Heliocentrism is an Atheist Doctrine
[Note - This article?is reposted?from Blogs For Brownback.? We're trying to get hold of the original author, sisyphus, and get proper permission, but sometimes you read something that smacks you upside the head so hard that your brains get knocked back into the place where they used to be before Madeline Murray O'Hare and the Dummy-Crats poisoned the air of God's righteousness with their secular humanism and sodomy.? I'm expecting the pews to be full on Sunday after y'all read this!]
What?s even worse than the debate raging in American schools about the teaching of the soulless doctrine of evolution, is the non-debate over an issue that rational Americans have foolishly conceded to the secular among us: the issue of Heliocentrism, or the idea that the Earth revolves around the Sun.
Now, it has to be granted that there may be some mathematical evidence going either way; mathematically speaking, Copernicus may be on ground nearly as firm as that of Tycho Brahe. Right-thinking people know the correct doctrine, however:
Heliocentrism is the view that the sun is at the center of the universe. It was proposed by some ancient Greeks,[1] and became the dominant view in the 1700s and 1800s. It was abandoned in the 20th century.
Since the advent of relativity theory in the early 1900s, the laws of physics have been written in covariant equations, meaning that they are equally valid in any frame. Heliocentric and geocentric theories are both used today, depending on which allows more convenient calculations
It seems clear that it may occasionally be convenient to assume that the calculations of Copernicus and Kepler were mathematically sound. However, for both moral and theological reasons, we should always bear in mind that the Earth does not move. If it moved, we would feel it moving. That?s called empiricism, the experience of the senses. Don?t take my word for it, or the evidence of your own senses, Copernicans. There?s also the Word of the Lord:
?He has fixed the earth firm, immovable.? (1 Chronicles 16:30)
?Thou hast fixed the earth immovable and firm ?? (Psalm 93:1)
?Thou didst fix the earth on its foundation so that it never can be shaken.? (Psalm 104:5)
??who made the earth and fashioned it, and himself fixed it fast?? (Isaiah 45:18)
?The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose.? (Ecclesiastes 1:5)
?Then spake Joshua to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon. And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.? (Joshua 10, 12-13)
Moreover, as Answers in Genesis points out,
?[S]omething well known to high-school physics students, but apparently not to bibliosceptics?that it?s valid to describe motion from any reference frame, although an inertial one usually makes the mathematics simpler.3 But there are many times when the Earth is a convenient reference frame; i.e. at some point we all use the geocentric model in one sense. For instance, a planetarium is a geocentric model. Calculation of rising, transiting, and setting of various celestial objects is calculated geocentrically. There are numerous other examples. Since modern astronomers often use an Earth-centred reference frame, it?s unfair and anti-scientific to criticise the Bible for doing the same.
The premier website for those wishing an absolute debunking of the Biblically unsound, empirically fraudulent, historically heretical doctrine of Heliocentrism is http://www.fixedearth.com/. The website contains numerous links to essays and analyses proving that the embrace of Copernicus is almost as foolish as the embrace of Darwinism. To quote from just one of these astounding essays:
Copernicanism, in short, is a concept that is protected in a bunker under a 50 foot thick ceiling of solid ?scientific? concrete. It is meant to be impregnable. It is a concept that has become ensconced in men?s minds as the indestructible cornerstone of enlightened modern man?s knowledge. Virtually all people everywhere have been taught to believe?and do believe?that this concept is based on objective science and dispassionate secular reasoning, now long since freed from religious superstitions based on the Bible.
Indeed, it was this Copernican heliocentricity concept that gradually broke the back of Bible credibility as the source of Absolute Truth in Christendom. Once the Copernican Revolution had conquered the physical sciences of Astronomy and Physics and put down deep roots in Universities and lower schools everywhere, it was only a matter of time until the Biological sciences launched the Darwinian Revolution.
This embrace of Darwinism then quite predictably emboldened increasingly secular-minded mankind to further reject Biblical Absolutism and replace its teachings with yet more new ?truths? in areas of learning having to do with economics and government. Thus was unsuccessful and floundering Marxism given new life. Marx openly tried to dedicate his own books to Darwin, exulting: ?You have given me the basis for my system?. Thus, the ?Social Science? disciplines were born and began to make their contributions to the destruction of Bible credibility?
Darwin, of course, only popularized evolutionism with his book in 1859, giving it a supposed mechanism thru natural selection and mutations, both since demonstrated to be utter nonsense. The actual roots of the evolutionary concept can be traced back to antiquity?as indeed can the roots of Copernican heliocentricism. Certainly the neo-heliocentrists, i.e., the early Copernicans such as Kepler were evolutionists. Galileo, like Kepler his friend, a neo-heliocentrist, was probably an evolutionist. Newton gave Copernicanism its biggest boost with his book in 1687, but I?ve seen no overt evidence that he was an evolutionist. (If you know of such evidence, I?d like to see it?.)
Thanks, however, to Newton?s invented math and the excesses of his gravitational hypotheses (HERE), Copernicanism dug in its heels in the universities in the 1700?s, and by the last quarter of that century had produced a large crop of hard core heliocentrists, not a few of whom were advocating ape-man theories (amongst them, Darwin?s grandfather, Erasmus Darwin, Voltaire?s disciples in France, etc.). This was the age of ?The Enlightenment? which produced Thomas Paine, the celebrated pamphleteer of the American Revolution, whom George Washington referred to as ?that filthy little atheist?. Thomas Jefferson?s and Ben Franklin?s Deism was commonplace in Europe as well as amongst the rebellious American colonies. During the French Revolution of the 1790?s the Bible was actually outlawed.
These developments were sixty to a hundred years and more before Darwin, but the damage to Bible credibility done by the Copernican Revolution by that time was making an ever-widening open door for Evolutionism to take root. By 1830?even before Darwin (with his Degree in Theology, not Biology) went to the Galapagos Islands and began to formulate his mythology, Charles Lyell (with his degree in Law, not Geology) had advanced his idea of a ?geologic column? with great ages attached to alleged descending layers of the earth. Though such a column has never, ever been confirmed, and though there are mountainous examples of the theoretically old layers being on top of the supposedly more recent ones, and though the Cambrian layer shows a sudden profusion of highly developed life forms with no antecedents, Darwin picked up on Lyell?s fantasy and it is still taught as a proof of an ancient earth and macro-evolutionism.
If that, alone, isn?t enough to convince you of the folly of embracing a soulless, atheistic pseudoscience like Heliocentrism, perhaps this will soften your stony head:
God, thru His Word, teaches a non-moving and immovable earth just as surely as he teaches a six-day Creation 6000 years ago and a universal Flood some 1600 years later. All attempts to twist and even boldly reverse geocentric Scriptures by claiming that God just used a ?language of appearance? are extremely reckless for the Christian devoted to the inerrancy of Scripture. After all, the same argument has been employed with near devastating effect upon the Creationist Movement by Theistic Evolutionists, has it not?
Attacking vulnerable Copernicanism is a strategy that outflanks the entire secular science establishment (overrunning the Theistic Evolutionist?s position in the process!)
In addition to all that, being men and women of sound mind (II Tim. 1:7), Creationists should be eager to learn that:
1) No one?not Copernicus, not Kepler, not Galileo, not Newton, not Einstein?absolutely no one has proven the earth to be moving.
2) The earth moves only thru abstract, abstruse, and esoteric mathematics invented to make it move.
3) Over 200 truly scientific experiments using real mathematics have shown no earth movement, and these had the science establishment in a panic from the 1880?s until Einstein came to the rescue in 1905 with his ?relativity? hypothesis.
4) Relativity is pure claptrap and there isn?t a person reading this who can?t know that fact.
5) Foucault?s Pendulum, the Coriolis Effect, and geostationary satellites do not prove a moving earth.
6) Anyone can see that the results of the Michelson-Morley experiments?especially the light fringe results?prove a stationary earth; and other facts about eclipses, satellite re-positionings, alleged blinding earth speeds, gravitational hooey, etc., add to the proof. Moreover, the Big Bang Baloney, the growing awareness of the effect of Dark Matter on galactic speeds, parallax factors (HERE) which shrink the cosmos, the evidence for speed-of-light retardation, the behavior of reflections and their capabilities for producing phenomena regarding size and depth, etc., all combine to corroborate the certitude of a greatly sanforized universe (one no more than one light day thick: Start HERE), a universe put in diurnal rotation around the spiritual and physical center of God?s Creation, just exactly as it appears to be day in and day out.
7) The Bible not only flatly states scores of times (HERE) and in several ways (HERE) that the earth does not move, it actually has a built-in geocentric assumption?sun rise, sun set?from beginning to end. (One scholar, a geocentrist and mathematician, is cataloguing some 2000 (!) of these.)
In the beginning, the Bible makes clear, the earth was the center of our ?solar? system, with no sun for it to go around until the 4th day of creation (Gen.1:14-19; HERE). At the End we read of a New Earth (HERE) replacing in the same location this old one (Rev. 20:11; 21:1,2). This New Earth which occupies the same location in the cosmos as the old one which has ?fled away? is the place where God the Father and Jesus will dwell with the redeemed forever (Rev. 21:3).
Given that unpreached but clear teaching, do you think that God the Father and Jesus the Son will eternally be somewhere out on the edge of Their NEW Universe in the boonies?or at the center?
If you ask me, that settles the question right there. I support the Bible, and I don?t want my children learning about Heliocentrism in school. I think this doctrine encourages atheism, Darwinism, and anti-Americanism. I don?t want my tax dollars going to finance this kind of false science. It?s complete rot, and I hope that those of us who come to realize this can ultimately prevail against its propogation amongst OUR children with the money from OUR salaries.
I can?t wait to hear from the moonbats and the Darwinists and the other rubes on this one, though. Go on, witch doctors. Preach to me how the planet hurtles through the ether, Scriptural and physical evidence to the contrary! Your false doctrines will be cast down on the day when America rediscovers its Christian roots. That is a promise.
24 Comments so far
Leave a reply
> Since the advent of relativity theory in the early 1900s, the laws of physics have been written in covariant equations, meaning that they are equally valid in any frame. Heliocentric and geocentric theories are both used today, depending on which allows more convenient calculations
Uh, that one is good: “A huge number of proofs say our old book is not telling the truth. Thus all those proofs are wrong!”
Ockham’s Razor to the rescue…
Yay, an article that reminds me of the good old STR days of totally over-the-top awesomeness. Very nice indeed!
We all know that evidence for stupide stuff like this is manipulated by His Noodly Appendage.
“What?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?ɬ¥s even worse than the debate raging in American schools about the teaching of the soulless doctrine of evolution, is the non-debate over an issue that rational Americans have foolishly conceded to the secular among us: the issue of Heliocentrism, or the idea that the Earth revolves around the Sun.”
Technically, Heliocentrism means that the Sun is the center of the universe, which is false, as there is no center.
“Now, it has to be granted that there may be some mathematical evidence going either way; mathematically speaking, Copernicus may be on ground nearly as firm as that of Tycho Brahe. Right-thinking people know the correct doctrine, however:
Heliocentrism is the view that the sun is at the center of the universe. It was proposed by some ancient Greeks,[1] and became the dominant view in the 1700s and 1800s. It was abandoned in the 20th century.
Since the advent of relativity theory in the early 1900s, the laws of physics have been written in covariant equations, meaning that they are equally valid in any frame. Heliocentric and geocentric theories are both used today, depending on which allows more convenient calculations”
Geocentric theories are not used, really. For example, if I wanted to do some calculations with the Moon’s orbit, I would use the Earth’s frame of reference, which makes the Earth no move for those calculations. The Earth is still moving, however. You don’t know anything about relativity.
“It seems clear that it may occasionally be convenient to assume that the calculations of Copernicus and Kepler were mathematically sound. However, for both moral and theological reasons, we should always bear in mind that the Earth does not move. If it moved, we would feel it moving. That?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?ɬ¥s called empiricism, the experience of the senses. Don?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?ɬ¥t take my word for it, or the evidence of your own senses, Copernicans. There?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?ɬ¥s also the Word of the Lord:
?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?ɬ?He has fixed the earth firm, immovable.?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?ɬ? (1 Chronicles 16:30)
?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?ɬ?Thou hast fixed the earth immovable and firm ?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?Ǭ??¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?ɬ? (Psalm 93:1)
?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?ɬ?Thou didst fix the earth on its foundation so that it never can be shaken.?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?ɬ? (Psalm 104:5)
?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?ɬ??¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?Ǭ?who made the earth and fashioned it, and himself fixed it fast?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?Ǭ??¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?ɬ? (Isaiah 45:18)
?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?ɬ?The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose.?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?ɬ? (Ecclesiastes 1:5)
?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?ɬ?Then spake Joshua to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon. And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?ɬ? (Joshua 10, 12-13)”
Of course we don’t feel the Earth move, because it is not accelerating. When you’re riding in a car on a highway, you don’t feel the movement. You only feel acceleration and deceleration. Also, how do you know those Bible quotes are completely valid? The Bible has been translated many times.
“Moreover, as Answers in Genesis points out,
?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?Ǭ?[S]omething well known to high-school physics students, but apparently not to bibliosceptics?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?ɬÆthat it?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?ɬ¥s valid to describe motion from any reference frame, although an inertial one usually makes the mathematics simpler.3 But there are many times when the Earth is a convenient reference frame; i.e. at some point we all use the geocentric model in one sense. For instance, a planetarium is a geocentric model. Calculation of rising, transiting, and setting of various celestial objects is calculated geocentrically. There are numerous other examples. Since modern astronomers often use an Earth-centred reference frame, it?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?ɬ¥s unfair and anti-scientific to criticise the Bible for doing the same.”
That’s what I said. Also, your Answers in Genesis site also has this:
Some creationists believe that the scientific assault on the Bible did not begin with biological evolution, but with the acceptance of the heliocentric (or more properly, geokinetic) theory centuries ago. These people believe that the Bible clearly states that the Earth does not move, and hence the only acceptable Biblical cosmology is a geocentric one. Modern geocentrists use both Biblical and scientific arguments for their case. We examine these arguments, and find them poorly founded. The Scriptural passages quoted do not address cosmology. Some geocentrists draw distinctions that do not exist in the original autographs or even in translations. In short, the Bible is neither geocentric nor heliocentric. While geocentrists present some interesting scientific results, their scientific arguments are often based upon improper understanding of theories and data. Much of their case is based upon a misunderstanding of general relativity and the rejection of that theory. While geocentrists are well intended, their presence among recent creationists produces an easy object of ridicule by our critics.
I won’t even bother with the rest.
Billy, thanks for re-posting this. For a long time, Brownback has been the gold-standard for conservatism. If Donald Rumsfeld does not run, then I for one will be backing Mr Brownback.
You miss the point : all depand , it’s the first theory of relativity … not the Einstein one but the old : the Newton one !
I hope you study it beaucause it’s the less every one should know for his own knowledge…
So this very old and very true theory say that an object seems to move if you don’t , but can be fixed if you move with him. So in this simplify first theory of relativity the earth IS fixed for those one who are on the earth beaucause you move at the same speed ….
It’s the same thing that a car or a Train , in a train , the train is fixed for you if you are in , and all the earth move under you , but it’s just a point of vue , a way to simplify the problems.
There are no debat here because in physics nothing move or nothing is fixed all depand of your point of vue. Whatever say the bible it is a fact and even a child can understand that ….
I also study the theory of Einstein wich is more complicated and if you don’t understand the first theory of relativity I don’t think you could understand the second one which is a beautifull theory with a lot of success… ( Black Hole , different orbit of Planet , Geostationary Satellite , clock in plane , einstein cross … and so on… )
At least I just want to remember you that the majority of you “atheist” researchers actually believe in god … even the genious Einstein : ” God does not play dice”
friendely your physicist
> At least I just want to remember you that the majority of you
> ?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?ɬ?atheist?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?ɬ? researchers actually believe in god ?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?Ǭ? even the genious > Einstein : ?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?ɬ? God does not play dice?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?ɬ?
Einstein also said: “It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.”
“how the planet hurtles through the ether”
Oh, I love that Hunter Thomson quote! Its the part of the book Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas where he describes the effects of ether. Ah, Shelley and Hunter S. Thomson. Joy. I guess the site is fake. Oh well.
Love Hester
People have been unable to prove that the Earth is moving only because humans have always been earth bound creatures, with out the means of removing themselves from the Earth’s frame of reference. However, there is much evidence (empirical evidence mind you, not a quote from a thousand year old book) that clearly shows the movement of the Earth around the sun, and around its axis.
I have a question too, how do you explain the seasons?
Hey while were at it, we might as well claim that Biogenesis is pseudo-science and revert back to spontaneous generation theory.
“1) No one?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?ɬ¨not Copernicus, not Kepler, not Galileo, not Newton, not Einstein?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?ɬ¨absolutely no one has proven the earth to be moving.”
Actually it has been proven. Space probes have shown it. The Bible says a lot of things, but it just says and saying is easy. Science does not just say stuff, it proves, it shows the stuff it says. You should goto school and learn something that can be useful to the World. I’m sure God doesn’t care at all if you think the Earth moves or not, but if you are a good, honest and merciful person that does something to make the World a better place.
Oh and I forgot to congratulate you on using real sources for your research, person who wrote this.
Shelley et all, you could learn from this guy. So that your arguments have more weight than just “The Bible sorta kinda says this so it must be right because the bible is the word of god and god is absolute!”
Lol. How can anyone possibly believe that Earth is the centre of the Universe? We’re in the 21st century!
What a bag of bovine excrements. Sorry, it has been proven a hundredfold that the earth revolves around the sun. Likewise the moon revolves around earth. Oh, and the sun is not the cneter of the universe, either. Just of our solar system.
It seems clear that it may occasionally be convenient to assume that the calculations of Copernicus and Kepler were mathematically sound. However, for both moral and theological reasons, we should always bear in mind that the Earth does not move. If it moved, we would feel it moving. That?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?ɬ¥s called empiricism, the experience of the senses. Don?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?ɬ¥t take my word for it, or the evidence of your own senses, Copernicans. There?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?ɬ¥s also the Word of the Lord:
Okay, two mistakes here:
1. You don?Ǭ¨?Ǭ•t feel it when you are inside something that moves. YOu only feel it accelerating and decellerating. Earth moves in a constant pace.
2. He?Ǭ¨?Ǭ•s mixing religion into a scientific topic. That?Ǭ¨?Ǭ•s the most disastrous mistake one can make. It immediately let?Ǭ¨?Ǭ•s him loose the discussion. Period.
PS: Why have space probes (like the ones NASA uses) to relocate earth every time they?Ǭ¨?Ǭ•re sending infos? THere is only one logical reason: Earth moves.
God, thru His Word, teaches a non-moving and immovable earth just as surely as he teaches a six-day Creation 6000 years ago and a universal Flood some 1600 years later. All attempts to twist and even boldly reverse geocentric Scriptures by claiming that God just used a ?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?ɬ?language of appearance?¢‚Ǩ?°?É‚Äû?ɬ? are extremely reckless for the Christian devoted to the inerrancy of Scripture. After all, the same argument has been employed with near devastating effect upon the Creationist Movement by Theistic Evolutionists, has it not?
Okay, this puts the final nail into the coffin of real, serious and good science on this site. Now it only remains hate-filled, whacko-extremist propaganda.
Another Einstein qoute: There are only two things that are endless: The universe and human stupidity.
ANd this refutes any claims that the earth is the center of the universe. Something that has no boundaries, no end, cannot have a center, either.
The German Guy
IMPEACH BUSH!
Hilarious. I am completely astonished that people fall for this nonsense. Alsmost as amusing as the Autodynamicists.
billy bob neck the only time you feel the earth move is when your banging your mother.
I’m pretty sure that “Sara” is your stage name when you’re performing in transvestite shows because I ain’t never heard a lady speak like that. Even the hairest, ugliest lesbians have a little more self-respect than that. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if you’re really that Sean Ryan fella. And if you ain’t then I’m sure the two of you have a lot of time to watch each other scream as the flesh is burned off your bodies in Hell.
God is Love!
BBN
http://www.billybobneck.com
i love to tell you this fuckface but some women do stupid. you sir a sexist and you also condone domestic violence and you also support this church that you were trying to save from tax persecution you have no respect for the irs and you have no respect for the american government christians like you make me sick trying to force your crazy assed beliefs on people your nothing but a piece of white trash and your a amerian version of hitler. and if you think people will elect a piece of racist white trash like you then sir you better think again cause all you would be a american version of hitler which you already are. and bbn your the reason why i am not a republican anymore. you know i think howard dean is right the republican party is nothing but a white christian party. thank god that i am not a republican anymore. and it is no wonder why alot of people will not set foot into a church cause of zealots like you bbn and no i am not that sean fella and i have no idea who the hell he is. and i am not a transvestite so there goes your theory out the window. and you talk like a redneck and i for one don’t want a white trash redneck like you as president cause you would be a all fired dictator just like your ancestor adolf hitler. you are giving republicans and christianity a bad name. and i love telling you this but J Edgar Hoover was a homosexual and i know that has to hurt hahaha. and i do recall jesus saying to love one another which something you do not do. and i’ve never seen so called christians like you bitch so much like you do all you do is bitch, bitch, bitch you never hardly write anything positive so for the love of god stop all your bitching and whining and start being a christian like you should. maybe if you started showing a little bit of love to people and pray for them you might have my respect but i will not respect you bbn and STR cause all you is bitch,whine,and complain about a person who don’t agree with you or if someone doe’snt agree with you beliefs so billy bob fuckface and str shut the fuck up and quit your bitching and whining. and start showing the love a christian should. i respect all other christians cause they show love and don’t pass judgement on people. but i do not respect christians like you bbn cause you my dear do not deserve it so go to hell you racist son of a bitch
and one more thing bbn i know more about the bible more then you ever will loser.