It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Heliocentrism an Anti-Christian Hoax?

page: 10
5
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 08:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60
The point I was making, or attempting, was how people like to use the Galileo story to make Christians seem like fools


Some Christians don't need Galileo, they can do it by themselves.

Seriously, why do some, mainly US Christians it appears, think that 'science' is out to get them? These 'Christians' should spend their hard earned money and time helping others rather than trying to twist science to fit their indoctrinated interpretation of the bible.

Scientists, like the rest of the world, couldn't care less who believes in whatever nonsense.




posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Confusion42
 

. . . mine quote the other 10%.

What is mine quoting, what I am doing now?
Some people don't like that but I don't like people quoting a huge post to give a one line reply.
I'm not a scientist, and I took Astronomy 101 in college, so I can't argue my point but I was interested to see if anyone could give a persuasive argument to why geocentrism can't be right.



posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 09:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60

Geocentrism can be right if you invoke supernatural forces and illusion.

Otherwise all the evidence points to the Sun being the centre of the solar system.

Occams Razor would point to the simpler explanation:

Geocentric model:
1. The sun is different to all the other stars we can observe.
2. The solar system is different to the others we observe
3. The whole universe rotates and wobbles around us
4. The Earth doesnt obey the same laws as the rest of the visible universe
5. Everyone involved in Science is fabricating things to make Cristians look stupid
6. The real position of space craft is subject to illusion or NASA are lying.
7. Thats without anything technical this list could get pretty long so I'll stop here...

VS

Heliocentric model
1. The Sun is at the centre.
2. Everything goes around it.



posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 09:35 PM
link   
So the earth has greater mass than the moon, the sun, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Neptune, Uranus and Pluto, plus the asteroid belt and oort cloud together???



posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 10:02 PM
link   
reply to post by EasyPleaseMe
 

You know, I made a video of my model of a geocentric system but it may be hard to find on this thread.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Follow that link to an embedded video.
It has the Sun orbiting Earth and Mercury and Venus orbiting the Sun.
All that other stuff is not in my model. If you open it up in the YouTube page and watch it at 720, you can see the earth rotates on its axes and the stars do not spin around it.
It does show Mars orbiting both the Sun and Earth.
You have to watch closely in the video since it is a little small.
edit on 15-2-2012 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 16 2012 @ 02:31 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


Well here’s the problem with that idea


I got this from a Christian website so you can disagree with them and not me
Here:
genesismission.4t.com...


the sun would be going around the Earth at: 6,757 miles per second. The Earth escape velocity is only 7 miles per second, so the sun would be going 965 times Earth's escape velocity. Furthermore the sun's escape velocity is 383.6 miles per second, so the relative speed between Earth and sun would be 17.6 times faster than solar escape velocity. If they were created at their current distance of 93 million miles apart then gravity would only decrease their relative velocity to 6,745 miles per second as they separated, that means that today they would be about 217 LY. apart if they were created 6,000 years ago.


So if the sun where going around the earth every 24 hours it would be going faster than the escape velocity of the earth –it would be going so fast that the sun would simply fly away from the earth at about 1/3 the speed of light



posted on Feb, 16 2012 @ 06:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by racasan
you provided a poem by one astronomer – but even if all astronomers are sun worshippers it still wouldn’t alter the fact that a heliocentric solar system is the best fit for the observations we have


Both models are a fit.

Even if you had the moon as the centre of the system, we would see exactly the same things on Earth.

Many people dont understand this.



posted on Feb, 16 2012 @ 06:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by rnaa
reply to post by jmdewey60
 




NASA flights by probes to planets are planned and calculated using a geocentric model.


Wrong.

NASA flights to low earth orbit (ISS) and to the Moon are planned and calculated using a geocentric model, because the ISS and the Moon are definitely geocentric. Missions to other planets are heliocentric once they leave the Earth orbit phase.

Flight to Mars: How Long?
Along what Path?


Phoenix Mars Mission: Cruise Phase (Notice how the orbits of Earth and Mars and the spacecraft are all centered on the Sun)

Human Mission to Mars (Review the physics (or not), then study Student Activity 2 closely.

Canadian Space Agency: The Outbound Trip (whats that yellow thing in the center of the diagrams?)

Virtual prototyping of human Mars missions
with the Orbiter space flight simulator
(see section "D. Mars trajectory planning and guidance" on page 6 - especially the image of the flight planning guidance tool.

Athena Mars Exploration Rovers: Flight Plan

I could go on, but I'd just get a sore arm beating a dead horse further.
edit on 15/2/2012 by rnaa because: (no reason given)

edit on 15/2/2012 by rnaa because: grammar


So a trajectory is planned around the sun.

What does that prove exactly? That the sun exists.



posted on Feb, 16 2012 @ 06:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by EasyPleaseMe
Some Christians don't need Galileo, they can do it by themselves.

Seriously, why do some, mainly US Christians it appears, think that 'science' is out to get them? These 'Christians' should spend their hard earned money and time helping others rather than trying to twist science to fit their indoctrinated interpretation of the bible.

Scientists, like the rest of the world, couldn't care less who believes in whatever nonsense.


Science offers far more support for geocentricity.

All the twisting of science comes from those who want to dismiss science that shows the Earth is stationary.

An experiment goes against the heliocentric premise? No probs, just invent new physics that makes instruments shrink!



posted on Feb, 16 2012 @ 06:11 AM
link   
reply to post by racasan
 

I have two diferent videos I made and are embedded in posts on this thread.
I put a link to one in the post above for people who go to the first and last posts
on a thread rather than go through each page. Once you go to one video
on YouTube, there should be a link to the other one, since they are closely
related.
I went to a lot of trouble to make these videos which are basically hand made
from one frame to the next to place the bodies, plus I had to painstakingly
make each model, so I wish people would actually watch them, and they are
less than a minute.
The earth spins on its axis. My model is Jeff Grupp's as he explained it
verbally. I was having difficulty even imagining what such a thing would
look like, so I made the model and made videos from that.
So the orbit of the sun around the earth takes one year, not every day.
I am not trying to prove the Bible's description is correct.
I am saying either model works but the powers that were to come
chose a new paradigm on purpose that was counter to the accepted model
as a way of tricking people into believing their belief made you smarter.



posted on Feb, 16 2012 @ 06:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by EasyPleaseMe
Geocentrism can be right if you invoke supernatural forces and illusion.

Otherwise all the evidence points to the Sun being the centre of the solar system.

Occams Razor would point to the simpler explanation:

Geocentric model:
1. The sun is different to all the other stars we can observe.
2. The solar system is different to the others we observe
3. The whole universe rotates and wobbles around us
4. The Earth doesnt obey the same laws as the rest of the visible universe
5. Everyone involved in Science is fabricating things to make Cristians look stupid
6. The real position of space craft is subject to illusion or NASA are lying.
7. Thats without anything technical this list could get pretty long so I'll stop here...


1. Sun doesnt need to be different in the geo model
2. You've never observed another solar system.
3. Just as simple as you having the Earth at a tilt and wobble
4. Earth obeys the same laws in the geo model. If you think different then specify which laws.
5. True. But the simplest explanation is that people (who are bad and selfish) will lie.
6. Positions of space craft are the same in both models.
7. Oh please, get more technical...I love technical.



posted on Feb, 16 2012 @ 06:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by CB328
So the earth has greater mass than the moon, the sun, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Neptune, Uranus and Pluto, plus the asteroid belt and oort cloud together???


Earth (itself) doesnt need huge mass, it just needs to be located at the barycentre of the universe.



posted on Feb, 16 2012 @ 06:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by racasan
Well here’s the problem with that idea

I got this from a Christian website so you can disagree with them and not me
Here:
genesismission.4t.com...


the sun would be going around the Earth at: 6,757 miles per second. The Earth escape velocity is only 7 miles per second, so the sun would be going 965 times Earth's escape velocity. Furthermore the sun's escape velocity is 383.6 miles per second, so the relative speed between Earth and sun would be 17.6 times faster than solar escape velocity. If they were created at their current distance of 93 million miles apart then gravity would only decrease their relative velocity to 6,745 miles per second as they separated, that means that today they would be about 217 LY. apart if they were created 6,000 years ago.


So if the sun where going around the earth every 24 hours it would be going faster than the escape velocity of the earth –it would be going so fast that the sun would simply fly away from the earth at about 1/3 the speed of light


The sun isn't going at any velocity. The aether is.



posted on Feb, 16 2012 @ 06:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60
I have two diferent videos I made and are embedded in posts on this thread.
I put a link to one in the post above for people who go to the first and last posts
on a thread rather than go through each page. Once you go to one video
on YouTube, there should be a link to the other one, since they are closely
related.
I went to a lot of trouble to make these videos which are basically hand made
from one frame to the next to place the bodies, plus I had to painstakingly
make each model, so I wish people would actually watch them, and they are
less than a minute.
The earth spins on its axis. My model is Jeff Grupp's as he explained it
verbally. I was having difficulty even imagining what such a thing would
look like, so I made the model and made videos from that.
So the orbit of the sun around the earth takes one year, not every day.
I am not trying to prove the Bible's description is correct.
I am saying either model works but the powers that were to come
chose a new paradigm on purpose that was counter to the accepted model
as a way of tricking people into believing their belief made you smarter.


If you have a geo model that includes a spinning Earth you are going to come unstuck at some point in the debate. You dont need a spinning Earth. The universe spinning around us creates all the forces we have.
edit on 16-2-2012 by ArmorOfGod because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 16 2012 @ 06:46 AM
link   
reply to post by ArmorOfGod
 

If you have a geo model that includes a spinning Earth you are going to come unstuck at some point in the debate. You dont need a spinning Earth. The universe spinning around us creates all the forces we have.

You have a model I know nothing about.
I have one that I learned about by listening to hours of Jeff Grupp describing it on his radio show he was doing at the time.
He learned his version in turn from another source.
I haven't looked into any other current models out there that anyone is supporting.
I was describing it to someone last night and used as an illustration the fact that the earth moves because the moon pulls on it, so we are always off center a bit, based on where the moon is at that moment. Also with two sun systems, you have the suns orbiting each other, you don't have one stationary and the other circling it. So it is all relative. The planet, Mars, orbits the earth simply by the fact that its orbit, even in a heliocentric model, is bigger than the earth's. There is no way to avoid it. No matter what model you use, the outer planets orbit around earth, by definition.
Obviously the inner planets orbit the sun because we can observe them from our vantage point, circling around the sun. We have a more difficult time observing ourselves or the outer planets.

edit on 16-2-2012 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 16 2012 @ 09:08 AM
link   
reply to post by ArmorOfGod
 


That explains nothing


Tell you what - why not explain what your model is for the solar system/universe is, that might help us to see where you’re going wrong



posted on Feb, 16 2012 @ 10:38 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


To put it simply - any model except the heliocentric one has to have some sort of magical fudge factor to get them work


Astronomers on the other hand can show embryonic planetary systems being formed

www.redorbit.com...

This evidence supports the nebula hypothesis (note the word hypothesis)

www.daviddarling.info...

Planet formation:
www.daviddarling.info...

Proto planetary disks:
www.daviddarling.info...


A whole Wikipedia thing on the subject:
en.wikipedia.org...


so not only does the heliocentric model elegantly explain what we see in our solar system it is also the basis for an explanation of how star systems form - including evidence of it happening now around other stars

The only way out of for you in light of this evidence is to claim some sort of special status for the earth because of your faith in a Bronze Age book about some Jewish wizard pufftting the earth into existence

But where ever we have looked in the universe we can see the same physics and chemistry processes so there is no reason to think there's anything to set the earth apart from the rest of the universe



posted on Feb, 16 2012 @ 11:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60
I haven't looked into any other current models out there that anyone is supporting.


You should look into the neo-tychonian model with a non-rotating Earth fixed in the centre of the universe.

It's the easiest to defend. Trust me.

A spinning Earth cannot be defended in the light of real experimentation.

Go here and study all the material:

GalileoWasWrong Blogspot



posted on Feb, 16 2012 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by racasan
That explains nothing


Tell you what - why not explain what your model is for the solar system/universe is, that might help us to see where you’re going wrong


Ok.

The Earth is stationary, non spinning at the centre of the universe. The aether (which has Planck dimensions) turns around the Earth once per day taking the sun with it. The planets independantly orbit the sun as it is carried around the Earth. The distant stars are perfectly arranged around the Earth as to render the Earth the barycentre of the universe, but are actually aligned with the plane of the sun. The celestial sphere has a 24 degree tilt that takes one year to proceed through a full turn.



posted on Feb, 16 2012 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by racasan
To put it simply - any model except the heliocentric one has to have some sort of magical fudge factor to get them work


I guess you wont be needing 'dark matter' then?

The king of all fudge factors.

Or how about special relativity which introduces shrinking instruments in order to fudge real experiments that prove the Earth is still?

At least the aether has been proven. You have never found an ounce of dark matter.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join