GODS STRETCH MARKS REVEALED IN THE CMB?

The CMB Dipole and Quadripole; alignments from the farthest reaches of the known universe to the earth’s equator and ecliptic; artifacts of creation that reveal Gods handiwork.

I just watched Bob Sungenis and Rick DeLano again for the third time on MilitantTv.  Watching them, gets me so pumped up.  At about 49:42 into it, Rick was talking about the earths’ 23.5 degree angle, and how it’s not just a phenomenon of our solar system, but that 23.5 degrees is built into the entire cosmos, but according to "big-bang" theory, the cosmos shouldn't have any idea how our earth and "local group" are oriented. 

 
So they have to somehow explain these alignments in terms of "big-bang" cosmology, but as Rick stretched out his arms, while describing these cosmological alignments, it occurred to me, what these alignments really are; these are really an artifact from creation; when "God stretched out the Heavens".  Cool huh?

Exchange with CoolHardLogic on geostationary satellite launches on his video # 4

p-brane:  Would you agree with the following equatorial geostationary satellite launch scenario? 

1.       You launch from the equator from west to east.

2.       You go into a circular low earth orbit, 100 to 200 miles up, at a speed of 17,500 mph and a 90 minute orbital period.

3.       Then, at the opposite side of the earth that you want to position the GEO SAT, you begin a Hohmann transfer orbit by accelerating the launch vehicle to about 23,000 mph, then coasting and slowing down due to the earth’s gravity the rest of the way up to GEO orbit about 22,236 miles up.

4.       Just as the craft reaches GEO orbit height, its speed now reduced to about 3,500 mph, fires its apogee “kick” motor, accelerating the craft to almost 7,000 mph, circularizing the orbit and synchronizing the satellite with the earth’s rotation.

Would you say that this launch scenario, give or take a few mph, is accurate?

CoolHardLogic:  Hi + p-brane

It would have helped if you'd used SI units. However, going with 320km initial orbit, I get 2.454km/s for the periapsis ΔV, and 1.477km/2 for the apoapsis ΔV, which are 5521.5mph and 3323mph, so I would say you're pretty much there.

p-brane Hi,

Being that you have “Logic” in your name, I’m going to ask you to exercise some of that logic, now.

If I ask you to fly your airplane from your runway to my runway, and I mark an X on my runway and ask you to “park” your plane on that X; could you accelerate when you get to the X to stop on the X?  NO!  You would have to “brake” and “reverse thrust” and brake some more and then maneuver your craft into position on top of the X, then stop.  Correct? 

Relative to your runway "take-off" spot, the X on my runway is FIXED.

Likewise, the geostationary satellite position in the sky is also FIXED, relative to its launch pad; correct?

So I have a question:  does it make sense to say that the satellite is ACCELERATED into its geostationary “parking spot”?

CoolHardLogic:

You forgot to say thanks for helping you with your calculations.

"could you accelerate when you get to the X to stop on the X?  NO!"
Incorrect. Accelerating doesn't mean "increasing". Acceleration is a change of velocity.

"So I have a question:  does it make sense to say that the satellite is ACCELERATED into its geostationary “parking spot”?"
Yes, see above.

p-brane

Thank you for taking the time to add your calculations and engage me in this conversation.  I appreciate it.

I’m not sure I understand your comment:  -- “Accelerating doesn’t mean ‘increasing’.  Acceleration is a change in velocity.” --

Yes, it’s a “change” in velocity, but that change is an increase in velocity.  Decelerating is also a change in velocity; but it’s a decrease in velocity.

This is a quote from a satellite person that I’m currently conversing with as it relates to “circularizing” the elliptical geostationary transfer orbit at its apogee to put the satellite into its geostationary coordinate:

“At apogee the satellite needs to be accelerated in order to catch up with its ‘parking spot’.”

Would you agree with him on this?

Joshua's Long Day

To believe, or not to believe; that is the question!

Joshua 10:12-13; “… Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon.

And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, … So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.” (KJV)

If you’re a heliocentrist “believer”, Joshua 10:12-13 presents a host of problems:

1.   Can God make a square circle? No!  Can God stop something that’s stopped? No; it’s illogical.  So if a “NON-MOVING” SUN stops, the only “logical” explanation for the heliocentrist is, that God figuratively stopped the sun, by literally stopping the earth; an interpretation that requires, not believing and ignoring all of the Bible passages telling us that it is the sun that moves and not the earth!

2.   Stopping the earth’s rotation would indeed make the sun, almost, appear to stop in the sky, (more on that in a minute), but, would do nothing to make the moon stop.  To make the moon stop, God would have to physically stop the moon in its orbit.  And so a truthful writing of this scripture would read something like this:  God stopped the EARTH and the moon; or, God made the sun APPEAR to stop, but the moon, He actually physically stopped.

3.   In order to rationalize and explain-away the stopping of the sun, the heliocentrist needs 2 different interpretations in the same verse; in the same sentence!  They are forced to interpret the stopping of the sun figuratively, and at the same time, interpret the stopping of the moon literally; (Is that even allowed in scriptural interpretation?)  And God couldn’t say He stopped the earth; it’s already stopped.

4.   Also, to make the sun, completely “appear” to stop, God would have also had to stop the earth’s revolution, (orbit).  You see, just stopping the earth’s rotation would not completely stop the sun from “moving”; because the earth is supposedly orbiting the sun at 67,000 MPH.  So during the 24 hours that God "stopped the earth's rotation", the earth would have traveled 1,608,000 miles, equivalent to ONE DEGREE OF MOVEMENT in the sky, backwards; to the east.  So you see, to only stop the earth’s rotation would not have completely stopped the sun; you’d have to also stop the earth’s orbit around the sun to make the sun stand still.  Also, if the sun moved back ONE degree, wouldn’t it have been mentioned?

5.   We should feel differences here on earth during our orbit around the sun.  For instance at perihiion, (closest to the sun), the earth would be moving faster than at Aphelion, (farthest from the sun).  I would think you’d feel the inertial effects on our bodies; created by this elliptical orbit.

6.   Finally, you’d have to question the trust worthiness of scripture.  God said He stopped the sun; when He really stopped the earth.  So you are left with one of two possibilities: either Joshua 10:12-13 is scientifically incorrect, and therefore NOT “inspired”, or, God told a “white lie”; either way, the Bible’s credibility is severely in question.  It’s Just like when people say that Jesus was a good teacher, but not God.  But Jesus claimed to be God.  So, He was either crazy, or, a liar, or, He is, who He said He is.  So, if you don’t believe He’s God, don’t call a “crazy liar”, a good teacher.  Same goes for Joshua, (and other passages that refer to a moving sun), either the Bible is not inspired, or, God’s a liar, or, God stopped the sun, therefore the sun moves, just like the Bible says.  GOD CAN NOT LIE, REMEMBER???

By just taking God at His word, here’s how easy it is for a Bible believing geocentrist to explain Joshua 10:12-13: 

God stopped the sun and the moon (period).

Where’s the Real Launch Data? 

The "text book" geostationary satellite launch data presented in Wikipedia and elsewhere on the internet, (assuming the GEO SATS are really up there, fixed above the equator), CANNOT BE the real launch data.  The data they’ve put up has the assumption of a rotating earth added to their calculations; the problem is, these "text book" calculations, won't work.   <<CLICK HERE FOR ARTICLE WITH LAUNCH DATA>> 

Here’s how I know this:
If I ask you to fly an airplane from your runway in, say..., California to my runway in Florida, and I paint an X, on the runway, and I tell you to stop your plane on the X; how would you accomplish that?  You cannot just, STOP, on that X, you would have to land, either, before the X, and brake and reverse thrust so that you could slowly approach the X, and gently stop on it; or, touch down on the X, brake reverse thrust, turn around and comeback and then park on the X.  Correct?

Relative to your runway, the X on my runway is “fixed”; not moving up or down, side to side, or back and forth.  Right?

The geostationary satellite position up above the equator would also be “fixed” relative to its launch site.  There’s no way that the "text book", launch data, (data that shows the craft speeding up when it gets to the “X”, which is necessary to circularize an eliptical transfer orbit, could land on that “X”, (the fixed geostationary position), without doing the same things that my, example above, of the airplane landing on the X has to do.

I believe that if we could see the REAL launch figures, they would show, what I’ve described for my airplane example.  But they can’t do that, they can’t give us those figures because we would see that the EARTH IS NOT ROTATING.  SOMEONE PROVE ME WRONG!