Article Geocentricity on Creation Wiki

Creation vs. Evolution: Article Geocentricity on Creation Wiki · New blog on the kid: First 19 Minutes with Carter

Here it is, btw:

CreationWiki : Geocentricity
https://creationwiki.org/Geocentricity

Contains a list of Anti-Geocentricity points:

• Foucault's pendulum demonstrates the rotation of the earth; without such rotation there is no reason for the pendulum to rotate its plane of swing.
• A non-rotating earth would require the outer planets and the stars to be moving at excessive (translight?) speeds. Measurements of relative motion between the earth and the nearer planets indicate that the other planets are not moving fast enough for the earth to be stationary.
• Differences in escape velocity at the poles vs the equator wouldn't exist on a non-rotating planet. Similarly, satellites in geostationary orbit would be motionless over a non-rotating planet, and would simply fall down.
• The Coriolis effect would not exist on a stationary earth.
• Earthquakes, including those induced by placing explosives in geological fault-lines, can produce measurable changes in the earth's rotation. If the earth is in fact stationary, this would mean that events on earth can instantaneously affect the motions of stars many many light-years away.
• The orbit of the earth around the sun is used as a baseline for measuring distance to stars using the parallax method - if the earth was stationary this ought not to be possible.
• The relative frequency of shooting stars before/after midnight indicates that the earth is both rotating and moving through space.
• The red shift measured in stars' spectra changes in an annual cycle; if the earth is not circling the sun, then stars must be constantly accelerating/decelerating in something akin to a 'Mexican wave'.

Now, let's tackle these one by one.

P 1)

Foucault's pendulum demonstrates the rotation of the earth; without such rotation there is no reason for the pendulum to rotate its plane of swing.

A

Except if instead of void, we are dealing with an aether, capable of going around Earth, if God so moves it.

P 2)

A non-rotating earth would require the outer planets and the stars to be moving at excessive (translight?) speeds. Measurements of relative motion between the earth and the nearer planets indicate that the other planets are not moving fast enough for the earth to be stationary.

A

The measurements are made with supposition that the relative motion in question involves earth rotating as explanation of the daily motion.

As for outer planets, and stars.

What is the exact distance at which the rotational speed would be translight?

First, we deal with 360° full rotation each stellar day:

Earth's rotation period relative to the fixed stars, called its stellar day by the International Earth Rotation and Reference Systems Service (IERS), is 86,164.098 903 691 seconds of mean solar time (UT1) (23^h 56^m 4.098 903 691^s, 0.997 269 663 237 16 mean solar days)

Second, we are dealing basically with a perfect circle. If a body were passing in and out of its limits, it would be passing in and out of translight speed.

Third, gracefully, distances can be counted in time-units, in "light" so and so time unit.

Fourth, this means we can use π fairly elementary calculations. If the circle is 23 light hours plus 56 light minutes plus 4.098 903 691 light seconds, we convert all to light seconds, to get perimeter of circle, then divide by π to get diameter, then divide by two to get instead radius. And then convert light seconds back again to readable units.

23 * 60 * 60 ls		82 800 ls
56 * 60 ls		03 360 ls
4.098 903 691 ls		00 004.098 903 691 ls
		86 164.098 903 691 ls

86 164.098 903 691 / π = 27 426.884 515 162 764 789 2 ls
27 426.884 515 162 764 789 2 ls / 2 = 13 713.442 257 581 382 394 6 ls

13 713.442 257 581 382 394 6 / 3600 = 3.8092895159948284429 lh
0.8092895159948284429 lh * 60 = 48.557370959689706574 lm
0.557370959689706574 lm * 60 = 33.44225758138239444 ls

So, the radius of the circle would be 3 light hours, 48 light minutes and 33 light seconds.

Pluto's perihelium was 29.658 AU in September 5, 1989. Pluto's next and first observed aphelium is calculated to be in February 2114, and at a height of 49.305 AU.

Now, one AU is 499.004 ls, so 499.004 * 49.305 = 24 603.392 22. Beyond the radius.

But 499.004 * 29.658 = 14 799.460 632. Just a little beyond the radius.

For any period in which the Sun coincides with the Earth, that is never. For any period when Pluto is straight behind the Sun you add the AU of the Sun. For any other period, you do some more complex trigonometry. Adding less than a full AU.

Solutions : 1) translight speeds do exist per se; 2) translight speeds at least exist when going with the aether, but not at translight when going through the aether; 3) distance to Pluto has been ill measured.

I'm finest, I think, with translight speeds existing on a local but not vectorial level, that is when going with the aether, but not when going through the aether.

P 3)

Differences in escape velocity at the poles vs the equator wouldn't exist on a non-rotating planet. Similarly, satellites in geostationary orbit would be motionless over a non-rotating planet, and would simply fall down.

A

Elementary case for the aether.

P 4)

The Coriolis effect would not exist on a stationary earth.

A

Elementary case for the aether.

P 5)

Earthquakes, including those induced by placing explosives in geological fault-lines, can produce measurable changes in the earth's rotation. If the earth is in fact stationary, this would mean that events on earth can instantaneously affect the motions of stars many many light-years away.

A

We don't know there is any even one light year away. Parallax is measured by a presupposition of heliocentrism. While there are mathematical shortcuts, the basic trigonometry for measuring a stellar parallax (I have heard of the short cuts from Sungenis and DeLano who have defended, somewhat carelessly "we could do parallax anyway") is, earth position A and earth position B and star, six months between positions and counting on star itself not moving.

I was the other day asking myself about Henoch's pre-Flood calendar again, with its 364 days, and wondering whether we have a very slow rotation of Earth, amounting to full circle in 293 days, and this makes days shorter and hence the pre-Flood year is intact in space, but gives an erratic number of days on Earth due to this slow rotation. It could have started with a meteor impact at the Flood.

An earthquake might affect that.

Other way, it is stars that affect the Earth, perhaps aether doing so.

P 6)

The orbit of the earth around the sun is used as a baseline for measuring distance to stars using the parallax method - if the earth was stationary this ought not to be possible.

A

Since we have no independent proof that alpha Centuari is 4 light years away, it is very possible that it is impossible.

That the distances gathered are in fact mathematical mirage, a bit like carbon dating sth which had 25 percent modern carbon when it was really alive, and giving an older than creation carbon date. Or argon trapped in lava inflating the potassium argon age.

I count on stars being about one light day away, either even now, or at least back in the 4th day of Creation, since so, not only could Adam and Eve admire starlight on eve of day 6, but birds who orient on starlight were not disoriented back on day 5.

If universe has expanded since then, well, perhaps we have by now a radius of 3 and a half light years, or nearly. So that Christ, a getting up from His throne and heading for Earth and B using light speed to do so, would take 3 and a half years of the Apocalypse tribulation period to reach us at battle of Armageddon.

But beyond 3 and a half light years, I don't think the universe is, and either way, we have measured no distance accurately beyond the furthest objects reflecting sunlight in such a manner as to show a shadow on one edge depending on angle of sun. Pluto or a little beyond?

Either way, the parallax as such would be done by stars being moved by angels, like Tychonian orbits of planets are done or regulated by planets being moved by angels.

P 7)

The relative frequency of shooting stars before/after midnight indicates that the earth is both rotating and moving through space.

A

Both - or neither. I don't know the details of the problem, but shooting stars, a k a comets, sorry, also known as meteorides would be non-random events directed by angels and by God's mercy or sometimes wrath.

P 8)

The red shift measured in stars' spectra changes in an annual cycle; if the earth is not circling the sun, then stars must be constantly accelerating/decelerating in something akin to a 'Mexican wave'.

A

Supposing that stars are at all moving outward and that is causing the red shift. And since they are moved by angels obeying God, arranging a deceleration and acceleration of Mexican wave would be no more of a problem than arranging the parallaxes as proper movements, or for that matter even the "aberration of starlight" movements in their positions.

[32] But he that knoweth all things, knoweth her, and hath found her out with his understanding: he that prepared the earth for evermore, and filled it with cattle and fourfooted beasts: [33] He that sendeth forth light, and it goeth: and hath called it, and it obeyeth him with trembling. [34] And the stars have given light in their watches, and rejoiced: [35] They were called, and they said: Here we are: and with cheerfulness they have shined forth to him that made them. [36] This is our God, and there shall no other be accounted of in comparison of him. [37] He found out all the way of knowledge, and gave it to Jacob his servant, and to Israel his beloved. [38] Afterwards he was seen upon earth, and conversed with men.

From Baruch 3 - last verse, of whom the angels of the stars (both fix stars and planets) are obeying, foretells the Incarnation.

Two more in this context: 1) why is the aether moving westward at 360° per 23^h 56^m 4.098 903 691^s? God is moving it. This is the updated version of Aristotle-Aquinas Prima Via; 2) with no actual parallax (though a phenomenon so classified), to stars, no Distant Starlight problem either. This is how I came across Geocentrism more than a decade ago.

I was harrassed by admins at this place when doing this article, as seen in picture:



Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre UL
Sts Cyprian and Justina, Martyrs
26.XI.2018

PS, I have started watching Robert Carter's speech against Flat Earth.

I am where he is speaking of SOHO - which is gravitationally more or less "anchored" at a Lagrange point.

My earlier take on angelic movers was, with them, really no need at all for gravitation to be playing any role at all.

However, partly bc of SOHO (unless it's held in "place" by an angel or demon), I do think gravitation does exist on those scales. And then, an angel conducting a planet (including Sol or Luna, Sun or Moon) would be fulfilling a role similar to the motors which keep pushing SOHO back to the exact Lagrange point.

Starting at 0:51 of a video:

"... we humans, we have sent a satellite into outer space and we got it between the Sun and the Earth at a place called a Lagrange [point] - it's a point where the gravity from the Sun and the Earth are balanced and so, just with a little bit of finagling of little teeny rocket engines, you can keep a satellite right in one place"

Well, if so, dito for planets in one orbit, except angels of each planet need to handle some more force, which is no problem for angelic beings, and as Sun has a gravitational pull and is moved backwards, West to East, through the "zodiac" or ecliptic as the scientists call it, the gravitational points of exact balance would be moving, and hence Tychonic orbits. Angels and not engineered rockets doing the finagling./HGL

Nicomediae natalis sanctorum Martyrum Cypriani, et Justinae Virginis. Haec, sub Diocletiano Imperatore et Eutolmio Praeside, cum multa pro Christo pertulisset, ipsum quoque Cyprianum, qui erat magus et suis magicis artibus eam dementare conabatur, ad Christianam fidem convertit; cum quo postea martyrium sumpsit. Eorum corpora, feris objecta, rapuerunt noctu quidam nautae Christiani, et Romam detulerunt; quae, postmodum in Basilicam Constantinianam translata, prope Baptisterium condita sunt.