No. You need to show what observations, if any, that the calculator is based on. We have emailed timeanddate in the past and they refused to reveal their sources.

Don't need to show anything. Any day, any time, go out and perform an observation and compare it with timeanddate.

Have you done that? Have you any reason to believe what timeanddate (or Stellarium or any "calculator" we reference) is not accurate? If you don't, then the calculator IS documentation until you can prove it to be unreliable.

I can attest that when I have referred to timeanddate.com it has always been correct.

Tom, remember, I have chosen observations that are easily verifiable and there is little or no contention about them. If you think these observations are inaccurate, make it known. So far, you have not raised any objections to the observations. I don't know why you re being so obstructionist. I sincerely doubt you have any objections to observations #1, #4, and #5. Are you are just messing around and are not sincerely seeking truth?

I'm not looking for a mathematical type proof, like proving there are infinite primes. I've looked at the proof for infinite primes, it's thick and, not studying math currently, I no longer understand the technical proof, but, without the proof, I conceptually understand why there are infinite primes. People can have conversations about infinite primes without first going through the proof and agreeing it is correct and acceptable, or even understanding the proof.

I am looking for an honest conversation about these observations. Tell us why you think they are incorrect os silently accept them as correct.