This is an entirely false statement. If you understood Sungenis's work at all you'd know he has multiple volumes of work and 2 docuмentaries proving it with empirical science alone.
No asceth, he has not proved geocentrism by way of empirical science. The problem with determining whether the sun and stars revolve around the Earth as we see them do, or whether the Earth orbits the sun while revolving in a fixed-star universe as we are told they do, is one of relative movement in space. Only if we could position ourselves outside the universe and look in at it, would it be possible to see if any body or bodies are fixed, and only then could science know the true order of its many movements. But because we are confined
within our place in space and cannot reach beyond the universe for observation and confirmation, man’s science cannot confirm or falsify how the universe works.This concept can be recognised through Kurt Gödel’s second incompleteness theorem; that full validity of a system, including a scientific one, cannot be demonstrated within that system itself. Richard Dawkins himself has admitted: ‘It is not actually provable that the Earth orbits the Sun, but it is perverse to deny it.’ (Richard Dawkins, speaking on gαy Byrne’s The Meaning of Life, RTE, 18th Oct. 2015.)
Yes, since the latter part of the 18th century, empirical science, real science, has conceded that there is no way of proving for certain the true order of the universe - and consequently its laws - for the simple reason that science cannot verify Archimedes’s ‘one fixed point’ in space to determine the movements within it. This intractable problem for physics is called relative movement in space, and this simple relativity was once, and must become again, an accepted principal of sane reasoning.
Go ask Sungenis and he will confirm he has never proven geocentrism with the empirical method.
Topic: Any Heliocentrists on CI? (Read 7885 times)