Another fanciful tale

[Zzyzx]

.
Here is another fanciful tale about the sun that was not reported by anyone other than Bible writers:

Joshua 10:12 On the day the Lord gave the Amorites over to Israel, Joshua said to the Lord in the presence of Israel: “Sun, stand still over Gibeon, and you, moon, over the Valley of Aijalon.� 13 So the sun stood still, and the moon stopped, till the nation avenged itself on its enemies,as it is written in the Book of Jashar. The sun stopped in the middle of the sky and delayed going down about a full day. 14 There has never been a day like it before or since, a day when the Lord listened to a human being. Surely the Lord was fighting for Israel!

Most glaring defects:

1. Physical impossibility of Earth stopping rotation then starting again AND rotation is 1000 miles per hour at the equator. Atmosphere and oceans would not stop with the solid Earth – thus, winds of hundreds of miles per hour and oceans sloshing over coastal areas.

2. No astronomers or observers worldwide noticed or recorded that remarkable event they could not have missed.

Of course, whoever wrote Joshua may not have had a way of knowing that the Earth orbits the Sun, not vice versa – thus making the tale impossible. Modern people, however, should recognize it as fantasy.

WHY would any informed, educated person accept as true a tale of the sun and moon stopping / standing still (or a star doing so in the nativity tale) -- as anything other than fantasy? Do they not know that Earth rotation causes the appearance of sun, moon and stars moon movement / rising and setting?

WHY give any credibility to a source that presents that tale as true?

[Difflugia]

Thank you, nice try. The speed difference could also be explained by gravitational pull of sun and moon traveling around earth.

Nice try? I hope you're not seriously arguing this, but I'll bite.

If that were true, then the speed differences would change as the satellites approached and receded from the centers of gravity of the sun and moon. That's not what happens.

I think this is actually a god point. Not necessary enough to make me to believe earth rotates, but if there is really geostationary satellites it is interesting how they could remain steady, if earth doesn’t rotate. One explanation would be that they are just stopped there and no force needed to move it, far enough from earth to not drop.

Again, unless we irretrievably misunderstand the mathematics involved, there is no such thing as "far enough." The fact that the Apollo Moon landing went off without a hitch proves that the gravity of Earth has a significant effect at least to the orbit of the Moon, which is an order of magnitude more distant than a geosynchronous orbit.

If you somehow think antigravity is plausible, then that still wouldn't explain the apparent orbits of satellites in high inclination, elliptical orbits. If the Earth rotates, then their orbits are simply ellipses with the Earth at one elliptical focus, exactly as the simple math of conventional physics would predict. If the Earth doesn't rotate, then their orbits are extremely bizarre. The fact that the satellites were put intentionally into the orbits they were means that the math works. These weren't just "wait and see where they end up" sorts of things.

Do you know how they are set to the position they have?

Yes.

[1213]

…If that were true, then the speed differences would change as the satellites approached and receded from the centers of gravity of the sun and moon. That's not what happens….

Sad thing is that I have no real reliable data of the movements of satellites.

… The fact that the Apollo Moon landing went off without a hitch proves that the gravity of Earth has a significant effect at least to the orbit of the Moon, which is an order of magnitude more distant than a geosynchronous orbit…

Yes, but the gravitational force depends also on the size of the object. For small object the force is obviously smaller than for the moon for example.

…that still wouldn't explain the apparent orbits of satellites in high inclination, elliptical orbits. ...

Sorry, I have difficulties to believe that information.

Do you know how they are set to the position they have?

Yes.

According to that, “Geostationary satellites require some station keeping to keep their position, and once they run out of thruster fuel they are generally retired.�, which means it is possible that they remain on their spot because they are artificially kept there.

[Diagoras]

I just want to say; my beliefs don’t require dismissing scientific knowledge. I just have no reason to adopt scientific beliefs, if they are not well supported by real scientific observations.

Taken as read, this would be the same viewpoint of any serious scientist, if you’d amended it to end with: “real scientific observations made of repeated, testable experiment.�

In this particular thread, you seem to be taking a position that the rotation of the earth round the Sun can’t be ‘well-supported’, but admit that you don’t have any data about satellites. You furthermore offer unsupported alternate explanations (“They just stop there unsupported�) without acknowledging the relative merits of different theories.

The fact is we can launch and control satellites, plus track and predict the relative movements of all the bodies in the solar system (and beyond) to a high degree of precision, Along with countless other experiments and observations made over the centuries, this does prove that the earth rotates on its axis. To suggest otherwise merely shows up your assertion about not dismissing scientific knowledge as false.

Far simpler and more likely that the biblical passage in question was meant as hyperbole.

[1213]

…The fact is we can launch and control satellites, plus track and predict the relative movements of all the bodies in the solar system (and beyond) to a high degree of precision, ...

Nice thing about space is that things are relative. One doesn’t have to know all to have a working project, because it is enough to have right ratio.

[nobspeople]

[Replying to Zzyzx in post #1]

WHY give any credibility to a source that presents that tale as true?

An honest, thinking person without some deep, inset need, wouldn't. Unfortunately, that's not how some people work these days.