[geocentrism] Re: The Sun/ Comment & question
- From: "Philip" <joyphil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 10:27:58 +1000
Jack, I was trying to explain to Alan what I meant by it being possible for
a thing to be at total rest even if it was not detectable. I have as much
chance of convincing him of that as I have of convincing him that God is a
possibility even if He was not detectable.
As regards the relationship to geocentrism, I wanted to show how
observations can be from two viewpoints relatively, and that calculations
done from each perspective confirm each, simply because each believes his
base is the correct one. A matter of truth and of faith.
I have every reason to believe the geocentric model to be more likely the
TRUTH . I will not allow the faith of another in modern science to sway me
from that belief based purely upon theoretical concepts which cannot be
demonstrated as axiomatic, which means of course no longer a theory.
It may appear true that Alan and I for example are nitpicking on little
errors we each may make. But that is the advantage of open unrestricted
debate. The mind may just capture a new concept or lateral viewpoint to what
one held previously.
Im looking forward to some answers to my post today from both sides.
Meanwhile I will have to delve into this "typhonic" thingo. I thought it had
been debunked severely. When I get the spelling right.
Philip.
Philip.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack Lewis" <jandj.lewis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2004 11:55 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: The Sun/ Comment & question
----- Original Message -----
From: "Philip" <joyphil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2004 2:53 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: The Sun/ Comment & question
>Philip said:
> I will try to give a logical example.
>
> In the beginning there was nothing. An empty void. and nothing in it. From
> outside I who am nothing but a spirit of great power, saw this nothing,
this
> empty void, so I made a beautiful stone, and I placed it in this void. I
> gave it no movement , and so it niether moved up nor down nor in any
> direction from this place where I put it. I saw that it was still and that
> it was good.
Jack says:
Is this the Earth or the Sun or are you saying it doesn't matter?
Snip
> This is the possible inertialess frame which only I as a spirit can
> contemplate, and know that it has no movement. Then I thought, this stone
is
> alone. Perhaps it would look even better if I gave it a companion. So I
made
> another stone even more beautiful than the first, placing it not too far
> from the first. And I gave an impulse to this stone that it rotated in its
> place.
Do you mean on its axis and if so why would you want to do that?
If you mean as an orbit, on this forum it matters which is which, geo or
helio?
Jack Lewis
Other related posts:
