Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: "Conquievit et siluit omnis terra  (Read 14454 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline cassini

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3911
  • Reputation: +3083/-275
  • Gender: Male
"Conquievit et siluit omnis terra
« Reply #45 on: January 12, 2013, 08:01:02 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Memento
    I appreciate the time both you, Donachie and you,  Cassini took to answer my question. Those of us without an aptitude for science must approach our understanding of geocentrism through other means : relearning to trust our senses and learning what the Church has taught through the ages.   Both of you obviously have scientific and mathematical minds , have an understanding of scholastic teachings and also have done much research.  

    At this time, even if there was not a way that geocentrism could be proven scientifically, I would still believe it ; but I am trying to remove the remnants of the false concepts that I believed for years, therefore my question to you both. I am from that generation where the moon landing was an event we were told, by our parents, to watch on the television.  The Church was in disarray and the order in our lives was coming undone.  Looking back, it seems that the space program was in full throttle at the time of the Council....  Both being a culmination of revolutionary thought that started long ago. 


    Thanks for that Memento. you bring up a few points here worth commenting on.

    First of all be openminded with regard to the moon landing. It really doesn't matter to me whether it happened or not. If it was a hoax, surely one of the hundreds in NASA would have blown the whistle by now. No such person has come forward that I am aware of. Geocentrism is not affected by the truth whatever it is.

    With regard to a 'mathematical mind.' Well I have only a secondary school level of maths. Donachie and others I have seen posting on the subject have 10000% more maths than I. I tell you this so that you and others will know you do not need to have a great understanding of maths to believe the Bible gives us the literal truth. I got great confort in my study when I came upon this on Albert Einstein.

    ‘The third and most important reason [to study this chapter well] is that he [Einstein and his theories of relativity] provides another opportunity to show up the fallacy of the general belief that modern science, in every field but perhaps especially in mathematics and physics, is so complicated that it cannot be understood by the non-specialist, and that the layman has no choice but to rely on the words of experts with superior intelligence and training. Stripped of its disguises, which as with other science and elite professions are mostly jargon and bluff, Relativity, whether Special Theory [STR] or General Theory [GTR], involves no major challenge to the intellect in order to be understood. Relativity is not merely nonsense, it is simple nonsense; and the only difficulty in seeing this lies in bringing oneself to believe it possible that anything so generally accepted by so many intelligent people really can be such obvious nonsense.’  
    --- N. Martin Gwynne: Einstein and Modern Physics, Briton’s Library, 1985, p.5.


    http://www.alcazar.net/einstein.pdf

    The above is the best read of all time on the nєω ωσrℓ∂ σr∂єr's use of a man called Einstein. N.M. Gwynne is my preferred author on this subject.

    Interesting Memento that you say : 'At this time, even if there was not a way that geocentrism could be proven scientifically, I would still believe it.' You are one in a million. The 'simplicity' of placing the earth as but one more planet in a solar system we know to be true, is almost impossible to break free from. My belief arose when I (as a heliocentrist and evolutionist due to universal education of all children today) read a book debunking evolution. It took me about TEN MINUTES to see I was duped. I got very angry with the world, even  with the Church who supported the lie, and that was my WAKE-UP MOMENT. Then I learned that the Heliocentrism they claimed for 300 years was a proven fact, was never proven. I put the two lies together and found both affected the Church's teaching that caused a paradigm shift. I had no problem returning to tradition for my truth in these matters.

    Even now Memento, the lure of a simple solar system is tempting and without a strong faith I could never have broken free. But the geocentric position is growing stronger by the day. When the likes of Donachie and others go public with their thinking on it, it gets stronger and stronger. I believe it is now unstoppable, with the help of God of course.

    Offline Memento

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 269
    • Reputation: +135/-0
    • Gender: Female
    "Conquievit et siluit omnis terra
    « Reply #46 on: January 12, 2013, 09:18:28 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • What seems paramount right now is the education of all Catholics in basic Scholasticism ( not neo-Scholasticism.) Then, with proper understanding and the graces that come forth from the sacraments, there would be a richer soil for Truth to take seed.  Always though, and even more immediate, we have the Holy Ghost and Our Lady to beg graces from...even those souls who do not have access to the sacraments or a proper education.   

    Yes, N. Martin Gwynne's writings are an eye-opener; especially about the new mathematics.  It brings to mind that in constructing the great Gothic Cathedrals in Europe , as it is my understanding , our ancestors used the plumb-bob and geometry for their calculations.  They certainly did not need advanced " physics"  to build magnificent soaring and pierced stone   structures that are still standing 800 years hence. Maybe there is a supernatural element involved, this I can only surmise, because beauty of that sort, true beauty which gives honor and glory to God, mirrors His creation and could be fostered by Himself.  

    I guess we shall eventually see. If space travel, skyscrapers, Hadron Colliders and the like are all types of the Tower of Babel, man will surely one day witness their destruction by God.  That is not to say that who or what God loves the most does not suffer-quite the opposite- but He is patient and gives man a very long lead. Falsehood and lies may perpetuate for a very long time.  He did give us free will and we can choose the truth or we can deny it.  I hope you are right Cassini; it seems the subject of geocentrism is striking more and more people as the truth. It is the order of it that strikes me. As the other option leaves me in pain and confusion, the order of the universe, as described by St. Brigitte in the Myroure of Our Lady, ( ie:the geocentric order) brings me peace.


    Offline Memento

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 269
    • Reputation: +135/-0
    • Gender: Female
    "Conquievit et siluit omnis terra
    « Reply #47 on: January 12, 2013, 12:12:17 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I do not know if mentioning another forum is allowed here, so I will simply say that on another Catholic forum a very lengthy post of an unpublished book titled The Earthmovers can  be found.  The book is extremely thorough and its approach is different from any I have read yet on geocentrism.  Donachie may want to look at it as there are some people posting right now discussing formulas that might interest him/her and also the book may affirm or add to his own research.  Regarding geocentric debates and books going public, Cassini is correct in stating that with the help of God, it may be unstoppable.

    For those who think I am basing my previous posted decisions on feelings, they would be quite wrong. It has to do with the intellect and the will.  The peace I feel is based on knowledge of order as opposed to the questions presented by chaos (relativity, a-centrism, black holes, antimatter). Donachie gave a great definition of gravity which further helped me to understand the geocentric universe.  There is a logic to it.

    Thanks again Donachie and Cassini!

    Offline Memento

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 269
    • Reputation: +135/-0
    • Gender: Female
    "Conquievit et siluit omnis terra
    « Reply #48 on: January 14, 2013, 10:40:40 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • This is a sub-forum for Catholic Arts and Literature and on January 11th Donachie posed a relevant question and gave an answer:

    "Why should art be relevant to this? Because this is more than science. There are deep psycho-emotive seeds and colors here. This topic can make people moody. "

    Below is an outline of the basic elements that an artist must not only consider but must have a degree of mastery over to make his piece of art.  If he does not does not, he has created an amateurish thing and quite possibly an incomprehensible or very ugly thing. 

    Form 
    A. Structure
           1.size
           2.shape
                  a.Ratios within 
                   b. Patterns of shape
                   c. color 

     Content/Subject  
    A. Purpose
    B. meaning

    We know from Book of Wisdom 11:21  that Solomon says of or to God "but thou hast ordered all things in measure, and number, and weight. "  

    Donachie, you said that your concept of the shape of the universe came to you while contemplating the golf ball (a sphere) and its retrieval.  Your line of thinking seems to me a relationship of measure, ratios and Dun Scotus' philosophy on the Infinite  ( form- meaning). Would you or any of the readers on the subject of geocentrism   be willing to make any connection, if one exists, of art created by man to God's Creation?  Does the above listed criteria apply to God's Creation and if so, why?

    Offline Donachie

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2566
    • Reputation: +620/-258
    • Gender: Male
    "Conquievit et siluit omnis terra
    « Reply #49 on: January 17, 2013, 08:21:15 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Memento:

    "Would you or any of the readers on the subject of geocentrism be willing to make any connection, if one exists, of art created by man to God's Creation?  Does the above listed criteria apply to God's Creation and if so, why?"

    Yes, i'd say that list must apply to God as well. The truth of the matter is unavoidable, especially for God.

    I figure the cosmos is a sphere because the Earth is a sphere, and evidently it is uniquely at rest at the center of the ecliptic, and, therefore, imo, it must be at rest at the center of the cosmos as well. There is only one ecliptic. There are not two, and the Earth is the only body that is at rest at the center of the ecliptic all the time. The Earth is the only "star" or "planet" that is in all signs of the ecliptic always.

    Space is not infinite. It is fractional. Only God is transcendent and can transcend space. "What is absolutely infinite cannot be excelled ... any perfection that can exist in numerically different things is more perfect if it exist in several than if it exist merely in one ... therefore, what is absolutely infinite cannot be found in several numerically different things."

    Since space is finite, and the Earth is a sphere at rest at the center of the cosmos, imo, then the cosmos must be spherical, and therefore, a sphere. I don't take this too seriously. Maybe it is like an egg like a mystic has said? But I tend to think it is a sphere.

    Concerning human knowledge and art, Duns Scotus's opinion, in part, was that, "for even though God freely co-operates with the intellect when it combines or does not combine these terms, still once the terms have been formed into a proposition, the conformity of the latter with the terms seems to follow as a necessary consequence from the very meaning of the terms -- a meaninig which they have by reason of the fact that the intellect of God has naturally produced these terms in intelligible being.

    From all this, it is clear why a special illumination is not required to see in the eternal reasons ... for we see in them only such truths as are necessary in virtue of their terms."

    Cassini said:

    "The universe cannot be infinite (theology). We see it turn in 24 hours, providing
    evidence it is not infinite. Something infinite cannot revolve."

    This is a valid point, but the term "revolve" could admit a deeper meaning. It could mean something like process in a circle, which could refer in an elevated sense to the processions of the Holy Trinity. The Holy Trinity is a divine circle of three in one, and an infinite motion would have to be circular.

    As far as math goes, scientific materialism 2013 uses math to intimidate and indoctrinate people. It's a subtle form of mind control, imo. They use math to startle and bewilder people with excessive complexity and that way take a deceptive control of a subject.

    However, only one of three things can occur in math:
    1. increase
    2. decrease
    3. stability (no increase or decrease, remaining the same)

    And there are only four basic operations: addition, multiplication, subtraction and division. They may try to be very complex and nebulous sometimes, but that is all that is there in the end.

    There are also only three causes in science: accidental, coincidental, and efficient.


    Offline Donachie

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2566
    • Reputation: +620/-258
    • Gender: Male
    "Conquievit et siluit omnis terra
    « Reply #50 on: January 22, 2013, 05:50:45 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • notes on the Foucault pendulum

    After the first exhibition in February at Meridian Hall was a success, a second one
    followed at the "Pantheon" in Paris in late March 1851. It would be an even more
    impressive demonstration. It was the largest and heaviest pendulum the world had seen up to that time, and, of course, it was scientifically endorsed by the
    government and the liberal media for credibility and bona fides.

    Soufflot's dome of the Pantheon was high, so Foucault had made a pendulum 67 meters long with a large brass bob of 28 kilograms. In the daily publication "Le National" on March 26, 1851, they were writing, "Have you seen the Earth go round? Would you like to see it rotate? Go to the Pantheon on Thursday, and, until further notice, every following Thursday, from ten a.m. until noon. The remarkable experiment devised by M. Leon Foucault is carried out there, in the presence of the public, under the finest conditions in the world. And the pendulum that is suspended by ... expert hand from Soufflot's dome clearly reveals to all eyes the movement of rotation of the Earth."

    Soufflot's dome had originally been the Dome of the Basilica of St. Genevieve, a
    large and historic Roman Catholic Church. It was the highest and most famous dome in all of Paris, and it had been built in what formerly had been a sacred building that had been blessed with ceremonial and religious importance for all of France. The Abbey and Basilica of St. Genevieve were on Mont St. Genevieve, an elevation overlooking all of Paris. It was named after St. Genevieve, one of the patron saints of France, who as a young shepherd girl had helped inspire and organize the local people to stand against Attila the Hun's armies, when the Huns had been conducting raids and preparing final attacks against Paris in 451 AD.

    In 502 AD King Clovis and Queen Clotilde had directed that a special chapel
    dedicated to the Holy Apostles be built on the hill where St. Genevieve, who had
    been a pious ascetic, had had the habit of praying, as she often followed a path
    commemorated later by the name Rue de la Montagne-Sainte-Genevieve. In 512 AD, when she passed away, the people buried St. Genevieve on top of the little mountain overlooking all of Paris, where the chapel was that became Mont St. Genevieve.

    When the chapel had been built up into a larger Church and Abbey, it was rededicated in her name as one of the patron saints of France. It also supported a monastery and Catholic school, but in the wake of the Revolution of 1789 the buildings were taken over by the atheistic state, and the main Church was converted into a secular mausoleum. In 1790 the Revolutionary Assembly declared all religious vows void and evicted all residents of the monasteries. There were thirty-nine Augustinian canons at St. Genevieve's who were thrown out. This was the end of the abbey and school that later would become the secularized Pantheon.

    It was an historic change, and sixty-one years later, as the Pantheon, it would be used to demonstrate Foucault's pendulum hoax to the world from Soufflot's Dome. So when Foucault's pendulum was showcased there, to a naive and manipulated public, obviously, it was a weighted coup of propaganda for secularism and liberalism. It was symbolic of the political and social powers of "scientific" materialism that were ascendant. Soufflot's Dome, in an historic Church building that had been secularized by the revolutionary and atheistic powers of the state, would be a perfect place to stick a finger in the eye of old Aristotle and the authoritative Bibilical view of a stationary Earth ... at rest at the center of the cosmos.

    ...

    Even Catholic Church scholars and authorities have caved in to this ridiculous and sophomoric deception. For example, in 1911, a Jesuit priest J.G. Hagen wrote a major treatise published by the Vatican called "The Rotation of the Earth: Its Mechanical Proofs Ancient and New." In this book Hagen naively described in detail the Foucault pendulum experiments and credulously explained Foucault's "sine law" and "how it works", giving credence to the basic heresy of heliocentrism. Hagen's writing made it clear that it was his opinion that Foucault's experimental and theoretical proof was finally convincing.

    Even the Vatican II modernist Pope John Paul II would make official apologies to
    Galileo and the liberal media, for publicity's sake, in October, 1992, over the old
    and inane and unscientific heresy of heliocentrism, which still is against the
    unanimous opinion of the early Fathers and Doctors of the Church, and contrary to scripture and all scientific observations. Heliocentrism has not even a thread of valid scientific evidence in its favor even down to today.

    "Ubi deest hoc orbis", where this circle ends, non compos mentis sunt. It is sad
    that rubes and many innocent minded people 2013 are expected to follow a Foucault pendulum and then believe that the Earth is moving and orbiting the Sun, when all that they can discover is that it is the pendulum bob, in fact, that is moving around and around, not the Earth.

    It has been a question of bias really, but they have been introduced so smoothly, with only the most impeccable, practical, and scientific principles in mind, of course, but these pendulums are an absurd deception and make an ironic proof for an Earth that is evidently immobile. They are ridiculous and offer a counter-intuitive case for the old Earth of Hipparchus, Aristotle, Plato, Ptolemy and the Church and the Bible.

    "Immanis pecoris, custos immanior ipse" … of a monstrous flock, the more monstrous guardian.

    Skipping forward over some of the scientific materialist and revolutionary history
    and background to 1932, it was then that the Bolsheviks raised a monstrous one in St. Isaac's Cathedral in "Leningrad". And the liberal and secularized Netherlands would donate an expensive one to the UN in 1955, one year after the first Bilderberger meetings in the Netherlands.
     
    etc.

    St. Genevieve's feast day is January 3.

    Offline Memento

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 269
    • Reputation: +135/-0
    • Gender: Female
    "Conquievit et siluit omnis terra
    « Reply #51 on: January 23, 2013, 07:43:20 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Interestingly, the Foucault Pendulum in St. Isaac's  Cathedral was moved out of there and to another location after communism fell. http://www.encspb.ru/object/2804034046;jsessionid=B3115832453145220F68FAB3001B7C1B?lc=en

    Note the description of the "Antireligious Museum" ..." the museum was one of the main centres  of atheistic propaganda in the USSR."  

    Most do not realize the real purpose behind these constructs.  

    Offline Donachie

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2566
    • Reputation: +620/-258
    • Gender: Male
    "Conquievit et siluit omnis terra
    « Reply #52 on: January 23, 2013, 07:12:47 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • "Stat Crux Dum Volvitur Orbis", from the Carthusians, "Crux Spes Unica", from the diocese of St. Andrew's, Scotland. Good Christian mottos that wouldn't suit spiritually poor and doctrinally unsound NASA. What could be a motto for NASA?

    "Lost in the cosmos, but show me the money" or "It's all about that dollar" ?

    "Spin, spin, spin," or "The Moon is going the wrong way and we say so" ?

    "We know math and all the big numbers, baby" ?

    Dark Mission Part 1: NASA Moon Hoax - Analysis of "Lunar" Photography


    Dark Mission Part 2: NASA Moon Hoax - Environmental Dangers and the Trouble with Rockets


    "You do not need to see our pass" ?

    "We're with Warren Buffet (Berkshire Hathaway) and Kirby Vacuum Cleaners ... and the NWO to the Stars" ?




    Offline Donachie

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2566
    • Reputation: +620/-258
    • Gender: Male
    "Conquievit et siluit omnis terra
    « Reply #53 on: January 23, 2013, 08:35:53 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • "The Skunk is Ours" ?

    "and the Federal Reserve, we are with them" ?


    Offline Donachie

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2566
    • Reputation: +620/-258
    • Gender: Male
    "Conquievit et siluit omnis terra
    « Reply #54 on: January 28, 2013, 10:58:00 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Dr. A.E. Wilder-Smith on the 7 main postulates of evolution. Blessed Duns Scotus and the old school masters could enjoy this, because it brings up some questions about equivocal and univocal predication and "haecceitas". It could illustrate some of the limits of proof by analogy, and the fallacy of a circle of equal causes.



    Like Galileo and the heliocentrics, Darwinism relies on methods of equivocation and insufficiency. (Where it is not outright scamming like Piltdown and Nebraska man).

    For example, if Ann Coulter and the giraffe have two eyes, tow ears, a long neck and nose, and similar circulatory and nervous systems, that does not necessarily mean that Ann Coulter and the giraffe have evolved from some long lost common ancestor.

    All the specific cases, all the little species, of their antecedent biological generations can be perfectly exclusive of each other, yet the giraffe and Ms. Coulter remain related by generic properties and proof by analogy. This does not mean they are related with generational "haecceitas", with specific "thisness" of a shared biological ancestor.

    Proof by analogy may be insufficient and only beg the question "why"?

    Why do Ann Coulter and some birds appear similar to giraffes?

    Darwinism's method of proof of anterior equivocation does not and cannot provide a valid scientific answer. Darwinism is not a valid and testable scientific theory but a metaphysical research program. And the time scales supposed for Darwinism are preposterous. They use huge numbers to camouflage the difficult nature of the metaphysics into which they have clearly wandered. The Darwinists are lost. They are far out of natural empirical science and in metaphysics.

    The mathematical difficulties of Darwinism are extreme from more than one angle. The irreducible complexity of the cell, and the probability of forming even one moderate protein by random chance, eliminate Darwinism as a reasonable scientific theory.

    Protein formation alone refutes Darwinian theories of evolution by random chance, mutation, and survival of the fittest.


    Offline Donachie

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2566
    • Reputation: +620/-258
    • Gender: Male
    "Conquievit et siluit omnis terra
    « Reply #55 on: February 01, 2013, 02:11:13 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • "Permanent Instruction of the Alta Vendita", by Piccolo Tigre, Italian Freemason,
    dovetails with the subversive nature of "scientific" materialism, which is an old 19th century euphemism for Marxism and includes heliocentrism and Darwinism as its two main pillars.

    Regarding Darwinism, "survival of the fittest" is a diabolical and sociopathic principle.

    Besides the obnoxious harm to society, this principle is not biologically valid. Fitness in any species would be a question of excellence in virtue of some kind or other. Excellence in a given species, even at the most optimum levels, has never, and will never, cause a species to evolve into something other than what it is in the first place. Every seed is after its kind, and every spiritual gift and grace is from one ultimate higher source.

    For example, if Red Shoulderd Hawks are doing really well and flying at their top, for years and years, they will not turn into another kind of bird. They will remain Red Shouldered Hawks, and an interesting aspect of nature is that birds of a feather flock together.

    Further, genetic mutations are never advantageous to a species, and random chance, of course, is only an accidental and inferior cause. Seed lines do not maintain themselves by random chance. Speciation is from an efficient cause found in the irreducible complexity of the cell and protein formation within a gentic code.

    The complexity of even moderate protein formation is beyond the mathematical level of random chance.

    Darwinism puts people's noses in the dirt and follows a bad line and hook into the abyss.


    Offline Donachie

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2566
    • Reputation: +620/-258
    • Gender: Male
    "Conquievit et siluit omnis terra
    « Reply #56 on: February 06, 2013, 04:18:06 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • "Homo bulla", man is a bubble, is an old Latin saying. Varro wrote "quod, ut dicitur, si est homo bulla, eo magis senex", for if, as they say, man is a bubble, all the more so is an old man."

    The scientific materialist ʝʊdɛօ-Masonic NWO is a bubble of vanity. Richard Dawkins and NASA's fake trips to the moon and Mars. Bernanke, Goldman Sachs and derivatives, etc., bubbles that will burst.

    9-11 "boom, boom, boom".

    "Vanitas vanitatum", dixit Ecclesiastes, "vanitas vanitatum. omnia vanitas. Quid habet amplius homo de universo labore suo quod laborat sub sole"?

    Offline Donachie

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2566
    • Reputation: +620/-258
    • Gender: Male
    "Conquievit et siluit omnis terra
    « Reply #57 on: February 07, 2013, 02:13:51 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Connery on the moon in "Diamonds Are Forever":



    Go, you crazy Scot!

    The man in the studio booth said, "careful, that's not a toy." Yeah, and the moon buggies can be expensive, even as only one of a ʝʊdɛօ-Masonic banker's dozen.

    Bond will know what this talk and the cut sign is about.

    Offline Donachie

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2566
    • Reputation: +620/-258
    • Gender: Male
    "Conquievit et siluit omnis terra
    « Reply #58 on: March 19, 2013, 07:18:02 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: cassini
    Quote from: Memento
    I appreciate the time both you, Donachie and you,  Cassini took to answer my question. Those of us without an aptitude for science must approach our understanding of geocentrism through other means : relearning to trust our senses and learning what the Church has taught through the ages.   Both of you obviously have scientific and mathematical minds , have an understanding of scholastic teachings and also have done much research.  

    At this time, even if there was not a way that geocentrism could be proven scientifically, I would still believe it ; but I am trying to remove the remnants of the false concepts that I believed for years, therefore my question to you both. I am from that generation where the moon landing was an event we were told, by our parents, to watch on the television.  The Church was in disarray and the order in our lives was coming undone.  Looking back, it seems that the space program was in full throttle at the time of the Council....  Both being a culmination of revolutionary thought that started long ago. 


    Thanks for that Memento. you bring up a few points here worth commenting on.

    First of all be openminded with regard to the moon landing. It really doesn't matter to me whether it happened or not. If it was a hoax, surely one of the hundreds in NASA would have blown the whistle by now. No such person has come forward that I am aware of. Geocentrism is not affected by the truth whatever it is.

    With regard to a 'mathematical mind.' Well I have only a secondary school level of maths. Donachie and others I have seen posting on the subject have 10000% more maths than I. I tell you this so that you and others will know you do not need to have a great understanding of maths to believe the Bible gives us the literal truth. I got great confort in my study when I came upon this on Albert Einstein.

    ‘The third and most important reason [to study this chapter well] is that he [Einstein and his theories of relativity] provides another opportunity to show up the fallacy of the general belief that modern science, in every field but perhaps especially in mathematics and physics, is so complicated that it cannot be understood by the non-specialist, and that the layman has no choice but to rely on the words of experts with superior intelligence and training. Stripped of its disguises, which as with other science and elite professions are mostly jargon and bluff, Relativity, whether Special Theory [STR] or General Theory [GTR], involves no major challenge to the intellect in order to be understood. Relativity is not merely nonsense, it is simple nonsense; and the only difficulty in seeing this lies in bringing oneself to believe it possible that anything so generally accepted by so many intelligent people really can be such obvious nonsense.’  
    --- N. Martin Gwynne: Einstein and Modern Physics, Briton’s Library, 1985, p.5.


    http://www.alcazar.net/einstein.pdf

    The above is the best read of all time on the nєω ωσrℓ∂ σr∂єr's use of a man called Einstein. N.M. Gwynne is my preferred author on this subject.

    Interesting Memento that you say : 'At this time, even if there was not a way that geocentrism could be proven scientifically, I would still believe it.' You are one in a million. The 'simplicity' of placing the earth as but one more planet in a solar system we know to be true, is almost impossible to break free from. My belief arose when I (as a heliocentrist and evolutionist due to universal education of all children today) read a book debunking evolution. It took me about TEN MINUTES to see I was duped. I got very angry with the world, even  with the Church who supported the lie, and that was my WAKE-UP MOMENT. Then I learned that the Heliocentrism they claimed for 300 years was a proven fact, was never proven. I put the two lies together and found both affected the Church's teaching that caused a paradigm shift. I had no problem returning to tradition for my truth in these matters.

    Even now Memento, the lure of a simple solar system is tempting and without a strong faith I could never have broken free. But the geocentric position is growing stronger by the day. When the likes of Donachie and others go public with their thinking on it, it gets stronger and stronger. I believe it is now unstoppable, with the help of God of course.


    http://www.alcazar.net/einstein.pdf

    Martin Gwynne: Einstein and Modern Physics, Briton’s Library, 1985, p.5., is a good resource. Thank you for adding it. The end here is a good place for it, if people stumble across this.