Tuesday, September 14, 2010

Is fixedearth.com the new Timecube?

fixedearth.com is full of some really idiotic claims. For example:

"I) Instead of granting the Copernican assumptions of a rotating earth & a stationary sun, one can keep a rotating earth & assume that the sun orbits the earth annually"

One big problem with such an assertion is that it doesn't explain night and day. If the Earth is stationary and the sun orbits the Earth once a year, then a single night /  day cycle would take not 24 hours, but 365.4 of what we now call "days." We'd have 6 months of darkness and 6 months of light. In order for the day / night cycle we have now to be maintained, the Sun would have to orbit the Earth once every 24 hours, or be in a fixed position while the Earth rotated beneath it.

Most of the content of fixedearth.com is little more than incoherent rants. For example:

There is a third fact which reveals a striking contrast to these assumption-based Models falsely claiming to be "Science".  ("Science: TO KNOW". "Assumed: ADOPTED TO DECEIVE").  This third fact relates solely to the Biblical Model of the Earth and the SunIn this Model no assumptions and theories are required at all! Worldwide, all of us can see and photograph the sun, moon, and stars going around the earth daily.[1] This is KNOWN SCIENCE with real math behind all eclipses, space shots, etc.  

Really now, if this kind of drivel represents the height of Geocentric thought then it's no wonder that among scientists the theory died out a few hundred years ago.

 The Biblical Model is the only truly scientific Model. It is time for every truth seeker to ignore the scoffers and insist on the facts. The facts are that the Biblical Model of a completely motionless Earth with the Sun, Moon, and Stars going around daily is true science requiring no assumptions. All else is from Satan, the father of lies.

The rant above ignores the fact that an Earth centered solar system does not comply with any observable facts about the motions of the planets or the observations and achievements of the space program.


HereAmI said...

Your piece is replete with words such as "rant", "drivel" and "idiotic". Dangerous words, Matthew.
1. Your first quotation implies that as FE.com advocates a non-rotating earth and a rotating sun, then night and day are 6-monthly phenomena. A great insight, Matthew, but only if the sun takes a year to complete the circuit ; FE.com states that this is a daily phenomenon, hence N & D are the usual length. So you have misunderstood and misrepresented what they are saying. Go back and read it again; you will definitely learn something.
2. You think that the idea of a geocentric planetary system died out hundreds of years ago. Clearly you have never heard the name of, or investigated the published work of, Sir Fred Hoyle. I advise you to take issue with his contention that the two competing ideologies are indistinguishable from all scientific standpoints. I am sure that you are well qualified to do so.
You are under the similarly mistaken impression that the geocentric theory is at variance with our knowledge about planetary motion, and space exploration data. Tycho Brahe - you may have heard of him - stated that a highly satisfactory model of the system could be assembled which involved the sun and moon revolving around the earth, and the planets revolving around the sun. I suggest that you familiarize yourself with astronomical history before further useage of the sort of intemperate language which graced your learned assertions, given above.
As far as the revelations granted by space science, you may be aware that there is prima facie evidence that men have never set foot on the surface of the Moon. And also that the idea of geostationary satellites is completely falsifiable. This should lead us, inter alia, to question the fundamental assertions of this aspect of 20th century history.
Time, methinks, for you to start thinking for yourself, Matthew, instead of parroting the drivel which you have clearly so avidly lapped up since birth.

HereAmI said...

Sorry, I meant to say geosynchronous, not geostationary.