Sad to Note This

GJ 357 d - if one light day up · Sad to Note This

Yesterday, I was promoting the URL of this blog and two more, and one conversation landed me in describing last article on this one.

I was asked if I thought the source I was quoting was reliable.

First of all, yes, I think CMI in general are reliable. Their non-reliability comes in when they promote Protestantism, which is a heresy and ultimately anti-Biblical, or when they promote Heliocentrism, or when they consider Catholic opposition to Heliocentrism in Galileo's time was all about defending Aristotle or nothing about believing the Bible.

Many who are not Creationists themselves would disagree both on my general condoning of them and on my reservations.

Second, what I was being asked about was a thing they had cited from a standard science source, Lisa Kaltenegger at Carl Sagan Institute at Cornell University . Because, they, like Kaltenegger, were saying GJ 357 d is 31 light years up or away.

Third, this is what made me sad, they seemed to confuse the reading of my source, as GJ 357 d being 31 light years away, with my recalculation of how big it would be at 1 light day up. And since this was the first time they met me, but I'm known in the area, I think they were set up to question this.

Would someone over here in Paris please note, I am capable of thinking for myself, and if I recalculate the 31 light years I read into one light day, it's because I am precisely critical of a Heliocentric source, not uncritical of a Geocentric one.

General idea behind Geocentrism connecting to Stellar Distances being wrong, with Geocentrism you have no trigonometric proof in "Parallax" which is a misnomer on the Geocentric view.

Here is a diagram I made on this some time ago:



Click to enlarge.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris XI
Vigil of Assumption
14.VIII.2019