[geocentrism] Re: Proof of heliocentrism
- From: Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 13:54:44 +0000 (GMT)
Jack L
Regner came to this forum by invitation to debate helio/geo positions. He asked
for each of the intending participants to give their five best propositions as
to why geocentrism was king. There followed a lot of huffing and puffing as to
why heliocentrism was wrong to which I drew attention stating that
dissatisfaction with heliocentrism was not affirmation of geocentrism. After
some weeks -- or was it months? -- of coaxing, several members grudgingly
nominated up to five propositions.
Now you would have us return to sniping at heliocentrism?
What is the problem? Your position has been in existence for much longer than
Copernican model. As I remarked previously, I'd have thought that your greatest
problem would be in deciding which of the multitude of proofs available to you
that you would consider the most devastatingly convincing with which to
confound we poor confused, ignorant, lying heliocentrists.
Paul D
----- Original Message ----
From: Jack Lewis <jack.lewis@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, 23 May, 2008 8:24:51 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Proof of heliocentrism
I have decided to start a new thread now that stellar parallax or the celestial
ploes is not a proof for either heliocentrism or geocentrism.
Might it not be quicker for all of us, in our discussion regarding the
helio/geo debate, to ask Regner for just one proof of heliocentrism. So far it
would appear that the M-M etc. experiments are all being interpreted and
corrected by heliocentric theories. This is pointless since it is the helio
idea that is being questioned. The problem, if any with the interferometer
experiments, has to be addressed exactly for what it is and not quetioned by
that which it questions - does that make grammatical sense?. I think it would
be useful to know just what helio's pin their position on. As with evolution it
may be easier to highlight the scientific problems and flaws with
heliocentricity, since that is the current paradigm, rather than spend endless
hours trying to convince helios to consider geocentrism arguments.
Therfore would Regner give just one proof of heliocentrism?
Jack
Get the name you always wanted with the new y7mail email address.
www.yahoo7.com.au/mail
Other related posts:
