The common denominator between the two perspectives was the Ptolemaic framework-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tychonic_system#/media/File:Tychonian_system.svg

It should no longer be a dispute, at least among those who are engaged in interpretative astronomy that a fixed star background, not entirely Ptolemaic, is central to accounting for the direct/retrograde motions of the slower-moving planets seen from a faster-moving Earth-

https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap011220.html

The direct/retrogrades of the faster-moving Venus and Mercury cannot use the fixed star framework as they run smaller circuits closer to the central Sun-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2uCtot1aDg

I could appreciate why Brahe had Venus and Mercury travel around the Sun, however, it could not be done or meshed with the resolution for the slower-moving planets seen from a moving Earth. Something had to give and satellite imaging permits the introduction of partitioning of direct/retrograde observations by using two different frameworks.

Despite the concern that the explanation which requires partitioning has moved into broader circulation outside this newsgroup without a proper explanation attached, there is enough to discuss further to occupy those who realise what they have in front of them, especially as visual narratives. Only very few solar system researchers at the level of Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo and Brahe have existed due to the heightened nature of interpretative faculties yet contemporary imaging should allow far more to engage themselves in this pursuit.