Replies

Said LeGrande:

Do you support spreading lies and misinformation?

GGG: I think maybe LeGrande does support the spreading of lies and misinformation, at least if it's him doing the spreading.

He claims that when you look at the sun, it's actually not where you see it but 2.1 degrees ahead of where it appears because the earth rotates 2.1 degrees in the 8.3 minutes it takes the sunlight to reach the earth..
(See here and here)

Now if the sun orbited the earth, SURE - the sun would indeed move 2.1 degrees by the time its light reached the earth, and the apparent position would be 2.1 degrees behind the actual position. But the earth is rotating at 360 degrees per 24 hours - not being orbited by the sun once every 24 hours.

(Also see my post here for a summarization of some of LeGrande's poor scientific understanding.)

I maintain that the sun will appear within about 20 arcseconds of where it actually is for an observer on earth -- and the 20 arcseconds displacement is due to the observer's transverse velocity of about 67K miles/hour as the earth flies through space on its yearly journey around the sun. (See Stellar Aberration)

And furthermore, LeGrande has heretofore refuse to answer some questions which I've asked him. They are simple questions, and I believe if he would apply his theory to them, he'd see the error in his way - but he refuses to answer them!

The problem of course is if it is true that the sun is lagged by 2.1 degrees between where you see it and where it is, then all the sudden Pluto, which can be up to 6.8 light hours away, will be lagged about 102 degrees -- in otherwords, not even really in the night sky when we look up and see it.

And a lot of other problems arise as well. I think he must know he's wrong because he refuses to answer some simple questions. But on the other hand, he insists that he's right.

Furthermore, so far I haven't found a evolutionist atheistic who'll join me in saying that "Yeah, LeGrande's wrong and he's got to know he's wrong." It seems they won't challenge their brother in their faith, even when they know they are wrong!

And I suspect that this is why science education is today in such shambles - because all the atheistic evolutionist teachers and professors know that their story doesn't hold water and they know eachother is lying but they refuse to speak up about the lies because they are being told by their own "kind."

Below are the questions which LeGrande heretofore refuses to answer. I have color coded them for ease.

So this is a call out to anyone who thinks that either I'm wrong or that LeGrande is wrong and that he's spreading lies and misinformation. This is also a call out to any atheistic evolutionist who has the guts to challenge LeGrande on his integrity for maintaining his untrue claims and yet refusing to apply them to simple questions.

The fact is that(see my earlier link) LeGrande does often call people liars and he himself makes scientific claims that aren't true.

(Oh, did I mention that LeGrande has heretofore provided not one single scientific source that supports his claimed 2.1 degrees for difference between actual and apparent position of the sun.)

-Jesse

The Red question - 12 light hour away planet:

For an observer on earth who is looking at a bright and stationary planet that is 12 light hours away and is above the earth's equator, at the instant that said planet appears in the east will it really be in the west? Will its gravity be pulling in the opposite direction of where the light appears to come from at that instant?
LeGrande's Answer: Refuses to answer so far.

The Green question: Pluto

For an observer on earth who looks up and sees Pluto when it is overhead and when it is 6.8 light hours away, at that instant in time, will Pluto really be about 102 degrees away from where it appears? Will it really appear directly overhead at the moment it is really below the horizon?
LeGrande's Answer: Refuses to answer so far.

The Blue question: if the sun were 10 light days away

If the sun were 10 light days away, and the earth was suddenly stopped, do you believe that the sun would continue to appear to rise and set for another 10 days?
LeGrande's Answer: Refuses to answer so far.

The Yellow question: Turntable at north pole tracking the sun

Let's say that you are standing on a turntable at the North Pole. Lets also say that the turntable (and its pointer) is tracking and pointing at the Suns gravity field (its actual position). Will the pointer on the turntable be pointing at* the light that you see or will it be leading or lagging that light by 2.1 degrees? (*Note: by "at" I mean "within about 20 arcseconds")
LeGrande's Answer: Refuses to answer so far.

The Lavender question: 17 minute merry go around tilted toward Polaris

Let us say that I tilted up my merry go around so that it's top pointed directly at the north star (Polaris to be specific) and furthermore let us say that I got it spinning at exactly 180 degrees per 8.3 minutes with reference to the position of the sun -- at the instant that the sun appeared almost exactly in my face, would it really be behind my head? In other words, would the light be coming from about the exact opposite direction from where the sun's gravity would be pulling - at any instant in time?
LeGrande's Answer: Refuses to answer so far.

The Purple question: 17 minute merry go around on north pole

Let us say that I had a merry go around on the North Pole furthermore let us say that I got it spinning at exactly 180 degrees per 8.3 minutes with reference to the position of the sun -- at the instant that the sun appeared almost exactly in my face, would it really be behind my head? In other words, would the light be coming from about the exact opposite direction from where the sun's gravity would be pulling - at any instant in time?
LeGrande's Answer: Refuses to answer so far.

The Aqua question: 17 minute day vs 17 minute merry go around revolution.

You said that If the earth were turning at the rate of 180 degrees per 8.5 minutes, the sun's optical image would be lagged 180 degrees from its real position.

But then you say that if I was on a merry go around that was turning at the rate of 180 degrees per 8.3 minutes, and the sun appeared on the horizon, the sun's apparent position would not be 180 degrees displaced from its actual position.

So how come, by your theory, would the earth's hypothetical rotational rate of 180 degrees per 8.3 minutes, for an observer on earth at an instant in time, cause the sun's gravitational pull and light to come from opposite directions from eachother, when for an observer on a merry go around turning at the same rate, it would not?
LeGrande's Answer: Refuses to answer so far.

Said LeGrande:Science is not about proof, it is about falsification. When someone says that science claims to have a proof, that person is simply ignorant or a nut case.

Neither of those statements are true.

There are lots of sciences that do have proof. And you're totally missing another aspect: Evidence for. Not only does a theory need to have no evidence against it, it needs evidence for it.

For example, in my field of electronics things are proved all the time. Every time I test a certain component in a certain way, it behaves in a predictable manner doing the same thing it did the previous time I performed that exact test.

The fact is that transistors behave in a certain way and it can be proved by demonstrating that they behave in a certain way. That's how your computer is working right now as you read this -- them little transistors or mosfets are turning on and off billions of times a second - and they do it predictably! (until you put MS windows on it.)

For example, let us imagine you're using an older slowish computer at 2Ghz. Let's say it's got about 55 million transistors, and every instruction cycle involves 20% of them. That's 2 billion times 11 million, or 2.2 × 10^16 transistor state changes per second. Now lets say your computer has been on for the last 8 hours: Now we get 6.33600 × 10^20 transistor change operations in 8 hours. Now multiply that by ten million computers, now it's 6.336*10^27! In case you don't know what that means, it's like this: 6,336,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000!

So don't you think that when it comes to the science of the operation of transistors that it's been proven that not only that they can but that they do indeed perform billion and billions transistor operations in a predictable way? And you think there is no proof in science? Have I got news for you..!

The fact is that real science does have proofs for a theory. In many of the real sciences, we can perform the test over and over, even billions of times, to prove that it works.

ASBE and AFN (All Species by Evolution and All From Nothing) on the other hand is a completely different kind of science - and if you look around, I think you'll find that to most people, AFN and ASBE are no more then a belief; a faith.

And always remember that lack of evidence against is not evidence for..!

-Jesse