[geocentrism] Re: Bible Geocentrism
- From: "philip madsen" <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "geocentrism list" <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2008 08:25:23 +1000
I will quickly put comments inside the message,Im beginning to like teal as my
eyes are growing dim on brown. and send a copy to Marshall , along with my
response to Bernie on this list. Phil
----- Original Message -----
From: Bernie Brauer
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, October 06, 2008 5:25 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Bible Geocentrism
Shared/Forwarded to Geocentrism
"The collar flap quip was a weak attempt at humor.. Understood, and I
liked it as an analogy representing a breeze.given the various speeds the earth
must move in the heliocentric, galactic, big bang model. Weak though it be as
humor, the jet liner illustration will not fly, so to speak. The nose of the
jet and the windshield (the whole plane for that matter) can be likened in one
respect to the earth allegedly speeding along like a large cannonball at, for
example, some 500,000 MPH around the Milky Way, as claimed. I disagree. I do
accept for now that all of space has a mild concentration of H2 atoms for now
But it is so thin as to be negligible. This H2 thinness supports the need of a
fast moving sun to fuel itself. Of course I do not have to accept any of that
theory, but it does not make for any "wind" type pressure that could be felt at
the speeds the kabbalists postulate. And no reason for me to deny the basic
scientific principle that the nose of a jet in a rare atmosphere , is nothing
like the nose of an asteroid or anything else moving at speed in the VOID. THE
HIGH SPEED SPACE PROJECTILES BURN UP ONLY WHEN THEY RE-ENTER THE ATMOSPHERE
just like as do meteors. Unless one accepts Einstein's erasure of the
aether, one can only conclude that there would be enough friction at 500,000
MPH to make some wind-like impression on that fellow with the open collar if he
were to get out of the pressurized cabin and sit on the nose a bit. Undeniably,
if the H2 is indeed there. but hardly in the league of being felt in the way
Bernie was asking. You mention the aether.. and I do not agree with einsteins
erasure, which thought of it as a material fluid.. I do not. As the stars fly
at SUPER SPEED, PERHAPS IT IS WITH THE AETHER.. The question then seems to
come to rest on whether the aether question has been solved. We've all seen
plenty of rejection of that concept along with relativity, curved space, time
travel, and other fantasies, I believe. Agreed.. But accepting the aether ,
without any evidence of or theory for concerning what it is, not that it is ,
gives no one the right to say it causes some friction in the normal physical
sense of the senses.
The "multiple experiments" refer to over 200 M/M experiments in the
l880's. It's factual. I see no need to change it. Within what I said above I
agree. The aether wind reacting against electromagnetic waves, does not have
any material effect or reaction against human flesh or its senses.
Philip sort of acknowledges the aether problem at the start. Yes, and i
still do, but not like Bernies states it.
The "nearly all experiments" sentence baffles one a bit.... No
experiments are necessary to know there is diurnal rotation; we just watch or
photograph star trails and we know that much. That's where the assumptions
begin! We deny what we see and photograph and insist that the assumption of a
rotating earth is causing the phenomena. Assumption ain't science. Yet this
little assumption is the keystone upon which the entire Pharisee/Kabbala Big
Bang Evolutionary Paradigm is built, and without that assumption the whole
edifice of deception is exposed and falls. Again true, but Bernies science is
just as presumptive.. actually non science. As I said elsewhere, there are two
presumptions.. One based upon our Christan Philosophy, and the other upon the
Kabbala, or anti- God Satanic philosophy. Both are presumptions based upon
preference.
If the gyroscope illustration proved anything it would be an the news
24/7 for a month. Not really so. They accept their philosophy with such
confidence that they have no need to prove it with what is obvious.. even to
me. The onus is on me/us to find another explanation, a new theory, and prove
it. We need to stop being indecisive and act when it comes to this pivotal,
total game-changing, knowledge forming geocentrism model. It's Biblical; it
answers all known science; and it pulls the rug out from under five centuries
of Satan's use of "science falsely so called to destroy Bible credibility from
creation through the Flood to Jesus and Heaven. "Sun stand thou still...."
(and scores more verses) will prove to be the Achilles Heel of Satan's
fine-tuning of his 6000 years of deception. Over 1900 years ago God wrote of
"the war the Lamb wins" (Rev. 17:14) and how it produces the Fall of Babylon
(Satan's empire)...(vs.14-18; ch. 14, 18, etc.)
All of this last is philosophical and religious, not scientific. You
can base your science on it of course, as a theory, but the onus of proof , not
the bible, but the science rests with you.
Of course such attributions of Truth from the Bible (even when backed
by all known ? science and challenged only seriously by anti-Christ
Phariseeism) mean little if one's religion depends upon acceptance of
anti-Bible teachings and doctrines. Those too are scheduled for exposure in
the above Fall. Then we will know for sure which side to get on...as in Rev.
13, etc."
Marshall and Philip.
Bernies said,
insist? - Does this show dictatorial leanings in your character? Bernie.
LOL .. Probably yes. A leadership trait perhaps. I have full faith in my
superiority.. Perhaps there is some Jew blood there. . Never believed in
democracy, since I was 4 years of age. and still prefer , that is I insist upon
a benevolent dictatorship...
However in the context of the article, it was more of an advice, said in
terms of , for me to accept it , I would insist (for myself) that it be
corrected. Otherwise it is of no worth. .
So now to assess your answer to the technical nature of your article.
You said this,
A non-moving, non-rotating Earth explains no collar flap. The assumption
of the Earth moving at 30 times rifle bullet speed would not explain
no collar flap. Unless you piled that assumption on top of another one
and say that space must be a vacuum then. At what point do we stop
believing these stretches?
"and say that space must be a vacuum then." Bernie, unless I am reading you
wrong this is less than juvinile science. Space is a vacuum, better than any we
can make on the earth. Why are you calling this a presumption?
another section, I must comment on..
!
"You have already acknowledged that one cannot detect speed or direction in
a jet liner whether it is doing 200 or 2000 mph.
I have acknowledged that the correct analogy for a person standing
on top ( the outside surface ) of the alleged moving Earth is for the person
to be standing on top ( the outside surface ) of the moving jetliner."
Yes, ok, if the jet is the shuttle outside of the atmosphere, then you will
not experience any movement. period. The astronauts demonstrate this on a
spacewalk when they open the shuttle door. We were here discussing the inertial
science , without any wind, so inside a jetliner was ok for inertial
experiments. If you go outside , you introduce windage. But not in space.
You somehow cannot accept that the atmosphere of the world is tied by gravity
to the world, and as it moves , or IF it moves through a vacuum, it will not be
blown away from the world.. The space satellites or shuttle are moving at
thousands of miles per hour. Any gases or fluids that are released from the
shuttle (towards the shuttles centre of gravity of course) will not be blown
away, but WILL CONTINUE as a rarefied gas in orbit close to the shuttles skin.
there is nothing to blow it away.. Likewise any planet with an atmosphere.
Geocentrism accepts that Mars is orbiting the sun.. We can see its
atmosphere. And this planet, with its atmosphere not flapping, is doing
enormous speed around the sun. There is no gas trail behind its motion..
People on its surface will feel no motion, or silly winds. The only "tail" on
the atmosphere of Mars is in the direction away from the central sun, due to
solar winds.. Same for our Earth..
Therefore I repeat, if we can see the science working in principle for Mars
or any other planet with an atmosphere in the solar system, then we cannot use
your assertion that there is no flapping of the earths atmosphere , proves the
world is stationary. to do so is inconsistent with the proven science.. Just
as rediculous as those who claim their senses tell them the world is flat,
therefore it is flat.
Finally Bernie, you said,
I don't believe that space is a vacuum and I believe that space scientists
are lying
or have been misled if they say it is a vacuum.
Think Bernie. The stratosphere is so rarefied that one could say it is
almost a vacuum .. If a strato jed decompresses, the people inside die. The Jet
cannot get much higer because there is no atmosphere to support its wings.
How can you blindly reject such physical evidence..
Philip.
Other related posts:
