[geocentrism] Re: Fruitless arguments
- From: "Philip" <joyphil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <StThomasAquinas@xxxxxxxxxx>, <ags@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 09:12:27 +1000
Um, no, maybe I'm a bit dense today but the only connection I see is
that your reasoning about the paranormal and supernatural equally
applies to religion.
Regards,
Mike.
Phil responds:
Yes. That was my point. Religion. The primary thrust of the geocentric
position comes from religion and /or its Book. If this Book and the
religions that follow it are excluded from the research, as containing
possible
evidence to be investigated along with Newton et al, simply because it is
not 'Kosher' then this would be invalid as a biased research. Its like a
physicist excluding biology or archeology. Complete physics has to include
biology.
Such is the power of the indoctrination of the dogma of science into my
whole lifes work, there is absolutely no way I would have ventured to waste
my time on the seemingly ridiculous concept, let alone reality, of
geocentricity, unless I had through similar research come to accept the
evidence of the supernatural in some forms, and that which pertains to
the Christian/Catholic religion in particular.
By the way, I do not intend to proselytise here. Religions, at least as
expressed by its church men are just as narrow and exclusive if not more so
than men of science. Blind faith is a dangerous thing akin to fanaticism. In
one
of his text books, THE PHYSIOLOGY OF THE HUMAN BRAIN Isaac Asimov,
he always used his pen name, said that such people do a reverse polarity,
in an instant. An actual electrical condition. He called this a
transmarginal state.
Instant Christian <=>Instant atheist. Love <=> Hate.
The problem science has with the paranormal is that their normal physical
tools
are of no use to measure the phenomena. Hence they ignore it.
Well conducted tests have shown results in telepathy (just one example) far
in
excess of what could be expected by chance. If one is confronted with
impirical
evidence of proven telepathy, undetectable by any physical instrumentation,
and I must say here that it is proven communication, not proven telepathy,
then
science cannot justifiably run from ANY claimed supernatural or paranormal
phenomena. To do so is exclusive science open to being flawed.
Where ever science (official science as represented for example by the
French
Academy of Science Paris) has investigated the supernatural, it has always
been
from a position of antagonism (to prove a fraud) rather than from a position
of
learning or enquiry.
I mentioned the above Academy because it had set up a commission at Lourdes
at the invitation of Church officials to obstensibly verify-debunk miracle
cures.
They kept a permanent team of observers, who examined all entrants before
and after
keeping meticulous medical records.
Thus we have science in action, biased and hostile though it may have been,
verifying CREATION as an event unexplainable. Their explanation? "There has
to
be a natural reason. There is no God or the supernatural." This when
confronted
by a 19 year old man who had virtually no bone in his lower leg coming out
of the
water in seconds with completely new healthy bone. This has to be
instantaneous
creation of 19 year old bone. And I am citing just one example among many as
verified by this academy.
Confronted with these amazing phenomena, what has science done since?
Something that should have become a top priority subject for research among
all science. Suppressed, hidden, forgotten, or too hard?
And you wonder therefore why some of us would perhaps have at least an
interest
in the possibility that Copernicus, got it wrong. He hadn't taken all into
account.
Its all a matter of mistaken relativity. He just got onto the wrong train at
the station.
Galeleo sitting beside him. Its still parked there. The other train
moved.......
Philip.
Other related posts:
