No, just ANY loon who would deny that the Earth is in orbit around the Sun. Not any particular loon.
Your constant refrain on any scientific subject - gravity or evolution - is that using the model to explain the data is “begging the question”. You are at least consistent that you think using a scientific model to explain data is some sort of logical fallacy.
But what you call a logical fallacy the rest of the world calls the scientific method - using a model to explain and predict data.
Apparently you think the evolutionary ‘scientific models’ are closest to reality just because nothing else is so highly researched [read gov funded]. The problem is any contradictory data consistently gets overlooked and ignored while ridiculing anyone willing to ask you to show all the steps in your ridiculous conclusions.
Evolution fails at the ‘mathematical model’ level and therefore evolution fails at reality.
Ah, more name-calling. When you don't like my opinion, you resort to name-calling.
"Your constant refrain on any scientific subject - gravity or evolution - is that using the model to explain the data is “begging the question”. You are at least consistent that you think using a scientific model to explain data is some sort of logical fallacy."
See below for quotes demonstrating the equivalence of geocentric and geokinetic models. After that, it's merely one's personal opinion. To claim that one model is demonstrably superior to the other in the face of quotes stating their equivalence, one must use logical fallacy as 'support'. If you don't want me to point out your use of logical fallacy as arguemnt the solution is obvious, don't use logical fallacy as argument.
“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
“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.... Today we cannot say that the Copernican theory is ‘right’ and the Ptolemaic theory ‘wrong’ in any meaningful physical sense.”
Hoyle, Fred. Nicolaus Copernicus. London: Heinemann Educational Books Ltd., 1973.
"...Thus we may return to Ptolemy's point of view of a 'motionless earth'...One has to show that the transformed metric can be regarded as produced according to Einstein's field equations, by distant rotating masses. This has been done by Thirring. He calculated a field due to a rotating, hollow, thick-walled sphere and proved that inside the cavity it behaved as though there were centrifugal and other inertial forces usually attributed to absolute space. Thus from Einstein's point of view, Ptolemy and Corpenicus are equally right."
Born, Max. "Einstein's Theory of Relativity",Dover Publications,1962, pgs 344 & 345:
"People need to be aware that there is a range of models that could explain the observations,” Ellis argues. “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. In my view there is absolutely nothing wrong in that. What I want to bring into the open is the fact that we are using philosophical criteria in choosing our models. A lot of cosmology tries to hide that.”
Ellis, George, in Scientific American, "Thinking Globally, Acting Universally", October 1995
"But what you call a logical fallacy the rest of the world calls the scientific method - using a model to explain and predict data."
That would be the fallacy of appeal to popular opinion.