Posted on 03/28/2006 12:09:01 PM PST by orionblamblam
Bible proves Earth is center of universe, author argues The Earth is at the center of Robert Sungenis' universe. Literally.
Yours too, he says.
Sungenis is a geocentrist. He contends the sun orbits the Earth instead of vice versa. He says physics and the Bible show that the vastness of space revolves around us; that we're at the center of everything, on a planet that does not rotate.
He has just completed a 1,000-page tome, "Galileo Was Wrong," the first in a pair of books he hopes will persuade readers to "give Scripture its due place, and show that science is not all it's cracked up to be."
...
For several years the Web site of his Catholic Apologetics International (www.catholicintl.com) offered a $1,000 reward to anyone who could disprove geocentrism and prove heliocentrism (a sun-centered solar system).
There were numerous attempts, Sungenis said, "some serious, some caustic," but no one did it to his satisfaction. "Most admitted it can't be proven." There's also no proof that the Earth rotates, he said. But what about Foucault's famous pendulum? Its plane of oscillation revolves every 24 hours, showing the rotation of the planet. If the Earth didn't rotate, it wouldn't oscillate.
Nope, Sungenis said: There just may be some other force propelling it, such as the pull of stars.
(Excerpt) Read more at sunherald.com ...
Perhaps he should convert to Islam
Opening paragraph of
Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution
by Theodosius Dobzhansky
As recently as 1966, sheik Abd el Aziz bin Baz asked the king of Saudi Arabia to suppress a heresy that was spreading in his land. Wrote the sheik:
"The Holy Koran, the Prophet’s teachings, the majority of Islamic scientists, and the actual facts all prove that the sun is running in its orbit . . . and that the earth is fixed and stable, spread out by God for his mankind. . . . Anyone who professed otherwise would utter a charge of falsehood toward God, the Koran, and the Prophet."
The good sheik evidently holds the Copernican theory to be a "mere theory," not a "fact." In this he is technically correct. A theory can be verified by a mass of facts, but it becomes a proven theory, not a fact...
"There's also no proof that the Earth rotates, he said. But what about Foucault's famous pendulum? Its plane of oscillation revolves every 24 hours, showing the rotation of the planet. If the Earth didn't rotate, it wouldn't oscillate. Nope, Sungenis said: There just may be some other force propelling it, such as the pull of stars."
So by simply declaring that there might be another mechanism, he think's he's disproven the rotation of the Earth? Unbelievable! How about he do some calculations to show that the pull of the stars actually is a feasible explanation?
But he shouldn't stop there. He needs to demonstrate that the accepted physics for placing satellites in orbit is all wrong. There's a reason we always launch rockets from as near the equator as feasible and always eastward, and that reason is the Earth's rotation.
"Sungenis' background is in both theology and science. He said he was a physics major at George Washington University but received his bachelor's degree in religious studies from GW, and a master's in the same from Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia. His religious studies doctorate came this year from Calamus International University. . ."
Ahh, so he failed physics and then moved on to religious studies, and this makes him a physics expert, I guess. The problem with people like this is that they sound credible to other people like this, and no matter how rational and well-supported an argument is to the contrary, it will fail to convince them.
"Einstein told us there is no center, that any point in the universe can serve as the center," Sungenis said. "If that's the case, Einstein has undermined Copernicus. You can't prove either one."
Again he demonstrates his ignorance. Doesn't he know what relative motion means? He couldn't have gotten far in physics without knowing this. Besides, relativity of motion predates Einstein and was understood in Newtonian Physics (if not earlier).
"Marshall Hall is one. He's been researching it since 1980. . .So sometimes he uses this illustration story:
You want to travel from Washington, D.C., to San Francisco. If the Earth is turning, why not just hover in a helicopter? Wait a few hours above the East Coast and eventually the West Coast will be underneath you."
And thus Mr. Hall demonstrates that he failed high-school physics. Makes we wonder if he understands what constitutes research.
Alas, this guy is also one of the loudest Creationists.
http://www.catholicintl.com/epologetics/articles/science/earth-young-old1.htm
Mathematica. Of course, you pay through both nostrils and the nasal septum.
Don't forget to add STK and OASYS. :-)
I also have Mathematica (and math type) :-)
Did the stars make you type that post?
FReeper please.
Of course not, I was commenting on your physical intuition. I apologize if I sounded harsh.
MathType is cheap. You need a second mortgage to buy a full Mathematica license.
Whee!!
You want to travel from Washington, D.C., to San Francisco. If the Earth is turning, why not just hover in a helicopter? Wait a few hours above the East Coast and eventually the West Coast will be underneath you
I think I just lost an entire standard deviation of IQ, evidenced by liquefied brain running out of my ears. Yucky!
Mark for later.
You won't find many posting on this kind of thread - the "struggle" is political for them and it isn't smart politically to align with a nutcase.
I'm going to assume that's a rhetorical question 'cause I can't imagine that anyone really wants to hear his answer!
Except for comedic effect, that is.
Oh my yes! Maple isn't exactly given away either. Sigh! LOL!
Satellite Tool Kit? OASYS? Not really in the same league. MatLab is a general purpose programming language. IDL is a better comparison, but it's very image/spectra centric. I'm not familiar with Mathematica.
Sorry, but that effect can also be achieved by the Sun orbiting the earth.
OK - how about this - why does water circle one way in the Northern Hemisphere when going down a drain and circle the other way in the Southern Hemisphere? If the world was stationary - it wouldn't spin at all.
That should prove the Earth's rotation.
I had a high school teacher explain to us after the Russians orbited the first man, that the claim was a hoax, because you couldn't see anything outside your window while going 18,000 mph. It would whiz by too fast.
This was a very expensive private school.
;^)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.