You are entitled to your opinion. I simply pointed out the error in your reasoning, while making a quick joke about Astronmers' nocturnal proclivities. If that offends you, so be it.
If you use a fixed point of reference, now, these are your words, how is it that you can call a star, or even our sun a stationary point, when in fact everything moves in the universe? [snip]
Stars a sufficient distance from us in the galaxy show no appreciable movement on a year-to year basis; hence these "background stars" can be used as "fixed" reference points.
[snip] The funny thing about moving the seasons, is that the seasons would fall in such a way as to appear support Global Warming.
You can swap Winter for Summer and Fall, for Spring, for all I care; 365 consecutive days of global temperature data is one year's worth, regardless of what season you start and stop the data.
[snip] You might even see that it would appear that there might be something to my argument.
Frankly, I haven't seen anything that would support your assertion, which as I've pointed out above, makes no sense.
If you have some argument to bolster your assertion, I'll be glad to consider it.
Indeed. There are only a very few stars which are near enough to show a slight shift in their position (relative to the rest of the stellar background), such shift being a result of the earth's motion around the sun. Photos taken at six-month intervals reveal these shifts. The difference is in our perspective, being at opposite ends of our orbital diameter every six months. This is called a parallex shift. Other than that, the stars just don't move enough for it to be noticeable (generally).
Because we know the size of our orbit, and the angle at which we observe the shifted stars, we can easily calculate the distance of such stars. Picture a very elongated isosceles triangle with its base perched on the earth's orbit, one angle anchored at each six-month position of the earth, and with the very acute angle ending at a point which is the star in question. Drop a line from that star perpendicular to the earth's orbit, and it will hit the sun, giving you a pair of right triangles. The rest is simple geometry. For either right triangle, we know the base (the radius of earth's orbit) and we know the angle at which the star is observed, thus we know the size of the other sides.
Because one Cepheid variable just happened to be near enough, we could determine its distance, and thus its true magnitude for that distance, and now we can use such stars as guideposts for determining distances of very distant clusters which contain such variables.