[geocentrism] Re: Hello, group.

  • From: "Cheryl B." <c.battles@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 22:30:07 -0500

Gary -- I'm going to jump in on the Bad Scientists but I'm not sure where
yet or just specifically what issue I'm going to deal with.  I will get my
facts lined up before I do, and talk about something I know something about
and stick to that.  I'm not one to shoot my mouth off about stuff I know
little or nothing about or even to render an opinion or even to make up my
mind until I have something to make it up with.

For example,  based on what I know so far, I can already state confidently
to them that they have no proof, no definitive proof for their point of view
because there is no way of knowing for sure where we are in the universe
unless we leave it and look down on ourselves.

  On the other hand, I have God's Word that says definitively that the earth
was made first, that everything thereafter was made for the earth and
because of the earth, and that the Bible has never yet been proved to be
wrong in any point whatever.

   I just reread/skimmed a biographical book I got for my homeschooled
daughter awhile back, something I got from ICR, and it's about Jim Irwin,
his adventures, including his three-day walk on the moon (Flight of the
Falcon).  One illustration in the book (an artist's drawing) shows the earth
in the background of the astronauts on the moon, the earth in a
three-quarter phase.   It's written by Paul Thomsen who lives in northern
Wisconsin.  I'm going to try to contact this guy and ask him if he
interviewed Irwin personally.  The book describes Irwin driving all over,
bouncing around in his lunar vehicle, flying over boulders, gives a
hair-raising rendition of their dangerous moon landing, how the ship came
close to tipping over on landing and they would have all died, how rugged
and dangerous the moon surface was.

The thing I found most interesting in this book, written and sold by
Creationists for children, is that supposedly a foundational experiment in
physics was conducted-- Newton's theory that if a hammer and a feather were
dropped together in a vacuum, that they would each fall at the same speed to
the ground.  The astronauts conducted this experiment on the moon, proved
Newton was right, and moved this from the realm of theory to scientific law.

I wonder why they were so anxious to prove this fundamental theory but cared
nothing to check out things like earth's place in universe.  It's like the
NASA people don't care.  They think we have no place, that we're just a
little speck of nothing, and the real answers and the big fish is "out
there" -- probably with their Masters of the Universe.

Is it possible they would know there's no use checking to see if the earth
is turning because whether they see it turning or not proves nothing -- as
I've come to learn from this exchange with you guys?

Cheryl
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Shelton" <garylshelton@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, February 19, 2005 1:48 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Hello, group.


> Cheryl,
>
> Lord knows I'm not an expert but I will contribute this much.  I don't
know
> of anybody who believes the strict "geocentric" definition as put forward
by
> Dr. Jones.  That is the one where the earth is spinning, and the sun
> revolves around the earth counter-clockwise, but obviously not as fast, in
> the angular velocity factor, as the earth is turning.  So this option you
> can just ignore, IMHO.   Your Bad Astronomers are "heliocentrists" (or
> "acentrists" if you prefer) and would say the earth rotates and revolves
> around the sun just as do the other planets we can observe.
>
> We "geostatists" naturally feel that the Bible correctly states the truth
> when it says the earth is immovable.  What this means is simply that the
> earth is indeed perfectly still in the most "preferred frame of reference"
> (to borrow the Einsteinian lingo) and that the sun, moon, stars, and
> everything else we see in the heavens is revolving daily around the earth
in
> a clockwise direction (for the most part), just as they appear to be doing
> to us here on earth.
>
> Biblically, the earth is a special place because it is mentioned directly
in
> Genesis 1:1.  You will note there that God didn't tell us "In the
beginning
> God created the heaven and Halley's Comet."  Or "Jupiter", or "Mars",
> "Venus", or even "the sun".  He told us "the heaven and the earth".  So in
> my mind that puts us in a special place right off the bat.  Also, Genesis
> 1:14-17 speak of the reasons all of the heavenly bodies were created.
Those
> would be, you may remember, for "signs, seasons, days, years, and to give
> light upon the earth".  I've said this a few times before on this forum
but
> it is perfectly clear that all of those reasons are reasons FOR THE EARTH.
> So that, logically, if the earth were not here, then neither would all the
> heavenly bodies.  As I said, it is a most "preferred frame of
reference"....
> And that is what gets us in trouble with all the acentric atheistic
> Einsteinians.  Because, of course, they would say there can be no such
thing
> in reality.  All places, when looking out from that place, will appear to
> each be in the CENTER OF ALL; it's the cosmological principle.
>
> If you are following the geostatic view, then you understand that
everything
> revolves around the earth clockwise daily, including the sun and moon.
Your
> question about the 28 days concerns the moon's revolution about the earth
in
> the h-system.  Keep in mind the h-view of the moon has it orbiting the
earth
> counter-cwise in around the 28 days.  This speed is essential to
accurately
> account for the observed phases of the moon that we see on earth.
>
> Our view of the moon is that it orbits clockwise daily and that the moon's
> phases are explained by the difference in angular velocity between the
> slower moon and the faster sun, which both are orbiting the earth
clockwise
> daily.  As for the sun the h-view has the earth orbiting it in 365 days
with
> a tilted axis to explain the seasons.  The geostatic view has the untilted
> earth being orbited by the sun in what Richard Elmendorf described as a
> "double helix" pattern.  This also explains the seasons.
>
> Remember again, that if you are on the moon watching the earth, you are
> moving as well as the earth you are watching, and in the final analysis,
you
> can't say whether it is you or the object of your eye (the earth) is
moving.
> Sounds rather Zen-like, doesn't it?
>
> I hope that is of help.  I'm no expert so take everything I say with a
grain
> of salt always. The truth comes with repeated dives into the field of
> knowledge, not just one quick dip.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Gary Shelton
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Cheryl B." <c.battles@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, February 18, 2005 10:02 PM
> Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Hello, group.
>
>
> > I see the part about everything revolving around the earth once a day.
I
> > still don't see where the 28 days of the moon, and the other orbits of
the
> > planets, the 365 days per the sun come in.
> >
> > I've been hopping around the net looking for those answers and haven't
> found
> > them yet.  Is there a simple answer to this question?
> >
> > I read Dr. Jones' landing on the moon essay over again, and seemed to
get
> > more out of it this time than before, and it is so fascinating.  But I
> don't
> > claim to understand all of it.
> >
> > I am only of average intelligence when it comes to math.  Physics was
> > something I flunked in high school.  My forte is politics and religion.
> >
> > Cheryl
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Gary Shelton" <garylshelton@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Friday, February 18, 2005 9:13 PM
> > Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Hello, group.
> >
> >
> > > Cheryl,
> > >
> > > I think one thought that might assist you is to understand that if you
> are
> > > on the moon watching the earth, you are not at a standstill.  You,
too,
> > are
> > > moving.  You would not be able to say with absolute certainty whether
it
> > was
> > > the earth turning (heliocentrist) that you were watching or the moon's
> > > clockwise motion about the earth (geostatist).
> > >
> > > This is why it is often said that the only way to prove the issue is
to
> > step
> > > outside of the universe and look down onto things.
> > >
> > > Sincerely,
> > >
> > > Gary Shelton
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Cheryl B." <c.battles@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Sent: Friday, February 18, 2005 7:42 PM
> > > Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Hello, group.
> > >
> > >
> > > > Thanks.  Could you explain the geocentrist model to me as simply as
> > > > possible?  Is it as simple as that the earth is not moving and
> > everything
> > > is
> > > > going around us once every 24 hours?  So that means the astronauts
on
> > the
> > > > moon would see what appears to be a revolving earth, going around
once
> > in
> > > 24
> > > > hours.
> > > >
> > > > So where does the 28 days come in?
> > > >
> > > > Cheryl
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Gary Shelton" <garylshelton@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Sent: Friday, February 18, 2005 8:30 PM
> > > > Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Hello, group.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Cheryl,
> > > > >
> > > > > You need a good dose of Bad Astronomy.  The folks there will
gladly
> > > > clarify
> > > > > any relative motion questions you have.  But I suggest you browse
> > > through
> > > > a
> > > > > couple of topics that I participated in last year.  You will
notice
> I
> > > > > thought like yourself in the beginning.
> > > > >
> > > > > The first is a topic that I actually started, unbelievable as that
> > seems
> > > > to
> > > > > me now....
> > > > >
> > > > > "Relative Motion Falls Apart When applied to Planes"
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=16726&postdays=0&postorder
> > > > =asc&start=0
> > > > >
> > > > > The next is a topic begun by a devout acentrist athiest named
> > Maksutov.
> > > > >
> > > > > "Thinking about geocentrism"
> > > > >
> > >
> http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=350240&highlight=#350240
> > > > >
> > > > > I did not agree with these people but I could not counter their
> > superior
> > > > > academic arguments.  Still, it was interesting taking the battle
to
> > > "their
> > > > > turf".  I personally believe that they made some good points and
we
> > need
> > > > to
> > > > > be able to answer all of them, just as the creationists have a
> counter
> > > to
> > > > > every single evolution premise put forward.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sincerely,
> > > > >
> > > > > Gary Shelton
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "Cheryl B." <c.battles@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Sent: Friday, February 18, 2005 10:31 AM
> > > > > Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Hello, group.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > A friend told me the whole moon landing thing was staged in Las
> > Vegas,
> > > > > that
> > > > > > the film crew all had untimely deaths later, and they were
> pacified
> > > with
> > > > > > hookers and parties during hte shoot.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If they did go to the moon I'd like to know why not one single
> > > astronaut
> > > > > has
> > > > > > commented about observing the earth turning.  I realize that it
> > takes
> > > 12
> > > > > > hours for one side of the earth to completely move around, but
it
> > > would
> > > > > > still be apparent to anyone looking that the earth was turning.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If you went to the moon and believed the earth was turning,
> wouldn't
> > > you
> > > > > > want to brag about having seen it with your own two eyes?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cheryl
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > No virus found in this outgoing message.
> > > > > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> > > > > Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.8 - Release Date: 2/14/05
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > > > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> > > > Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.8 - Release Date: 2/14/05
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > No virus found in this outgoing message.
> > > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> > > Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.8 - Release Date: 2/14/05
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> > Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.8 - Release Date: 2/14/05
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.8 - Release Date: 2/14/05
>
>

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. geocentrism
  3. Archive
  4. 02-2005