Dear Regner,For myself, I take a geocentric position by default - see e-mail to Philip. In doing so, I then question heliocentric arguments in an attempt to give my belief a more solid foundation. So I will kick-off stating that the catalogued stellar parallax results (which was given to me by Cambridge University Astronomy Department as heliocentric proof) are totally inconclusive because of the number of negative results. The Michaelson-Morley experiment and all the other interferometer experiments including Airey's telescope experiments prove the non-movement of the earth through the aether. These results were so disliked by mainstream scientists of the day that attempts to explain them away stemmed ONLY from a their heliocentric pre-supposition (belief). Your comments on this would be much appreciated.
Regards Jack Lewis----- Original Message ----- From: "Regner Trampedach" <art@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 3:17 AM Subject: [geocentrism] Is geocentrism supported by facts?
Dear all,
I would like to start this discussion by asking you to state the
5 most fundamental reasons that your theory is correct. And please adhere to the rules above - and don't go into much detail - we can do that later. I'll collate the replies in a few days into a list of the 5 reasons that are cited most often in your replies. Regards,Regner Trampedach
