Dear Regner,
Just an observation. Paul is a fellow traveller and unlikely to argue against you. However the geocentrists fundamentally disagree with you in what it is a very emotive subject. It is therefore likely to generate misunderstandings for whatever reason. There have already been apologies from both sides.

On this score I would ask you, how readily would you accept the defeat of heliocentrism? It's OK you saying that if just one thing could disprove it you would accept it. I believe that you are so absolutely sure that you are correct that the idea of truly accepting possible defeat is absolutely unthinkable and is a safe bet. Whereas the same does not apply to us who believe in a creator. Our belief does not stand or fall on geocentrism. But I wager it would make a massive difference to you if geocentrism were true. I say this simply to let you know that the stakes are very high and one sided.

Many meanings have been ascribed to Copernicus' theory, apart from its strictly scientific import. His work affected religion as well as science, religious belief as well as freedom of scientific inquiry. Copernicus' rank as a scientist is often compared with that of Galileo."

Mikołaj Kopernik's bust in the United Nations headquarters, New York!:

He is a hero for pushing God further away into peoples lives. Sad.

Steven.

Jack


----- Original Message ----- From: "Regner Trampedach" <art@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 11:27 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Two spin axes of Earth?

Gosh, I'm so glad somebody her can actually read.
Thanks, Paul.
The statement that there is no rotation, says nothing about translation,
since translation and rotation are two fundamentally different kinds of
movements. The door is wide open for a translational orbiting around the
Sun, as I also state is part of the HC model of the Solar system - which
agrees with observations. You are correct.

  Cheers,

    Regner