Which made a lot of sense, before the Copernican model was proved....
Mind you, the Sun isn't the center of the universe either, and some orbital varation -- as well as eccentric orbits of various comets, planetoids, etc., may well turn out to be due to objects outside our solar system.
Copernican works well-enough for most of what we've need so far. But in the future, we may need something more.
Teaching biology students both evolution and 'intelligent design' makes about as much sense as teaching astrophysics students to calculate planetary orbits using both a Copernican (heliocentric) model and a Ptolemaic (geocentric) model.Which made a lot of sense, before the Copernican model was proved....
That time is past. And, yes, of course, there are perturbations to be accounted for. But the Copernican model is broadly correct in a way that the Ptolemaic model is not. And to teach astrophysics students (qua astrophysics students rather than, say, history of science students) the Ptolemaic model as a calculational tool would be an utter waste of their valuable time.
And, yes, science is a work in progress—it's always on the way towards truth. But I've posted on that topic on earlier threads, so I won't belabor that point.