. I repeat: Why would airliners fly from New Zealand to Brasil in wrong direction ...

My Master,
I asked you several questions first and got no answers.

The simple "Liquid Filled Ball Style Pin On Compass" and
previous request "Show magnetic field's inclination and intensity as a function of latitude" prove the "flat earth hoax".

Look up to me,
"magnetic field's inclination and intensity as a function of latitude"
is not Photoshop.

Al

[cikljamas]

Al, all your contribution to this thread boils down to waving with some suspicious photographs and yelling funny questions.

After you show me in details HOW and WHY something works in reality (not in photoshop) and HOW and WHY that "something" works in RET and HOW and WHY that "something" doesn't work and can't work in FET, then (and only then) we can begin to consider your funny questions as serious one.

Look up to me. My question (unanswered by you) was very simple and plausible. I repeat: Why would airliners fly from New Zealand to Brasil in wrong direction which means doubling millage, throwing away enormous sums of money and wasting passengers precious time?

Would you like me to believe that they are all out of their mind?

I challenge you to take a long exposure photograph while moving 30 km per second and get a sharp image like this with which you are waving all along, and if you can't do it then you have to admit that your loving round-helioc.theory has been dead (flatten out) long time ago.