[geocentrism] Re: geocentrism
- From: "philip madsen" <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 09:15:21 +1000
Marshall said, "then what can one conclude about the "unique" science based
"solely on a supernatural/theological position" of another religion which
contradicts the Bible on every major doctrine (and, of course, hates Jesus and
has Him boiling in crap in hell)? Instead of starting with the geo/helio
controversy--the truth of which is indispensable to both theological
positions--perhaps we should start with the the Religions and their Holy Books
and the God/g'd which is behind these theological positions.
I respond: I said we cannot use such presumptions of theology in a scientific
forum.
Its unfair .. Its going to require unique science to prove our claim, which we
base solely on a supernatural/theological position. It is unfair (to use) to
base our claim on the philosophical supernatural theological conclusions that
Marshall states above in a purely scientific forum..
The average scientific community has no knowledge of, or interest in the above
socio political theological positions, which are outside its domain. Electrons
must be charged particles, and never elements of the holy spirit..
Only should individuals seek answers along these questions, is it then
permissable and even advisable to enlighten them personally..
But, considering the great divisions and diversity among the occult community,
that includes us, such arguments have a big task in convincing the rational
mind of their authenticity. The credibility factor is 1%
The aether has a great chance of being proved providing we do not include an
occult conspiracy conspiring to hide it from everybody.. We have two domains..
Science and politics (religion) .. They should not be mixed. Even though they
may arrive at the same post eventually.
Philip.
----- Original Message -----
From: Bernie Brauer
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 6:14 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: geocentrism
Bernie,
Two things regarding Phillip's conclusion:
a) The planets go around the sun in the geocentrism model, so there is no
conflict there. Even the Brahe Model had this worked out over 400 years ago.
b) The heliocentricity model is one of the five essentials of the Big Bang
Evolutionary Paradigm. All of those essentials form an "alternate creation
scenario" promoted by anti-Christ, anti-Bible Pharisaic Kabbalists. If one
concludes that geocentrism is "unique" science based "solely on a
supernatural/theological position" then what can one conclude about the
"unique" science based "solely on a supernatural/theological position" of
another religion which contradicts the Bible on every major doctrine (and,
of course, hates Jesus and has Him boiling in crap in hell)? Instead of
starting with the geo/helio controversy--the truth of which is indispensable to
both theological positions--perhaps we should start with the the Religions and
their Holy Books and the God/g'd which is behind these theological positions.
When that is done--usisng only facts and excluding
assumptions based upon other assumptions...along with the willfully deceptive
"secular" science claim...and certifiably fraudulent use of virtual reality
technology--one is faced squarely with which religion and which God/g'd one
trusts. And, oh yes, it is useful to note the admitted
theological position of the Pharisee Kabbalists
is that Satan is their g'd.
The heliocentricity keystone of the Kabbalilst Kosmos is pure illusion in
defiance of all observational evidence; e.g.:
http://www.fixedearth.com/Size_andStructure%20Part%20IV.htm Is this
"science" ?
http://www.fixedearth.com/Virtual%20Reality%20Fraud.htm
Marshall
philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Geocentrism as a science.
I know you all have noted my often presented defense of main stream
science, not that I want to debunk geocentrism, but to be just plain fair.
Perhaps it needs to be said outright...
I have just spent several minutes looking at the side by side animations
(GWW.) of the daily orbits of the solar system from both the geocentric and
heliocentric perspective.
It cannot be denied when considering all the natural motions of the planets
around the central sun, as shown in both systems, that to claim an unmoving and
central earth is very very unique, and goes against the natural order presented
by the rest of the cosmos. Indeed against our own experimental evidence in
earth bound laboratories.
Its unfair to say otherwise.. Its going to require unique science to prove
our claim, which we base solely on a supernatural/theological position.
Philip.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.21.7/1330 - Release Date: 15/03/2008
2:36 PM
Other related posts:
