Heliocentrism an Anti-Christian Hoax?

reply to post by ArmorOfGod


FFS just get on with it and explain how your geo-centricism explains obsrvations and newtonian physics

reply to post by ArmorOfGod


Between stellar parallax and what we know about gravity its certain that the earth orbits the sun there is no other explanation that covers those and the other observations we have


Astronomy for beginners – start here:

www.astronomyforbeginners.com...

It covers some of the math astronomy uses


If the above doesn’t help – perhaps you might say why you have a problem with astronomy’s explanation of what we can observe

Originally posted by racasan
reply to post by ArmorOfGod

 

Oh and how is stellar parallax explained within the geo-centric view?
Out of interest I did a bit of google-ing and didn’t find anything that supports that
And as far as I can workout stellar parallax can only be explained by a moving earth – otherwise you would have to account for have the stars moving around in all kinds of odd circular motions

It says in the Wikipedia article that there was no observable parallax until they had good telescopes, so obviously it is very minute.

oh well there’s your problem

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by racasan

 

He's not a professor of Astronomy.
He's an anthropologist specializing in Eastern Philosophy.

if your car needs fixing would you go to a car mechanic or a voodoo priest to get it fixed?

reply to post by racasan

if your car needs fixing would you go to a car mechanic or a voodoo priest to get it fixed?

Grupp is a Soto Zen Buddhist / Christian.
He came across some obscure writings that explains the universe and souls and why people have souls attached to them. The same thing attaches bodies in space as what attaches our souls.

reply to post by jmdewey60



Yes it’s difficult to observe but a well equipped amateur astronomer could do it I think

Observing the motion of the stars circling the galaxy might be do-able for an amateur – but I would think the simplest proof is that comets are seen to orbit the sun and not the earth and the simplest explanation for that is that the sun is the largest mass and is therefore the centre of the solar system

reply to post by jmdewey60



Oh ok – did he say why a geocentric universe was necessary to make this belief work?


As far as I know the only bit of astronomy the Buddhist care about the constellation of Ursa Major (the big dipper) as they believe it’s some sort of signpost to a gateway the soul has to pass through on death

reply to post by racasan

. . . the simplest proof is that comets are seen to orbit the sun and not the earth . . .

I don't think you read all my posts on this thread because I brought up how asteroids skip across the surface of the sun in their orbit around earth. No one has explained that to my satisfaction yet.

reply to post by jmdewey60


Never mind I found him

Jeffrey Grupp (but not Dr or professor)

Well you do know that people like him make real actual Buddhists cringe


You might try Dr. Yang, Jwing-Ming Or mantak chia – they have made material that can give you a good starting point for eastern style spirituality

reply to post by jmdewey60


Oh come - you are having a laugh

When the path of a comet is calculated, it’s obvious that the central mass of the sun is the deciding factor of what that path is and unless the comet comes close to the earth then earth’s mass make no noticeable difference to that path – therefore the sun is the central mass of the solar system and not the earth

Also the tail of the comet is always away from the sun showing the sun is a hot and active energy source and the tail of a comet is never seen to be effected in a way that is not consistent with astronomy’s view of a sun centred solar system

reply to post by racasan

. . . the tail of a comet is never seen to be effected in a way that is not consistent with astronomy’s view of a sun centred solar system . . .

Comets show the repulsive force is stronger than the attractive force in regards to the sun, so obviously comets orbit earth.

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by ArmorOfGod

 

FFS just get on with it and explain how your geo-centricism explains obsrvations and newtonian physics

It explains observations exactly the same as the helio model explains them. The only thing thats changed is our reference frame.

As for Newtonian physics, please tell me why the geo-centric model does NOT explains them?

Interestingly Newton says the centre of the system is immovable.

“That the center of the system of the world is immovable. This is acknowledged by all, although some contend that the Earth, others that the sun, is fixed in that center”

- Isaac Newton, Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica, Book 3: The System of the World, Proposition X, Hypothesis I

Originally posted by racasan
reply to post by ArmorOfGod

 

Between stellar parallax and what we know about gravity its certain that the earth orbits the sun there is no other explanation that covers those and the other observations we have


Astronomy for beginners – start here:

www.astronomyforbeginners.com...

It covers some of the math astronomy uses


If the above doesn’t help – perhaps you might say why you have a problem with astronomy’s explanation of what we can observe

Where exactly does your source prove that the Earth orbits the sun?

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by racasan

 

. . . the tail of a comet is never seen to be effected in a way that is not consistent with astronomy’s view of a sun centred solar system . . .

Comets show the repulsive force is stronger than the attractive force in regards to the sun, so obviously comets orbit earth.

edit on 12-2-2012 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)

Righttttt and no doubt the sun contains prodigious quantities of phlogiston and the mighty hand of Jupiter doth propel the heavenly spheres about their proper course

Originally posted by racasan
I would think the simplest proof is that comets are seen to orbit the sun and not the earth and the simplest explanation for that is that the sun is the largest mass and is therefore the centre of the solar system

In a two body system you might be right, but we have the trillions of other stars in the universe to balance out the barycentre.

reply to post by ArmorOfGod


Yes the stars are merely pinholes in the curtain of night
Or
Lamps in the upper atmosphere held aloft by the heavenly host

Heliocentrism is a spin on sunworship. Attempting to make the sun the centre of the system rather than Earth.

The outcome is removing Earth from unique position it is in.

God sent His Son here to die for the sins of the world. It is the focus of His attention both spiritually and physically.

Heliocentrism attacks the core doctrines of the bible.

Originally posted by ArmorOfGod
Heliocentrism is a spin on sunworship. Attempting to make the sun the centre of the system rather than Earth.

The outcome is removing Earth from unique position it is in.

God sent His Son here to die for the sins of the world. It is the focus of His attention both spiritually and physically.

Heliocentrism attacks the core doctrines of the bible.

Now I know you’re just being silly – I don’t know of any astronomers worship the sun

But if I where looking for a sun god cult I would start here

www.goddiscussion.com...

meroveeschild.files.wordpress.com...

www.abbaswatchman.com...

truthbeknown.com...

www.sacred-destinations.com...

www.truthbeknown.com...

reply to post by ArmorOfGod

Heliocentrism attacks the core doctrines of the bible.

I am not sure of all that but it would make sense if you were to take parts of the Bible as literal true history, such as the battle where The Lord stopped the Sun so the Israelites could continue their rout of the enemy (the Valley of Aijalon, Josh 10:9-20). If the earth stopped spinning on its axis it would have caused problems so an alternative would be to have moved the sun in order to keep up with earth's spin, which would have been simplified if the sun was already orbiting the earth, even though not as fast as some people imagined it did, as in daily.
My main objection to heliocentrism was how it was done in a confrontational way towards the Church, instead of doing it quietly among fellow astronomers who actually needed this theory. So, it is not like anti-religionists like to portray, where they paint a picture of the Church snooping into astronomer's papers to see what they were up to, but people like Galileo going out and broadcasting his views in a derisive way as a direct affront to the Church's authority.

reply to post by jmdewey60


If what the church teaches is the truth then why would it fear what astronomers or anybody else discovers about the universe?
or
if the church is just a tool to control people using deceit and ignorance then it would fear anything which would expose its deception and remove ignorance

you should read Caesars messiah - the roman conspiracy to invent Jesus (by Joseph Atwill)