| |
|
Article: <59uggi$gce@dfw-ixnews2.ix.netcom.com>
From: saquo@ix.netcom.com(Nancy )
Subject: Eric Kline CANNOT DEFEND his Newton Argument - Response
# 5
Date: 26 Dec 1996 18:34:58 GMT
Eric Kline once again, for the FIFTH TIME, is unable to defend the argument he posted in response to the Why do the planets continue to revolve? thread. The Zetas challenged him to defend his argument, pointing out a glaring discrepancy and contradiction. He has, for the FIFTH TIME, come back with diversions and insults, but NOT addressed the points that the Zetas make, listed, once again, below.
In article <32C0D1E6.C31@acs.tamu.edu> Eric Kline
states:
> I have answered your "challenge". Evidently not to
a level
> you could understand. You claim I come back with diversions,
> but if that is so you are certainly guilty of the same. You
haven't
> answered my questions. I've answered yours and turnabout is
> fair play.
> eric kline <emk9267@acs.tamu.edu>
Below, what the Zetas asked Eric to defend.
[repost of Zeta challenge]
(Begin ZetaTalk[TM])
Let's just follow the logic you presented, Eric, along the paths
nature would put it upon. Your planets do not ALL have the same
orbit, as you are aware. The Earth's year, with 365 days and a
fraction, is a much faster orbit than the outer planets. The
orbits are not circular. Thus, the planets come closer or farther
from each other regularly, and perturb each other. All this
you've said. BUT, you failed to apply your God Newton's law to
this happenstance, all the while claiming to worship him.
What does perturb mean? This is recorded in a CHANGE in the motion, else it would be a meaningless term. I could say the planets HARUMPF, but give no evidence of this, and none would agree. Therefore, PERTURB gives evidence, and this evidence is a slowing or speeding up, or a wider orbit or closer orbit, but it most certainly does NOT mean NO CHANGE.
So .. given that the planets CHANGE when they are perturbed,
according to your God Newton, they should STAY CHANGED, should
they not? If an orbit swings wide to move toward a giant it is
passing, should not the orbit STAY wide then? If a planet slows
slightly due to a giant's gravity attraction behind it, should it
not STAY slower? Please consult with the priests of the Church of
Newton and respond. We await your reply.
(End ZetaTalk[TM])
http://www.zetatalk.com