View Full Version : Set of YouTube.com Videos Explaining Astronomy of 2012

Jim Smith Chiapas
2010-Jun-08, 10:31 PM

John Jaksich
2010-Jun-10, 03:45 AM
I thought the videos were done very well. Despite --your "vanilla" comment---it portrays some of the seriousness of the "con-man" mentality that should be pointed out and rooted out when possible. ---These are my thoughts.

Good job!

Robert Tulip
2010-Jun-10, 05:38 AM

typo - website is http://alignment2012.com/

2010-Jun-10, 07:53 AM
I'd be pleased if any of you could view those videos and leave whatever comments you wish.

I tried viewing the first one, but found the slides changed too quickly. I wasn't able to read everything.

John Jaksich
2010-Jun-10, 03:09 PM
I tried viewing the first one, but found the slides changed too quickly. I wasn't able to read everything.

I felt the same way ---but (to me--at least) it somewhat reflects (anti-intuitively) the 3-card Monty attitude of the con-game.--However, I had to train my eye--to keep up with it. (I viewed them more than once --so I knew the pattern of display)

Robert Tulip
2010-Jun-10, 10:04 PM
Thanks Jim, I hope people find these videos informative to frame debate.

Re the slides changing too quickly, Jim mentions that the Youtube format means he has to switch fast. You can always stop the video and read more slowly.

Re a small error in 1D, the Milky Way was named in ancient times - Galaxy is from the Greek for milk. There is also an Eastern myth 'the churning of the milky ocean' that is often associated with precession.

Your statement "the crossing point and Galactic Equator are artificial positional references invented by modern astronomers" could open a question about the relation between invention and discovery. It can be argued this position is discovered, as a natural result of the cyclic relation between the earth's axis and the galaxy. It may be true that the Galactic Equator is just "an arbitrary artificial line defined by astronomers during the last 90 years for their own convenience", but the plane of the galaxy as a whole has been observed in rough terms for millennia. I'm not sure you can argue that the precision of modern observation invalidates the claim that a rough prediction was made in ancient times.

2010-Jun-11, 04:53 AM
Since the OP isn't posing a question but rather, seeks to counter conspiracy/fringe theories, I've moved this thread from Q&A to the Conspiracy Theories forum. Discussion of the videos may proceed apace but bear in mind, anyone who begins to advocate for the CT/fringe side will immediately assume a rule 13 burden.

Carry on folks.

Tom Servo
2010-Jun-11, 06:40 AM
Only watched one of the videos. Seems to be very informative. Keep up the good work.

2010-Jun-11, 07:31 AM
more intimidating videos to see?

Jim Smith Chiapas
2010-Jun-17, 11:48 PM

Jim Smith Chiapas
2010-Jun-18, 12:28 AM

2010-Jun-18, 01:31 AM
What I was trying to say is that when modern astronomers finally learned that there are such things as galaxies, and that we live in one, and that that’s why we see said bright streak, those astronomers naturally chose to name our Galaxy after the well-known streak that it caused in the sky. I’ll see if I can add another slide or two to make that clearer.

I didn't see the video, so I don't know if this matches the point you were aiming for, but (Wikipedia: Galaxy):

The word galaxy derives from the Greek term for our own galaxy, galaxias (γαλαξίας), or kyklos galaktikos, meaning "milky circle" for its appearance in the sky.

Turned on its head, the very concept of galaxy was named after the milkiness in our sky.

Jim Smith Chiapas
2010-Jun-21, 02:33 AM