[geocentrism] Re: Moving Earth deception

  • From: <marc-veilleux@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "Geocentric" <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 23:10:32 -0400

Phil,
Saint Thomas of Aquinus believed that angels carry the heavenly hosts (planets 
and stars).  He's probably much closer to the truth than all Ms scientists 
together.  And none of the scientists (called philosophers in those days) 
thought he was a nut.  Do you believe that MS scientists today have a better 
discernment than saint Thomas because they have more knowledge (mixed with more 
lies) today?

I used to have a computer disk (1,4 M) called : «DANCE OF THE PLANETS» that 
played on Windows 95.  I was able to see the yearly motions of the planets on 
that software.  Their movements look more like a dance: it definitly is not a 
geometrical ellipse for any of the planets.  I can't find that disk anymore and 
when Microsoft went to Windows 97 and the subsequent Windows, my software could 
not play any more.  Perhaps the devil doesn't want men to find out that Maths 
by themselves (without the supervision of philosophy) are unreliable to seek 
the truth.

Maths give results but they often don't match exacly with reality.   
Marc V.

----- Original Message -----
From: philip madsen
Sent: 9 août 2007 23:06
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Moving Earth deception

Well Marc, you just shot down my imagery of the geocentric universe according 
to Phul. What power other than supernatural could cause the sun to move north 
and south every year? Seeing as I cant have it locked into some aetheric goo.  

Phil.  
----- Original Message -----  
From: marc-veilleux@xxxxxxxxxxxx  
To: Geocentric  
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2007 11:28 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Moving Earth deception


The stars that are on the same plane than the Sun are the 12 constellations 
known as the zodiac.  Astrolog use them to tell you what the devil wants them 
to.  Those stars as all other stars or other "things" in the cosmos ... don't 
follow the Sun's path (ecliptic).  They remain at their respective "right 
ascension" (latitude) except for tiny movements as aberration and parallaxes.
Marc V.

----- Original Message -----
From: philip madsen
Sent: 9 août 2007 17:04
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Moving Earth deception

Philip,
If you always looked at the Moon, didn't you ever noticed that it's highest 
point in the sky is variable ??  Just as the Sun is at his highest point in 
summer and it's lowest point in winter, so is it with the Moon and the planets: 
their orbits always stay within the Ecliptic (that is approximatly 23 degrees 
south or north of the equator).  Marc.

Cant say I took much notice Marc, even tho I assumed as much..  however .  This 
is why I asked, did the stars that are on the same plane, also follow this 
annual track..  

Philip  
----- Original Message -----  
From: marc-veilleux@xxxxxxxxxxxx  
To: Geocentric  
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2007 12:14 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Moving Earth deception


Philip,
If you always looked at the Moon, didn't you ever noticed that it's highest 
point in the sky is variable ??  Just as the Sun is at his highest point in 
summer and it's lowest point in winter, so is it with the Moon and the planets: 
their orbits always stay within the Ecliptic (that is approximatly 23 degrees 
south or north of the equator).  Only the comets can be seen outside of the 
Sun's path.
Marc V.

----- Original Message -----
From: philip madsen
Sent: 7 août 2007 03:29
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Moving Earth deception

Philip,
The sphere of the cosmos doesn't move 23 degrees north and 23 degrees south 
(for a total of 46 degrees annually) relative to the Earth !  It is the Sun 
that moves north - south (total of 46 degrees); HC men claim this is an 
illusion caused by the tilted Earth.  So in GS it is against all observations 
to claim that the sphere of the cosmos moves north south (total 46 degrees) 
because we don't observe any annual change (north- south) in the latitude of 
the stars except for the very tiny aberration.
Marc V.   Before I answer, I did not mean what  any angular motion which 
degrees might suggest. I meant that the entire universe annually moved in a 
parallel fashion, what ever else it was doing, from the tropic of cancer to the 
tropic of capricorn and back annualy. Whats that ? A thousand miles back and 
forth per year..  Now here is why I asked the stupid question,  

Marc, I havn't got a clue what happens.  I have monovision, and I cannot tell 
where the stars are moving, except east to west..  That is why I asked Neville 
if the stars also move north and south with the sun..  somebody may have took a 
time lapse movie??  In 75 years I suppose I would not have gazed at the stars 
or seen them for more than 6 or 7 times, and then passed it up after 5 to 10 
minutes.. Now the moon, thats different..  I always look at the fascinating 
moon..  sometimes, and I'm not joking, if my dog is in the mood, we howl at the 
full moon together..  I can do a good wolf howl..   

Why would I do that.?  When very young my mother told me that when ever you 
heard a dog howl, it meant someone had died near by...

No one believes that today, but it sure gets all the neighbourhood dogs 
howling...   

Now as far as I can remember I seemed to get the impression that the Southern 
cross, which is the only star system I seeked out, did go south in our 
winter....but of course with such a memory I canna be sure.  

Now on another subject to all.. while the phads are on vacation.  

A problem here in this group is, that we never know when someone gives a talk, 
whether they is talking HC or GS. I prefer to talk HC because that is what I 
was tort and understand. When I talk GS I try to make that clear. Whenever I 
look at the sun or moon,  I have always felt as a "real feeling" that I am with 
the ground upon which I stand  moving towards and past these objects. Just like 
the car going past the telegraph pole. ,,, such is the power of lifelong 
indoctrination. The moon  is like a lamp post one is driving past.   

This is why I cannot relate at all to Allen and others who say that they see 
the sun rise towards us, and believe it is the reality.  Oh yes I can 
understand why they think that, if they have not been educated in the basic 
system of heliocentrism taught to them, along with all of the other physical 
sciences that support it. But Allen, in his zeal, no doubt denies observation, 
when he disallows what is observed from a ship at sea in a tidal current, when 
the ship seems to be moving forward through the water, at 15 knots, when in 
reality it is not.  

Therefore my approach to geocentrism is always as the devils advocate, when I 
debate it here.  

I see two groups opposed.  

One group composing of Paul alone, who "feels" reality the same way as I did, 
but who is faithful to that belief beyond reason, subject only to the concensus 
of the world of man, which I am not; and the other group, the rest, who feels 
an opposite reality, and is also faithful to their belief, beyond scientific 
reason, because they are subject to the command of a higher order.

Now I being also subject to the command of a higher order, accept and believe 
beyond reason a reality that does not conform with what I have always seen felt 
and believed before. I say beyond reason, meaning scientific reasoning.  

From the view of rational science as accepted by the world, even though this 
may be politically manipulated, we of the Gs camp are on the defensive. Being 
so, does not excuse the seemingly uncharitable manner in which we often if not 
always, try to put down Paul's efforts to understand our beliefs, and or even 
dispute them. After all, we all should wonder that he has stayed so long 
listening, to what I would have said not so many long years ago, a bunch of 
silly old people who still believe that the world is flat.  

Why are the geocentrists here? Each person must examine his own reason.  

I am here for two scientific reasons. One is to gain as much knowledge as 
possible that scientifically supports a geocentric universe, and answers or 
presents flaws in the current HC one that dominates the world. In other words I 
allow for modification or reversal of my own preconceived ideas. Once convinced 
I would  pass this on to my 2000 odd list.  If we do not pass it on we are just 
useless einsteins.  

The other reason is to make whatever contribution my intellect can offer 
towards our understanding of the physics involved. My first way to do this is 
to seek out and destroy any flaws I perceive in, or objections that others 
might offer against  our case. This is the devils advocate. It is also a way 
that my preconcieved ideas get modified, that is by the reaction it creates.  

I have in my files an enormous amount of information presented by Sungenis, 
Daly , Hertz, De Bouw,  etc, and including the Biblical and church side. to 
boot, both Catholic and Protestant.  None has given to me a satisfactory 
conclusion that answers the scientific problems geocentrism provides. Even GWW 
which I do not have, if it had the answer, could have provided it in one simple 
essay of no more than the length of this post. and if presented, the world 
would have to notice  

Finally I hope we all do enjoy each others company, pagan or not, hoping that 
all may arrive at perfect truth, the only way to eternal happiness for the 
people of God,  and even temporal satisfaction for the pagans in the hope that 
Grace may make that eternal for them; with that charity demonstrated by Jesus 
Christ, when he associated with sinners.  

Neville has most assuredly to be admired for his example of non-bigotary, in 
opening the forum to all reasonable discussion of sociopolitical and religious 
discussion, insisting as he has only on charitable good manners  

I do not pray for anything other than that Gods will be done, but I hope it to 
be done in you all.  



Philip.  









----- Original Message -----  
From: marc-veilleux@xxxxxxxxxxxx  
To: Geocentric  
Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2007 12:40 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Moving Earth deception


Philip,
The sphere of the cosmos doesn't move 23 degrees north and 23 degrees south 
(for a total of 46 degrees annually) relative to the Earth !  It is the Sun 
that moves north - south (total of 46 degrees); HC men claim this is an 
illusion caused by the tilted Earth.  So in GS it is against all observations 
to claim that the sphere of the cosmos moves north south (total 46 degrees) 
because we don't observe any annual change (north- south) in the latitude of 
the stars except for the very tiny aberration.
Marc V.

----- Original Message -----
From: philip madsen
Sent: 4 août 2007 17:48
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Moving Earth deception

Walter van der Kamp used such assumed association of stars with the Sun to 
deduce a 58-light-day radius (it may have been 60

Well yes, I can see why he might have even with the complications that might 
raise.  ..  But may I add some thoughts..  as it applies to the celestial 
poles..  

First up, in the GS system the earth is not tilted, but stands tall vertical 
and Proud. The tilt is an invention necessary to explain the seasons in the HC 
universe (no one seems to have mentioned this)  

In this perspective, with this orientation of the earth, as the sphere of the 
cosmos moves North and South with its annual oscillation, will the changing 
distance change the angle of view (which causes the polar star to circle) in 
the same manner as what we see.  Also Our system does not provide a base line 
for the geometry to measure distance (of the polar star) , as perhaps the HC 
system did.  But maybe the distance travelled vertically as measured against 
the latitudes of the earth, relative to the angle of the cone, as viewed from 
the pole, might give you something to work with..  Trig is tricky like that..  
in establishing the distance to the polar star. I never did much with cones.  

Phil.  
----- Original Message -----  
From: Neville Jones  
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx  
Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2007 12:41 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Moving Earth deception


Philip,

Further to my previous answer, and in terms of a scientific response, I would 
add that Walter van der Kamp used such assumed association of stars with the 
Sun to deduce a 58-light-day radius (it may have been 60, I do not recall 
exactly) for the universe. This is based upon the phenomenon of yearly 
aberration.

He may well be right. As with the aether, I have not decided on which side of 
this fence to position myself yet.

Neville.






Philip,

I don't know why. It's just a feeling. That's why I placed 'better' in 
quotation marks. Not a very scientific answer is it?!

Neville.




No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition  
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.4/935 - Release Date: 3/08/2007 5:46 
PM




No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.  
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.8/940 - Release Date: 6/08/2007 4:53 
PM




No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.  
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.10/943 - Release Date: 8/08/2007 5:38 
PM




No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.  
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.11/944 - Release Date: 9/08/2007 2:44 
PM

Other related posts: