--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], doctor_gabby_savy > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > > --- In [email protected], doctor_gabby_savy > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Peter > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > The precession of the earth's axis causes the cardinal > > > > > directions to slowly shift about 1 degree every 72 > > > > > years. In moves in a circle with an arc of approx 24 > > > > > degrees completing one cycle every 26,000 years. > > > > > > > > This > > > > > means that if you establish "true" north, 13,000 years > > > > > later it will be off by 24 degrees. Oh no! time to > > > > > rotate the house! > > > > > > > > 13000 / 72 = 24????????? > > > > Is that the "new" math? > > > > > > > > I get 180 degrees. Which makes sense since that is half a circle > > > > --which corresponds to 13,000/26,000 -- half a precessional > cycle. > > > > > > > > I need to better "visualize" what happens with precession. > > > > > > It's like a top wobbling as its spin slows down. > > > > > > Picture a dinner plate, with the top moving around the > > > outer edge of the plate, spinning as it goes, but also > > > wobbling slowly. The axis of the top describes a small > > > circle. The sun is at the center of the plate. The > > > plane of the circle the top's axis is describing is > > > roughly parallel to the plane of the plate. > > > > > > (Please excuse if this is a duplicate. Yahoo burped as > > > I was trying to post it the first time.) > > > > Thanks. I understand that -- to a degree. :) > > > > But does it imply the sun rose in west 13,000 yrs agos? > > No. How could it? The direction of the earth's > rotation doesn't change.
My point exactly. As you may have seen in my original post back to peter (to which you responded) if procession does not imply the sun rising from different directions, for example from the west 13,000 yrsr agos (half a precessional cycle), then why and how does it make SV invalid in the long run -- as Peter has argued. As I stated, SV is primarily about the position of the sun, its rising, transit, setting, in relation to a house or building. If the building is facing the sun in the correct way now, it would still be facing the sun in the correct way in 13000 years (half a precessional cycle) --if still standing. Thus, with your clarification of the above point, I believe Peter's point is empty of substance. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
