Precisely. Sadly, far too many people have trouble understanding that our whole Solar System is moving en masse in one direction even as our planets revolve around our Sun (which happens to be centered in the middle of the very System that is moving through space), and thus, they erroneously conclude that the Sun isn't really moving because people on Earth can observe that it "seems" to be always in the same place (not comprehending that it only seems that way because the Earth and the Sun are maintaining their relative positions to each other as they hurtle through space). "Sadly", the problem with your lame troll is that you're beating a red herring.
Aruanan's argument (and Van Flandern's, which is where Aruanan seems to have gotten his from) is not based on the motion of the Solar System as a whole, period. So your repeated flogging of that irrelevant issue in an attempt to muddy the issue is moot.
His argument rests solely on the motion of the Earth around the Sun, and would be equally valid or invalid whether the Solar System were cruising through the universe at near light speed, or nailed completely stationary to a cosmic anchor.
You're trolling with a red herring, and you most likely know that.
So I repeat -- stop trolling, you're not fooling anyone. FreeRepublic's administrators don't take kindly to trolls.
"Aruanan's argument (and Van Flandern's, which is where Aruanan seems to have gotten his from) is not based on the motion of the Solar System as a whole, period."
That could be, but I'm not posting Aruanan's argument. Rather I'm posting my own (which happens to dovetail nicely with Newton's points on the matter).
And my own argument is that we KNOW for a scientific FACT that our Solar System is traveling through space. This fact means that our Sun is moving even though it APPEARS to be in the same place to an Earth-based observer.
Since the Sun is ACTUALLY moving, the 8.3 minute-old Light that we see from the Sun is actually always coming from the Sun's previous location. Thus, we "see" the Sun where it was located 8.3 minutes ago (i.e. the time it takes Light to travel from the Sun to the Earth) rather than where the Sun is ACTUALLY located.
My argument is further that if Gravity travels at the same speed as Light, that the orbits of the planets around the Sun will see that same 8.3 minute delay (which would give us a Solar System in which the orbits of the planets progressively "lagged" behind the actual movement of the Sun).
Yet since we see no "lag" in the orbits of the planets, we have to conclude that Gravity doesn't travel at the slower speed of Light, but rather that Gravity travels SUBSTANTIALLY faster than Light.
And this conclusion is verifiable by direct scientific observation. QED.