Uhmm, strange, I see there is not enough standards yet in computing. The programming jargon shouldn't be displayed, but is used for page formatting. Sorry for not getting back to you yet, your welcome to phone anytime.
Best wishes, Steven. Jack Lewis wrote:
Dear Steven,I'll have a look at the links but in the mean time why does each paragraph in your e-mail start with what looks like programming jargon?Jack ----- Original Message ----- *From:* Steven Jones <mailto:steven@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> *To:* geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 10, 2007 7:42 PM *Subject:* [geocentrism] Don't Laugh! _/*Dear All,*/_ <!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--><!--[endif]--> I was contacted by someone recently through our website who told me that we almost have things right concerning the cosmos, only what we’ve been taught is actually the complete inverse of reality. Essentially, he was advocating a hollow Earth, concave in nature. <!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--><!--[endif]--> Now had this have been the past I probably would have immediately rejected such a notion, but I went to a site he linked me too (http://www.angelfire.com/il/geocosmos/) and the picture startled me a little. I then did my own research, and was rather surprised that there is a considerable amount of real science and mathematics that support it along with some disturbing experiments that science has tried to silence. Take a look at the Tamarack Mines Mystery for example (http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/hollow/tamarack.htm <http://www.lhup.edu/%7Edsimanek/hollow/tamarack.htm>), the obvious conclusion to be deduced from two 4250 ft plumb lines diverging at the bottom of a mine shaft is that the Earth isn’t convex. <!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--><!--[endif]--> But to be perfectly truthful I don’t actually feel comfortable with the idea much, it has a few merits I suppose, but it’s not as beautiful as what we’ve described (www.geocentricperspective.com/page10.htm <http://www.geocentricperspective.com/page10.htm>) I feel, maybe just because it’s nice to feel a “starry canopy” up above much like a child would describe it. Also it’s a bit of a deception, however it is possible to argue too that from a child’s perspective the convex Earth is a deception also. <!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--><!--[endif]-->The concave Earth in it's favour does probably harmonize more with Genesis chapter one than the conventional Earth though I suppose, because God doesn’t record creating a universe, only the Earth. So we have this nucleus of life if you like, living inside of a highly protective shell, like a womb. Distant loved ones in this strange concept are actually up and away behind the stars! Maybe also it explains why long-range radio theory does not work as expected, because transmissions received here in Britain from Australia simply travel across! <!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--><!--[endif]-->I was seeking to disprove the concave Earth and if you have any suggestions that would be most appreciated. If your interested in reading more about this idea, one of the best books is "The Cellular Cosmogony" available for download from http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/cc/ It's best from about chapter 20 "Tests That Cannot Be Ignored" onwards I think. Happy thinking! /*Best Wishes, */ /*Steven.*/
