# [geocentrism] Re: Moon landings?

• From: "Philip" <joyphil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
• To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
• Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 08:01:59 +1000

```I do not want to intrude upon Nevilles discussion with Robert.
I just want to try to clarify what Neville said, for us who might have
difficulties between east and west stuff. and between when we are talking geo
or helio.

Neville said,

How it "appears" is not the point. We are dealing with the actual motion of the
Moon under each system.

[ Yes. If I have you right Neville, you mean that under the HC system we (thats
us) must consider the reality of the Moons real velocity, not the assumed one
according to their 28 day figure]

You continue: .
In the HC case, the Moon is going eastward. It must be really moving.

[ I got confused here. I think you meant that in the HC system the moon  was
going east, but you did not mean by "really moving" to indicate really fast.
In the HC system the moon recedes from the earths rotation. Which gives it a
lazy 28day orbit of the earth. This naturally would allow NASA to catch up with
it easily, and it would have to be from an easterly launch as they did. If we
stop the earth which we do, then this reverses everything. Suddenly the moon
has to be moving from the east , slower than the sun, (radially) but having
enormous speed, as calculated by Neville.      and it would indeed present a
problem from the HC point of  view.. ]

Neville:
The reality is that it must be moving somehow. If the World is stationary, then
what we see of the Moon is what we get.

And this is where I have to question Nevilles attitude to the points he made,
not for truthfullness, or accuracy, but for being incomplete. Neville you are
sidestepping an important observed fact. Relative motions as observed from
earth. We have to accept that the force equivalent of a rotating earth exists.

Rob states, and I am inclined to accept** his explanation, as it is the only
one thats presented, that there is a force of the rotating plenum towards the
west. which carries all the cosmos towards the west. If this were so, then
whilst all the inertial systems on "apollo" might indicate motion catching up
with a slowly receding moon, it is in fact caught up in and recieving a contra
motion towards the west, which slows it down annd actually reverses its
expected movement so that it meets the moon at a reasonable speed.

What is observed, is not what they get... Although all the calculations will
balance... Do not they say that they can or do use the geocentric model for

Thus a moon landing does in no way destroy the geocentric position or the
Bibles credibility, any more than does the stationary satellite. This latter
though, has me worried.

**I cannot grasp in a practical way the effect of Robs rotating plenum that
duplicates on a stationary body, the centrifugal force observed upon a rotating
one..Consider from a GC system. If we accelerated the  the stationary satellite
into motion, either way, It would have two "centrifugal forces"  as we must
presume the plenum force is still there... Perhaps that is my answer..
relativity?

if one looks at my mental exercise I gave in yesterdays post, re shifting a
perfectly active polar orbit with a 24hour period, 90 degrees so that its orbit
is equatorial 24 hour, and in the direction of the earths alleged rotation.

I said then, What stops it rotating... and what keeps it up there ? The only
possible explanation can be that as the orbit inclines towards its 90 degree
point the plenum takes an increasingly stronger grip of it and slows it down.
to a stop.  with the added outward centrepetal force, which I said must be of
the opposite polarity of the polar position. I suppose I might put it
geometrically that it is moving from an axis of earth centred centrifugal force
to an axis of cosmic centrifugal force.

Coming back to the polar orbit,
You geometricians may be able to do some sums to show that the polar orbit goes
through transformations of both forces as the satellite moves from zero above
the poles to 90 degrees above the equator.. and down to the other pole.  I can
see it all in my head, but I just do not have the ability or mathmatical
education to put it in to your correct terminology. Which is only a jargon in
any case.

Philip.

----- Original Message -----
From: Dr. Neville Jones
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2005 7:02 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Moon landings?

Hi Robert.

You said, "From a Biblical standpoint: In the HC case the World rotates
eastward, so the cosmos appears to rotate westward as seen from Earth."

How it "appears" is not the point. We are dealing with the actual motion of
the Moon under each system. In the HC case, the Moon is going eastward. It must
be really moving. The reality is that it must be moving somehow. If the World
is stationary, then what we see of the Moon is what we get.

You further said, "From a scientific standpoint:
1- NASA claims that the Apollo trips started by inserting the spacecraft
first into Earth orbit, so the direction the Moon was moving at launch time
is irrelevant..... if you believe NASA.
2- The initial direction of all American rockets at lift-off is 90 degrees -
straight up...... if you believe NASA."

They are pointing straight up, yes, but they do not go straight up. They go
eastwardly, over the Atlantic. You can plainly see this curve, even a short
time after takeoff. They were placed into orbits that were in the same
orientation as the World's alleged rotation - eastwardly. The Moon is going in
this same direction in the HC model. It does not somehow change its direction
when in LEO, nor does it go "straight" for the Moon. It has to spiral.

Yours in Christ,

Neville.

Robert Bennett <robert.bennett@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Dr. Jones,

From Biblical Topics/ "Do the alleged Apollo Moon landings conflict with the
Bible?"

case, the World is stationary and the cosmos
rotates westwardly. Therefore, to rendezvous with the Moon, a rocket would
need to be launched eastwardly in the heliocentric model and westwardly in
the Biblical model.>
............................

From a Biblical standpoint:
In the HC case the World rotates eastward, so the cosmos appears to rotate
westward as seen from Earth.
In the Biblical (GC) case, the World is stationary and the cosmos does
rotate westward as seen from Earth.
Therefore, there is no difference in the preferred direction of launch -
westward - between HC and GC/Biblical models.

From a scientific standpoint:
1- NASA claims that the Apollo trips started by inserting the spacecraft
first into Earth orbit, so the direction the Moon was moving at launch time
is irrelevant..... if you believe NASA.
2- The initial direction of all American rockets at lift-off is 90 degrees -
straight up...... if you believe NASA.

Pax Christi,

Robert

---------------------------------
ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun!

```