1 2 3 4
That whole page really does qualify. Apparently according to the heliocentric theory it is impossible for the moon to go around the Earth and the Earth to go around the sun without eclipses occurring every new and full moon.
It of course goes without saying that there is no mention anywhere of how the geocentric theory addresses any of the "problems" raised. Like evolution(!).
But just to be picky, I did find this sentence:
"When the earth moves between the sun and the moon, it casts a shadow on the face of the moon, blocking or partially blocking our view of the moon. This is called a lunar eclipse. "
Hah! The earth moves! You said it yourself!
2/24/2010 3:05:33 PM
Well, it seems like someone only made it to their astronomy class the day the professor explained the celestial sphere.
2/24/2010 3:43:09 PM
And what would it look like if the currently accepted model were true?
2/24/2010 3:50:40 PM
> WYSIWYG—what you see is what you get...True science is supposed to be based on observation.
Hi, programmer guy here. WYSIWYG is usually used as a term to tell apart interactive
visual editing systems and ones that force the users to work using indirect means (formatting codes etc). But in order for WYSIWYG to work, there has to be an internal representation of data that is still uses formatting codes.
So here's a nice funny tidbit: WYSIWYG is indeed analogous to scientific process. Every practical application
of science is based on a theoretical foundation
, which in turn is based on observations and logic
. Just like visual editing
is based on internal representations of data
which is processed by the underlying application code
> The beauty of geocentricity is that what you see is what you get!
The ugliness of geocentricity is that it creates a really frigging complex astronomical model! Sure, everything can be explained
this way, but why the heck would anyone want to use a really complex model when simpler explanations work better and don't require a crapton of weird corner cases?
Here's a free hint: When the ancient Greeks looked at the movement of stars and planets, they noticed that all of them make loops in their orbits
. All of them. They don't go across the sky in a direct line - they always make backwards loops. It looks really weird. The philosophers at the time shrugged and just said "okay, we can work this out". And work out they did - a really complex model that explains everything
. Then the heliocentrists said "hell, what if we're
moving around the Sun?" and it suddenly dawned to them that the explanations might be far simpler and easier if that was the case
So good luck calculating those epicycles. Have fun. Like I said, I'm a programmer and not an astronomer, even the normal heliocentric astronomical math gives me a headache. Sorry, can't help you.
2/24/2010 3:51:30 PM
2/24/2010 3:54:49 PM
...alright, guys, who took the time machine for a spin and left it open again?
2/24/2010 7:26:06 PM
Yeah, but we've sent spaceships to "see" the planets, the universe beyond the solar system and the sun, and they brought back pictures. If WYSIWYG applies then geocentricism can't be right, ever think of that?
2/24/2010 7:54:10 PM
WYSIWYG — What you see is what you get!!
That's not exactly a hard and fast rule of reality, if it were then it would be fairly reasonable to assume that all gold coins could unwrapped to find chocolate inside.
The Biblical geocentric model of the universe is called WYSIWYG
The bible doesn't detail anything that could be called a "model" of the universe.
True science is supposed to be based on observation.
And it was odservation that gave rise to the heliocentric model of the solar system. Geocentrism is not based n observation but rather based in bilnd obedience to biblical dogma and fanfic.
We see the array of stars wheeling around the earth approximately daily and we motorize our telescopes to follow their steady motion.
We also see the relative positions of those star change by a certain degree from season to season, that also happens to be the same degree as the earth's axis. Under the geocentric model that would require the entire universe to spin on an axis for no apparent reason.
We see the sun rising and setting daily. We see the planets doing roughly the same thing, and we see the moon following them on a somewhat different schedule,
And that what you would expect to see from a vantage point on a large spinning body. Just another example of what you see not being what you get.
all revolving around the earth as our eyes testify.
The eyes can be fooled as any first grader could tell you. From the vantage point of a large spinning body things will appear to spin around you, but it doesn't mean that they do. You change your vantage point and the motion will change.
There is no justification at all from what we observe to arbitrarily assume the stars to be fixed and the earth rotating.
Astrophysics doesn't "assume" that the stars, or any other body of mass are "fixed". They are in motion, just not they way you assert that they are. Further more, no one arbitrarily "assumes" that the earth rotates, it's rotation can and has been observed from orbit.
The beauty of geocentricity is that what you see is what you get! It is a simple and readily understandable scenario for those who are willing to believe what their eyes tell them, and make the mental transition back to the instinctive reference frame of a stationary earth.
Just because it's easier for you to comprehend or understand physics with a geocentric model doesn't mean that it true. I'm sorry you have so much trouble understanding heliocentrism but that doesn't mean that it isn't true and provable. To hold to a geocentric model you must write off over a century of established, observed, and verified science as nothing more than lies or conspiracies intended to decieve the "true believer". Not only that but you would also need to invalidate the very physics of sattelite technology that allows you to disseminate your idiocy across the world.
There is plenty of direct and observed evidence of heliocentrism, or do you also expect everyone to believe that every single astronaut, from all the countries that have sent people into space, are all involved in a giant conspiracy to cover up geocentrism or destroy christianity by disproving the bible?
2/24/2010 9:20:38 PM
WYISWYG is a rule in Warhammer. Not real life.
2/24/2010 10:32:00 PM
From the page: Today's false "scientists" won't dare get on a plane if the pilot tells them he is going to allow for the rotation of the earth!!
2/24/2010 11:58:03 PM
No one claims that the stars are fixed in place. They're orbiting around the centre of the galaxy.
Anyone with a very basic understanding of how movement works can see why geocentrism doesn't work. The way the sun rises and sets, the path of the other planets, the angle sunlight hits the earth, and COMMON SENSE all dictate that the planet isn't the centre of everything.
2/25/2010 12:07:08 AM
"The Biblical geocentric model of the universe is called WYSIWYG—what you see is what you get...True science is supposed to be based on observation."
But... but... I...You...You literally have a 2 year olds grasp of science don't you?
2/25/2010 4:07:02 AM
"WYSIWYG — What you see is what you get!!"
I don't see God. Therefore I don't get religion.
2/25/2010 9:13:37 AM
Why am I reminded of Jesse Ventura, ex-WWF wrestler, actor and former governor of Minnesota, who once said:
"Organized religion is a sham and a crutch for weak-minded people who need strength in numbers. It tells people to go out and stick their noses in other people's business."
Gotta love someone like him, who starred in one of my all-time favourite films "Predator", and isn't ashamed or afraid of being an Atheist in the fundie stronghold that is the USA. Y'know, I can just imagine him holding copies of "On the Origin of Species", "A Brief History of Time" and "The God Delusion" to a bunch of Religious Right wingnuts, whilst saying:
'Buncha slack-jawed faggots round here! This stuff'll make you a goddamned sexual tyrannosaurus - just like me!'
2/25/2010 9:24:25 AM
What you see is what you get!!
So when you take LSD and the walls look like they're breathing that means they really are breathing?
ME: FUCK I see that shit even WITHOUT THE USE OF LSD or any other hallucinigen drugs (because I dont do drugs other than prescribed pills when im Sick) hahahaha the walls look like that to me if I really concentrate on them hard enough and sit still enough watching. But even so I know its not true and just looks that way. Also... does anyone here ever see like... little sparkly things like dots of energy sometimes floating in the air? especially when outside and in the sun? I see that sometimes too... its freaky! lol I just think of it as me seeing matter and energy all around me even tho people always tell me that would be micropscopic and not visable to the naked eye... and yet I see little sparkles of energy around me sometimes. Its neat.
2/25/2010 11:53:40 AM
Please go and read a book. NO! NOT THAT BOOK AGAIN!
2/25/2010 12:14:12 PM
itll be a coooolllddd day in Hell when your kind finally given legitimate proof to us that your Bible is correct in how the world and the universe operate... oh wait... but I dont believe in Hell. *giggles*
2/25/2010 12:14:12 PM
God is saying WHOA IM DIZZY LIVING UP HERE IN OUTERSPACE WITH ALL THIS SPINNING.... URP!... *pukes on the perfectly still unmoving earth in which he created*
yeah... right... i dont think so. LOL.
2/25/2010 12:17:06 PM
DUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUDE!!!! That theory is totally TUBULAR man!!! I am the 90s Kid, and WYSIWYG.
2/26/2010 5:31:48 AM
Technically, this one is not a fundie. The point of view "Earth is immobile, everything else rotates" is just as valid as "Earth rotates" - it depends only on the system of coordinates we want to work with.
Granted, "Earth is immobile" requires a lot more calculations then "Earth rotates" - which is why the latter is used.
There's also the fact that we have observed other planets orbiting other stars, but have not observed any stars orbiting other planets. To assume our own follows a different arrangement without any other evidence to suggest that it should is daft. Not fundie, strictly speaking, but a level of profound ignorance most commonly encountered in fundie circles.
2/26/2010 3:16:29 PM
Greasetrap The Viking
The cases of a stationary earth and a stationary universe are indistinguishable, so *both* are scientifically valid. Kind of like riding in a stationary elevator, with the rest of the building moving up or down around you.
This is called relativity.
The universe is usually taken as stationary, because it makes measurements easier, and just makes more logical sense.
2/27/2010 1:47:32 PM
Then why does measuring the distance of stars from the parallax effect work, if the earth doesn't rotate around the sun and so can be in two different positions 1/2 a year apart?
2/27/2010 1:49:29 PM
Except, you know, we've been out in space. We've got pictures that show us that we're not the center of the entire universe.
Also, you know. All that scientific proof. That hasn't been disproven in...centuries?
2/27/2010 10:22:15 PM
The 'Computer as a Biblical metaphor' thing failed with the Bible's 'pi = 3' procedure call.
2/28/2010 8:55:36 AM
somebody should really round up all these ignorant stupid piece of shit fundies and ship then to siberia where they can run around with their retarded ideas and won't breed with normal, logical human beings
3/2/2010 1:40:47 PM
1 2 3 4