[Gulliver]

Per Vx's request, to make this a separate thread.

[Ghost of V]

Are you still wondering about AWT? Because you've got two threads on that already. Keep on making new threads though, it's really getting your point across.

[Gulliver]

Are you still wondering about AWT? Because you've got two threads on that already. Keep on making new threads though, it's really getting your point across.

Yes, I still have open questions about AWT. No,I do not limit FEers to the conclusion they wish to work as an example of ZP in this thread. Are you limited to only AWT for some reason?

[Ghost of V]

That was your original question, wasn't it? Are you moving the goal post now?

[Gulliver]

That was your original question, wasn't it? Are you moving the goal post now?

At your request, I have indeed added other ways that you could help us to understand the ZP. Feel welcome to select the conclusion. I'm sure everyone interested in learning would be happy with any worked ZP example on any FET conclusion. Thanks. Oh, and no, adding options is not "moving the goal post" or the goalposts.

[Tom Bishop]

I would say that AWT does not adhere to the Zetetic Philosophy. The correct interpretation of the sun and moon is that while their position and movement above are apparent, we do not understand the mechanisms involved.

Rowbotham states the following on the motions of the sun:

That such is the sun's annual course is demonstrable by actual observation; but if it is asked why it traverses such a peculiarly concentric path, no practical answer can be given, and no theory or speculation can be tolerated. At no distant period perhaps, we may have collected sufficient matter-of-fact evidence to enable us to understand it; but until that occurs, the Zetetic process only permits us to say:--"The peculiar motion is visible to us, but, of the cause, at present we are ignorant."

[Gulliver]

I would say that AWT does not adhere to the Zetetic Philosophy. ...

Thank you, Tom. I suspected as much.