Replies

"YOU claimed that the gravity of the “rest of the universe” could account for the Sun orbiting the Earth. That is about all you will say on the subject. When I bring up that it is impossible you say ‘I didn't say that’. Laughably inept. GRAVITY moves the Earth around the Sun."

Nope, you simply demonstrate your inability to understand the models. You are the only one who insists that the sun must orbit the earth. The geocentric model is simply that the earth is at the center of the universe, hence the term geocentric. I never said that the sun orbits the earth. That is just your gross incompetence showing.

"Creationists indulge in apologetics. Biologists do science."

Ah, what a gross lack of critical-thinking skills. Define terms such that it is impossible for your position to engage in apologetics and think it true. Wow.

"My source was a scientific source that had, despite your obtuse inability to notice, BACKED their claims with peer reviewed literature. That WAS the standard you set you, one you curiously have repeatedly FAILED to live up to yourself."

So, 'Alec's Evolution Pages' is a scientific source and not apologetics? Wow! You did notice that good old Alec himself wrote the article you claim as your 'scientific source', didn't you? Sheesh...

"Where is your peer reviewed scientific literature to show that what the peer reviewed scientific literature my source referenced was incorrect?"

I used the source you provided to show that you claim a spectacularly speculative paper as though it is proof of your bizarre belief. You really think that if you post a source it can't be used to show your conclusions about that source are wrong? Wow! Your extreme lack of critical-thinking skills is definitely showing more and more. Keep talking, please.

"YOU HAVE NOTHING!"

Oh, shrill screaming now counts as debate? Your inability to think critically wrt your beliefs just becomes more and more obvious.

"But I laugh at your incompetence."

Fools laugh at that they cannot understand and will not admit.

“Heliocentrism always ignores the rest of the universe while geocentrism always includes it. Your example above shows how the rest of the universe is ignored by focusing on the sun/earth CG. Consider that the solar system is a mere point when compared to the universe. Then consider that it does not take much gravitational imbalance in the universe to move the CG from somewhere inside the sun (for heliocentrism) to inside the earth (for geocentrism).”

Unless you are too obtuse to understand your own writing; this is you suggesting that a “gravitational imbalance” when considering the “rest of the universe” would cause the Sun to orbit the Earth.

Why say it and then deny you said it?

Are you trying to sound stupid?