Well, obviously the earth and the universe move in relation to each other, so when you say it does not move at all, that would depend on your philosophical choice of perspective and be indefensible scientifically.
Is that your goal?
I do agree that in order to be a heliocentrist, you have to ignore the rest of the universe while a geocentrist always takes the entire universe into consideration, if that's what you mean.
Period.
Ah.
Well there's your problem then. There already are a bunch of other folks who call themselves "geocentrists". They've been around for thousands of years.
And *they* mean that the Earth is fixed in place by God.
So when you say you're a geo-centrist . . . you're confusing folks here. You sound like you're defending the idea that the Earth is fixed in place, unmoving.
It's like calling yourself a Nazi, but you don't believe in gassing Jews, you know?
Similarly, you're mistaken about what a 'heliocentrist' means . . . maybe instead of refusing to listen, you should listen carefully when RadioAstronomer tells you what he does?
"Heliocentrists" don't ignore the rest of the universe, for starters. You've gotten that little tidbit wildly wrong.
Dan, all you're doing in your heliocentric argument is arguing over exactly what the definition of 'heliocentrism' is. You're not arguing over whether it is a fact or not, just the definition of what the word means.