Page 1 of 3

Geocentricity vs Heliocentricity

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2012 11:21 pm
by chump
Does the Earth really rotate around the sun? I read this awhile back and thought it was pretty clever. My apologeez if it has already been posted. ... icity.html

Geocentricity vs. Heliocentricity
Heliocentricity, besides being proven false by experience and multiple experiments, is full of the most fantastical improbabilities and theoretical leaps that most people are willing to make simply because the pseudo-scientific establishment told them so. Here are some questions and answers to help clear up the Geocentric vs. Heliocentric world-views:

Why does the Earth seem motionless?

GC: Because it is motionless.

HC: It only seems motionless because it's spinning at a perfectly uniform speed with no acceleration or deceleration ever and the atmosphere is magically velcroed to it. Actually the Earth is spinning on it's axis at 1,000 mph, rotating around the Sun at 67,000 mph, which is orbiting the Milky Way at 500,000 mph and shooting through the known Universe at 67,000,000 mph. We don't feel even the slightest bit of this motion because all the centrifugal, gravitational, and inertial forces somehow perfectly cancel out.

"Most people who accept that the Earth is in motion believe it is a proven fact. They do not realize that not only has the motion of the Earth never been proven, but by the constructs of modern physics and cosmology cannot be proven. Again, even modern cosmology does not claim to be able to prove that the Earth is in motion. In fact the very best argument for Earth’s motion is based on pure ‘modesty’ not logic, observation and experience. If anyone could prove the Earth’s motion, that someone would become more famous than Einstein, Hawking and others. They may all be fools but even they would not make such an ignorant claim to proof of Earth’s motions, and those who do so don’t realize just how ignorant of physics they really are! Before folks go demonstrating how ignorant they are, they should consider: 1. The relationship between Mach’s principle and relativity. 2. The relationship between Gravity and Inertia, and Gravity and Acceleration (and the paradoxes that exist). 3. Relativity does not claim to prove Earth’s motions, in fact it ‘dictates’ the ridiculous idea that motion cannot be proven period. 4. Relativity proposes motion, it does not nor can it claim to disprove that the Earth is the center of the universe! 5. Only those who are ignorant of physics attempt to make arguments based on weather patterns, ballistic trajectories, geosynchronous satellites, and Foucault’s pendulums for evidence of Earth’s motions! For all those ‘geniuses’ out there, not even Einstein would claim such stupidity." -Allen Daves

Why do the Sun and Moon appear to be the same size?

GC: Because they are the same size.

HC: They only appear to be the same size because of an incredibly perfect parallax perspective from Earth. Actually the Sun is 1.392x10^6 km in diameter and 1.496x10^8 km from Earth. The Moon is 3474 km in diameter and 384,403 km from the Earth.And these just happen to be the EXACT diameters and distances necessary for a viewer from Earth to falsely perceive them as being the same size.

Why do the Sun, Moon, and Stars all appear to revolve around a stationary Earth?

GC:Because they do.

HC: The Moon does revolve around the Earth, but the Earth actually revolves around the Sun, and all the stars only seem to revolve around the Earth because the Earth itself is spinning beneath your feet!

"Whilst we sit drinking our cup of tea or coffee the world is supposedly rotating at 1,039 mph at the equator, whizzing around the Sun at 66,500 mph, hurtling towards Lyra at 20,000 mph, revolving around the centre of the 'Milky Way' at 500,000 mph and merrily moving at God knows what velocity as a consequence of the 'Big Bong.' And not even a hint of a ripple on the surface of our tea, yet tap the table lightly with your finger and ... !" -Neville T. Jones

"If the Government or NASA had said to you that the Earth is stationary, imagine that. And then imagine we are trying to convince people that 'no, no it's not stationary, it's moving forward at 32 times rifle bullet speed and spinning at 1,000 miles per hour.' We would be laughed at! We would have so many people telling us 'you are crazy, the Earth is not moving!' We would be ridiculed for having no scientific backing for this convoluted moving Earth theory. And not only that but then people would say, 'oh then how do you explain a fixed, calm atmosphere and the Sun's observable movement, how do you explain that?' Imagine saying to people, 'no, no, the atmosphere is moving also but is somehow magically velcroed to the moving-Earth. The reason is not simply because the Earth is stationary.' So what we are actually doing is what makes sense. We are saying that the moving-Earth theory is nonsense. The stationary-Earth theory makes sense and we are being ridiculed. You've got to picture it being the other way around to realize just how RIDICULOUS this situation is. This theory from the Government and NASA that the Earth is rotating and orbiting and leaning over and wobbling is absolute nonsense and yet people are clinging to it, tightly, like a teddy bear. They just can't bring themselves to face the possibility that the Earth is stationary though ALL the evidence shows it: we feel no movement, the atmosphere hasn't been blown away, we see the Sun move from East-to-West, everything can be explained by a motionless Earth without bringing in all these assumptions to cover up previous assumptions gone bad." -Allen Daves

Why do we never see the rotation of the Moon?

GC:Because it doesn't rotate.

HC: Both the Moon and the Earth are actually rotating but they are doing so in such a way that from our perspective it seems that neither are. The Earth is spinning East to West at 1,000 mph while orbiting the Sun at 67,000 mph. The Moon is spinning West to East at 10.3 mph while orbiting the Earth at 2,288 mph. These motions/speeds perfectly cancel out so that the Moon always only shows us one side.

"They want you to believe that the Moon's rotation is perfectly synchronized with its orbit so that's why we only ever see one side of the Moon, rather than conclude the obvious - that the Moon is simply NOT rotating. Moreover, they had to slow down the Moon's speed by 58,870 mph AND reverse its direction to West-East to successfully sell their phony heliocentricity system to a gullible public. I don't think there is one person in many, many thousands - regardless of education - who knows that the Copernican Model had to turn the Moon's observable direction around and give it a new speed to accommodate the phases and eclipses." -Marshall Hall

“The Moon presented a special math problem for the construction of the heliocentricity model. The only way to make the Moon fit in with the other assumptions was to reverse its direction from that of what everyone who has ever lived has seen it go. The math model couldn’t just stop the Moon like it did the Sun, that wouldn’t work. And it couldn’t let it continue to go East to West as we see it go, either at the same speed or at a different speed. The only option was to reverse its observed East to West direction and change its speed from about 64,000 miles an hour to about 2,200 miles an hour. This reversal along with the change in speed were unavoidable assumptions that needed to be adopted if the model was to have a chance of mimicking reality." -Bernard Brauer

Why do the stars appear to be fixed along a celestial sphere?

GC:Because they are.

HC: The stars only appear to be fixed along a celestial sphere because they are so incredibly far away. Even after hundreds of millions of miles of our (supposed) orbit around the Sun, the stars appear in the exact same positions at the exact same meridian times because they are many "light-years" away. A light-year is approximately 6 TRILLION miles away and that is why they falsely seem fixed from our faulty perspective.

"Take two carefully-bored metallic tubes, not less than six feet in length, and place them one yard asunder, on the opposite sides of a wooden frame, or a solid block of wood or stone: so adjust them that their centres or axes of vision shall be perfectly parallel to each other. Now, direct them to the plane of some notable fixed star, a few seconds previous to its meridian time. Let an observer be stationed at each tube and the moment the star appears in the first tube let a loud knock or other signal be given, to be repeated by the observer at the second tube when he first sees the same star. A distinct period of time will elapse between the signals given. The signals will follow each other in very rapid succession, but still, the time between is sufficient to show that the same star is not visible at the same moment by two parallel lines of sight when only one yard asunder. A slight inclination of the second tube towards the first tube would be required for the star to be seen through both tubes at the same instant. Let the tubes remain in their position for six months; at the end of which time the same observation or experiment will produce the same results--the star will be visible at the same meridian time, without the slightest alteration being required in the direction of the tubes: from which it is concluded that if the earth had moved one single yard in an orbit through space, there would at least be observed the slight inclination of the tube which the difference in position of one yard had previously required. But as no such difference in the direction of the tube is required, the conclusion is unavoidable, that in six months a given meridian upon the earth's surface does not move a single yard, and therefore, that the earth has not the slightest degree of orbital motion." -Samuel Rowbotham, "Zetetic Astronomy"

Why can't I simply hover in a helicopter and wait for the Earth's rotation to bring my destination to me?

GC: Because the Earth doesn't rotate.

HC: Because the Earth's atmosphere is magically velcroed to the Earth and rotates along with it.

If the atmosphere is magically velcroed to the Earth and constantly rotates from West to East along with it, 1) how is it that clouds, wind and weather patterns often travel in opposing directions simultaneously? 2) why don't East to West traveling planes or projectiles encounter increased resistance? 3) why can I feel the slightest Westward breeze but not the Earth's supposed 1,000 mph Eastward spin?4) If gravitational force is so great to pull the atmosphere together with the Earth then how come little birds and bugs are able to fly?

GC: All these questions are moot and irrelevant in the Geocentric view.

HC: All of these questions are difficult and my pseudo-scientific answers will be implausible and like grasping at straws.

"If the atmosphere rushes forward from west to east continually, we are again obliged to conclude that whatever floats or is suspended in it, at any altitude, must of necessity partake of its eastward motion. A piece of cork, or any other body floating in still water, will be motionless, but let the water be put in motion, in any direction whatever, and the floating bodies will move with it, in the same direction and with the same velocity. Let the experiment be tried in every possible way, and these results will invariable follow. Hence if the earth's atmosphere is in constant motion from west to east, all the different strata which are known to exist in it, and all the various kinds of clouds and vapours which float in it must of mechanical necessity move rapidly eastwards. But what is the fact? If we fix upon any star as a standard or datum outside the visible atmosphere, we may sometimes observe a stratum of clouds going for hours together in a direction the very opposite to that in which the earth is supposed to be moving. Not only may a stratum of clouds be seen moving rapidly from east to west, but at the same moment other strata may often be seen moving from north to south, and from south to north. It is a fact well known to aeronauts, that several strata of atmospheric air are often moving in as many different directions at the same time ... On almost any moonlight and cloudy night, different strata may be seen not only moving in different directions but, at the same time, moving with different velocities; some floating past the face of the moon rapidly and uniformly, and others passing gently along, sometimes becoming stationary, then starting fitfully into motion, and often standing still for minutes together. Some of those who have ascended in balloons for scientific purposes have recorded that as they have rapidly passed through the atmosphere, they have gone though strata differing in temperature, in density, and in hygrometric, magnetic, electric, and other conditions. These changes have been noticed both in ascending and descending, and in going for miles together at the same altitude." -Samuel Rowbotham, "Zetetic Astronomy"

How do Heliocentricist's account for the Allais effect, and the results of Michelson-Morley, Michelson-Gale, Airy's Failure, Sagnac and Kantors experiments proving the aether and a fixed Earth?

GC: Yeah, good question.

HC: (silence)

"I don’t argue or enter into debates, because the issue here is exactly what you would bring to the debate, which is the wealth of erroneous information that allowed our situation to become as dire as it is in the first place. Your argument would consist of phony statistics, historical fables, the newspaper’s latest lies, and profit-driven 'science.' My argument is simple. Discover who controls everything you’ve been told, only believe what you can verify for yourself through original documentation, science and logic, and then look for a political connection between the sources of all the erroneous information. Find the motives behind the lies. If you did that, there would be no debate, and we would all agree on whose head should roll, as the saying goes." -Jolly Roger ... 9904474125

Interesting, I'm not expert in this. But there are some social implications worth mentioning.

The accepted theories of space seem to support the idea of human insignifigance. In the material sense.

An occult perspective might suggest that, each person is the static center of their own universe, because there needs to be a mind to perceive it. He or she is at the center of perception always.

The middle may be here or it may be there, but if a fellow is denied the knowledge that he is also undeniably a and the "center". That is a way of consciously or unconsciously claiming power over them.

If we look at the "evolution" or concept of the evolution of the sun, there are always people who undeniably know what it is, usually it coincides with the latest science, in ancient times it was god, in the 1800s, it was burning gas, the the 1900s, it was nuclear, I believe, now I belive it works by fusion. What shall it be next? Always it is the most powerful thing man can conceive of. Many will always be certain of that.

There are even those dumb enough to say when it will burn out, based on their "measurements".

The sun will always be what it is, and that is likely beyond our terrestrial perception at this time. We don't have great tools to measure it.

As to the workings of the rotation or non rotation of the earth, it's the same presumptuous certanty. Subject to the same "evolution" as the sun.

My take.

Good stuff, thanks for the read.

Re: Geocentricity vs Heliocentricity

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2012 11:39 pm
by psynapz
Could have been written by JLL, if he were smarter.

But JLL is not smarter.

Therefore this was not written by JLL.

(And you will know that I am conscience dreaming.)

Re: Geocentricity vs Heliocentricity

PostPosted: Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:24 am
by Elihu
My argument is simple. Discover who controls everything you’ve been told, only believe what you can verify for yourself through original documentation, science and logic, and then look for a political connection between the sources of all the erroneous information. Find the motives behind the lies. If you did that, there would be no debate, and we would all agree on whose head should roll, as the saying goes." -Jolly Roger

incredibly fascinating topic. thank you chump. i wish that would fit into my sig line.

couldn't find this in englais, sorry:

The room at the embassy where the family get to stay is luxurious.

Homer: Oh, yeah, this is the life! Boy, next summer can you commit
some fraud in Orlando, Florida?
Bart: I'm way ahead of you, Dad.
Conover: [walking in] Kno-ock! Simpsons, I'd like you to meet our
ambassador, the honorable Avril Ward.
Ward: Hello. Now, everything is all set for Bart's apology. Mr.
Conover will meet you at the parliament house at three p.m.
Bart: Yeah, do the toilets go backwards in here?
Ward: No. To combat homesickness, we've installed a device that
makes them swirl the correct American way.
[he flushes the toilet]
[it swirls one way, then a machine kicks in and makes it swirl
the other way]
Homer: [singing] Sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing...[weeps]

Re: Geocentricity vs Heliocentricity

PostPosted: Fri Jan 13, 2012 10:53 pm
by Simulist
Wait a minute.

Clearly, ALL of this is wrong.

Obviously, Kim Kardashian is the center of the universe -- as anyone in line at a supermarket can see.

Re: Geocentricity vs Heliocentricity

PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2012 9:42 am
by Stephen Morgan
The universe has no centre. All things revolve around each other. See gravity. Also, smell gravity. The sun is merely more massive. And shiny. It's all mobiuses and ouroborouses and toroids and so on.

Re: Geocentricity vs Heliocentricity

PostPosted: Fri Mar 21, 2014 1:05 pm
by Lord Balto
Simulist » Fri Jan 13, 2012 10:53 pm wrote:Wait a minute.

Clearly, ALL of this is wrong.

Obviously, Kim Kardashian is the center of the universe -- as anyone in line at a supermarket can see.

Her butt is certainly massive enough. Actually, I believe in Electrocentricity. Everything revolves around the Primary Electron on Epsilon Indi.

Re: Geocentricity vs Heliocentricity

PostPosted: Wed Apr 23, 2014 4:33 am
by BrandonD
Hugely fascinating, thanks for posting.

Re: Geocentricity vs Heliocentricity

PostPosted: Sun Feb 01, 2015 2:42 pm
by sneezus christ
Fascinating stuff, im a flat earther now until i can understand several of the reasons presented why the arguments below are invalid. ... n-out.html ... wrong-pt1/

Re: Geocentricity vs Heliocentricity

PostPosted: Mon Feb 02, 2015 8:09 pm
by coffin_dodger
Welcome to the clubhouse, Sneezus. Great name.

Shit is generally so fucked up and so much is make-believe, I almost believe that stuff at waykiwayki. After all, everything I believe to be true about such matters has been relayed to me by other peoples experiences, not my own.

I mean, I know the System promulgates BIG LIES all the time, but this one would really be a who's-yer-daddy sized whopper. I approach subjects of this enormity with the question why would this be kept from us? Is it really to keep nasa guys in a job? I'm open to persausion.

Re: Geocentricity vs Heliocentricity

PostPosted: Wed Apr 01, 2015 10:58 am
by sneezus christ

Re: Geocentricity vs Heliocentricity

PostPosted: Fri May 15, 2015 7:11 am
by Elihu
Ya knoowwww? it's fun to learn new things. sometimes.

born into a prison. a prison that you can neither taste nor touch nor smell. a prison. for your mind.

Re: Geocentricity vs Heliocentricity

PostPosted: Fri May 15, 2015 1:47 pm
by chump

Re: Fake World Reality Part 1

PostPosted: Sat Aug 08, 2015 7:41 pm
by chump
"What is true is what is true for you."
- L. Ron Hubbard

from the video
... the horizon is always at eye level or higher no matter how high you are... you will never look down at the horizon... this proves that the earth is not a ball... all directions the horizon line is at eye level... Horizon = Eye level.

Its an illusion where every slave is on top of his own little world looking down on everyone else from his own little perspective... it's only when we put the persepctives together and everyone truly is equal that the real earth comes into focus.

The Earth is a plane, not a planet. You have been taught since childhood not to trust your eyes and experience. to deny common sense, ignore contrary evidence, and ridicule anyone who dares to question the space program priests and their infallible spinning ball-Earth gospel. Open your eyes and trust what you see! The Earth is flat, just as it appears, motionless, just as it feels, and everything in the heavens revolves around us, just as it seems.

Thanks to a bit of rocket technology, Zero planes, wires, cranes, pools, sound studios, and all the lying Freemasons they need, NASA and other programs have successfully fooled the entire world out of believing their own eyes, experience and common sense.

Tune to the Tube for part two of this series...

Another perspective:

Published on Jul 7, 2015

This video will be helpful to flat-Earthers, but also appreciated by ball-Earthers. In it, I provide a basic understanding of the Azimuthal Equidistant map style. It helps to understand a few things about this map to be better qualified for debate of the flat-Earth theory.

Re: Geocentricity vs Heliocentricity

PostPosted: Sat Aug 08, 2015 9:43 pm
by BrandonD
For me, the evidence indicates that our current conceptual model of the earth is incorrect - through a combination of legitimate error as well as deception.

But I think it's premature to just switch over to a flat earth model. Especially when there are still many conceivable possibilities outside of the narrowly-defined parameters we've been given.

Re: Geocentricity vs Heliocentricity

PostPosted: Thu Aug 13, 2015 8:05 pm
by guruilla
This is a rapidly-growing meme anyhow; I was pointed to the FE model a few weeks ago and today received an email from wayki guy.

what intrigues most about the question of earth-shape is the liminal state created by recognizing the impossibility of knowing. I suspect if I watched some of these docs all the way through, I would end up seriously doubting that the earth is round too. In fact just hearing about this movement is enough for me to doubt, because it forces me to acknowledge that I don't know. On the other hand no amount of evidence is going to make me 100% sure either way unless I can go up in a hot air-balloon high enough to see for myself. For this reason I’m not that interested in the specifics, since it doesn't make any difference to me if the Earth is round or flat. What does interest me is this growing phenomenon of counter-narratives undermining the consensus view of reality. (The Moon landing is another obvious example, & obviously related to the FE model.)

wayki is comparing recognizing the flatness of earth to a spiritual awakening; that to me is the fishiest part of all about this meme.

At first or fifth whiff, I smell psyop.