We little creatures have such a distorted view of the immense forces all around us. Like air. It weighs nothing--yet at sea level it weighs so much it's exerting 15 lbs. per square inch of us. If it was sand at that weight we'd know we are being squashed. How much less can we imagine the forces of gravity moving a trillion gallons of water, or the friction of one continent moving a foot against another.
He keeps using the word "conjunction" without defining what that means, but more importantly, without defining what forces are at work during a "conjunction." Is it gravitational forces? Something else? And finally, what does a Full Moon have to do with anything?! A full moon just means that from Earth, we can see the half of the moon that faces Earth. Just by invoking the full moon at all sounds like it's some occult interpretation.
It appears to me he is showing when planetary alignments are exerting compounded gravitational forces on the earth’s crust; i.e., when gravitational forces from two or more planetary bodies in alignment are pulling along the same vector; and also noting alignments significant (for the same reason) at alternate vectors either immediately before, during, or following the primary alignments. On its face, it seems plausible as the earth’s crust, if classical tectonic theory is correct, are segments floating on a molten base, and he is showing when planetary gravitational forces upon the earth will peak.
Well, the key word in your response is "appears".... it appears that he is showing such and such. But he doesn't actually say that, we are left to make assumptions about what he means. Unless he can show (or even utter) what he means, then I'm taking this with a fairly large grain of salt.
Of course, if he turns out to be right, I might rethink it, but with this video he doesn't even discuss what actual forces are at work in his predictive mode.
He talks astrology. Conjunction means when two stars are coming very close together. The Full Moon in astrology is often seen as a catalyst. I am no astrologer.
Don’t be confused by the nomenclature. It’s all astronomy. Stars that are very far away still have a big gravitational effect on their surroundings depending on their size.
But zero effect on us because of the great distance. If you double the distance, the force of gravity goes down by the square of that or four times smaller.
So how does the sun keep us in orbit or Pluto for that matter if your calculations are correct? I think you’re missing some fundamental understandings of physics buddy. The sun for example is in orbit around another very large star that’s very very far away in comparison to our distance from the sun.
Because the sun is so much bigger than the planets. The amount of mass also figures into the amount of gravity. The distance formula is a fact that is taught in physics. I took physics in high school and in college. Did you?
Obviously I understand that the force of gravity is relative to mass. I'm in no way trying disagree with basic high school physics what i am disagreeing with is your statement about the gravity of far away stars having zero effect on our solar system, A basic understanding of astronomy will inform you of the fact that our sun is in orbit around far away massive stars and even those stars are in orbit around more massive stars all the way up to everything in the galaxy orbiting around a super massive black hole in the center of our galaxy. So you cant tell me that the gravity of far away objects has zero effect on us. That is a completely false assumption if you understand physics.
A full moon is on the opposite side of the earth from the sun. A new moon is on the same side of the earth as the sun. These make a difference in the tides.
A conjunction is when two bodies in the sky appear to be close to each other in our line of sight. That means, I we could actually feel their gravity from that far away, we would be getting a combination of the gravity from both bodies pulling on the earth from the same side.
So it's not occult, although I wouldn't think the gravity from anything in the solar system besides the sun and moon could affect anything here on earth.
I wonder if the Dutch guy is an astronomer or if he's actually done the math on how much gravity decreases with distance.
All good points. However, if the Dutch guy can't explain his thesis properly and others have to do it for him, and while making several assumptions... I appreciate your effort, but as to the video's maker, I'm not convinced.
As I said in my original response, he does not explain how the conjunctions affect Earth...people are merely assuming that it's gravitational, but he doesn't actually SAY that in the video. We are left to intuit what forces are at work, and it's THAT that I am faulting him for.
There are several definitions of "conjunction" ( https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conjunction ) but the guy doesn't indicate which definition he's referring to. He's just sloppy in his approach...vague terms, unknown forces at work, conclusions left to the viewer, and so on.
The obvious effect, if you think about it, is a possible gravitational pull on the earth. Being obvious and using common language meant I didn't see any further explanation required. Anybody can see which meaning of conjunction applies here. We're talking objects in the sky, not "buts" and "ands."
Earthquakes are related to solar activity. Here's another prediction: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3jf80IZirA
And another: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6ipdGIpaag
If the sun tends to precipitate earthquakes it's no wonder they come in clusters.
We little creatures have such a distorted view of the immense forces all around us. Like air. It weighs nothing--yet at sea level it weighs so much it's exerting 15 lbs. per square inch of us. If it was sand at that weight we'd know we are being squashed. How much less can we imagine the forces of gravity moving a trillion gallons of water, or the friction of one continent moving a foot against another.
He keeps using the word "conjunction" without defining what that means, but more importantly, without defining what forces are at work during a "conjunction." Is it gravitational forces? Something else? And finally, what does a Full Moon have to do with anything?! A full moon just means that from Earth, we can see the half of the moon that faces Earth. Just by invoking the full moon at all sounds like it's some occult interpretation.
It appears to me he is showing when planetary alignments are exerting compounded gravitational forces on the earth’s crust; i.e., when gravitational forces from two or more planetary bodies in alignment are pulling along the same vector; and also noting alignments significant (for the same reason) at alternate vectors either immediately before, during, or following the primary alignments. On its face, it seems plausible as the earth’s crust, if classical tectonic theory is correct, are segments floating on a molten base, and he is showing when planetary gravitational forces upon the earth will peak.
Well, the key word in your response is "appears".... it appears that he is showing such and such. But he doesn't actually say that, we are left to make assumptions about what he means. Unless he can show (or even utter) what he means, then I'm taking this with a fairly large grain of salt.
Of course, if he turns out to be right, I might rethink it, but with this video he doesn't even discuss what actual forces are at work in his predictive mode.
Fair enough; how about this...how could an older guy with gray hair and a ponytail be wrong?
Heh... well sure, THAT'S never happened before, hehehehe...
Checkmate.
He talks astrology. Conjunction means when two stars are coming very close together. The Full Moon in astrology is often seen as a catalyst. I am no astrologer.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conjunction_(astronomy)
Probably you are right and it was my misinterpretation, but I am not sure and have no time to find it out on his very interesting website.
Here: https://ssgeos.org/
Don’t be confused by the nomenclature. It’s all astronomy. Stars that are very far away still have a big gravitational effect on their surroundings depending on their size.
But zero effect on us because of the great distance. If you double the distance, the force of gravity goes down by the square of that or four times smaller.
So how does the sun keep us in orbit or Pluto for that matter if your calculations are correct? I think you’re missing some fundamental understandings of physics buddy. The sun for example is in orbit around another very large star that’s very very far away in comparison to our distance from the sun.
Because the sun is so much bigger than the planets. The amount of mass also figures into the amount of gravity. The distance formula is a fact that is taught in physics. I took physics in high school and in college. Did you?
Obviously I understand that the force of gravity is relative to mass. I'm in no way trying disagree with basic high school physics what i am disagreeing with is your statement about the gravity of far away stars having zero effect on our solar system, A basic understanding of astronomy will inform you of the fact that our sun is in orbit around far away massive stars and even those stars are in orbit around more massive stars all the way up to everything in the galaxy orbiting around a super massive black hole in the center of our galaxy. So you cant tell me that the gravity of far away objects has zero effect on us. That is a completely false assumption if you understand physics.
A full moon is on the opposite side of the earth from the sun. A new moon is on the same side of the earth as the sun. These make a difference in the tides.
A conjunction is when two bodies in the sky appear to be close to each other in our line of sight. That means, I we could actually feel their gravity from that far away, we would be getting a combination of the gravity from both bodies pulling on the earth from the same side.
So it's not occult, although I wouldn't think the gravity from anything in the solar system besides the sun and moon could affect anything here on earth.
I wonder if the Dutch guy is an astronomer or if he's actually done the math on how much gravity decreases with distance.
All good points. However, if the Dutch guy can't explain his thesis properly and others have to do it for him, and while making several assumptions... I appreciate your effort, but as to the video's maker, I'm not convinced.
A video in English shouldn't be required to explain every single English word. Those were common terms that I learned in school.
As I said in my original response, he does not explain how the conjunctions affect Earth...people are merely assuming that it's gravitational, but he doesn't actually SAY that in the video. We are left to intuit what forces are at work, and it's THAT that I am faulting him for.
There are several definitions of "conjunction" ( https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conjunction ) but the guy doesn't indicate which definition he's referring to. He's just sloppy in his approach...vague terms, unknown forces at work, conclusions left to the viewer, and so on.
The obvious effect, if you think about it, is a possible gravitational pull on the earth. Being obvious and using common language meant I didn't see any further explanation required. Anybody can see which meaning of conjunction applies here. We're talking objects in the sky, not "buts" and "ands."
The full movie moon is a reference to It’s position in relation to the earth and the sun. And all other planets for that matter.
Hmmm, ok.
I think he means 'Petticoat Conjunction'. You know, with uncle Joe and Billie Jo, Bobbie Jo, and Betty Jo. The beauties bathing in the water tower?
HAARP
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ntd24t68ex4
Waiting ...