Let's see what you think is so difficult to understand.
According to Einstein:
“Can we formulate physical laws so that they are valid for all CS [coordinate systems], not only those moving uniformly, but also those moving quite arbitrarily, relative to each other? […] The struggle, so violent in the early days of science, between the views of Ptolemy and Copernicus would then be quite meaningless. Either CS could be used with equal justification. The two sentences: “the sun is at rest and the earth moves” or “the sun moves and the earth is at rest” would simply mean two different conventions concerning two different CS.”
Einstein, A. and Infeld, L. (1938) The Evolution of Physics, p.212 (p.248 in original 1938 ed.); Note: CS = coordinate system
According to Hoyle:
“The relation of the two pictures [geocentricity and heliocentricity] is reduced to a mere coordinate transformation and it is the main tenet of the Einstein theory that any two ways of looking at the world which are related to each other by a coordinate transformation are entirely equivalent from a physical point of view...."
Hoyle, Fred. Nicolaus Copernicus. London: Heinemann Educational Books Ltd., 1973. According to Ellis:
"For instance, I can construct you a spherically symmetrical universe with Earth at its center, and you cannot disprove it based on observations.” Ellis has published a paper on this. “You can only exclude it on philosophical grounds."
Ellis, George, in Scientific American, "Thinking Globally, Acting Universally", October 1995
"The gravitational force necessary to make the Sun orbit the Earth would move the Earth like a leaf in a storm, not leave it magically and mysteriously motionless."
Not according to Einstein, Hoyle and Ellis.
"But trying to talk reason, or get a straight answer, out of a Geocentrist truly IS a fool's errand."
Again, trying to label opposing models with emotionally-charged terms and accusations is a fool's errand.
"But thanks for playing along, I really enjoy showing what ludicrous foolishness creationism is."
Again, trying to label opposing models with emotionally-charged terms and accusations is a fool's errand.
But creationists must lie about science out of necessity.