This is a rebuttal video to "testing geocentrism"

Written rebuttal linked in video description on youtube and also attached  as pdf. It deals with the points raised in a relatively succinct manner.

E rev around S

But when you look at CMB map, you also see that the structure that is observed, is in fact, in a weird way, correlated with the plane of the earth around the sun. Is this Copernicus coming back to haunt us? That's crazy. We're looking out at the whole universe. There's no way there should be a correlation of structure with our motion of the earth around the sun – the plane of the earth around the sun – the ecliptic. That would say we are truly the center of the universe.

Data from the Planck Telescope published in 2013 has since found stronger evidence for the anisotropy. "For a long time, part of the community was hoping that this would go away, but it hasn’t," says Dominik Schwarz of the University of Bielefeld in Germany.

In June, 2020, the 'axis of evil' observation was confirmed by a study conducted by Lior Shamir, which verified the same result via a different measurement.  Shamir commented: "We have two different sky surveys showing the exact same patterns, even when the galaxies are completely different. There is no error that can lead to that. This is the universe that we live in. This is our home."

The theory of gravity has been around for over three hundred years. From Newton to Einstein we have believed this theory that gravity is an internal force of mass, i.e., Mass creates Gravity. However, no one has ever truly understood this force, nor have they proven its existence. I am presenting a new theory about Gravity from a quantum mechanics (QM) point of view in which Gravity is not an unknown force coming from a mass; but is, however, an internal force in the atom. When we look at anything surrounding us, it is made from atoms and the building blocks of all atoms are made of Quantum Elementary Particles (QEP). Therefore, to say a mechanical movement creates quantum structure is not accurate. It should be the reverse; the accretion of QM structure is creating mechanical energy. A solid rested mass does not generate any force. Furthermore, a mass in space is weightless as we have experienced for decades by sending astronauts into space. Therefore, the theory of gravity also does not work with classical physics (CP) in space. We have never observed any indication of gravity in the weightless planets in space. My observation of the two theories of gravity, on Earth and in Space, is that they are based on a faulty foundation and neither of them is following the laws of CP nor QM physics.

So says Erik Verlinde, 48, a respected string theorist and professor of physics at the University of Amsterdam, whose contention that gravity is indeed an illusion has caused a continuing ruckus among physicists, or at least among those who profess to understand it.
...
“For me gravity doesn’t exist,” said Dr. Verlinde, who was recently in the United States to explain himself. Not that he can’t fall down, but Dr. Verlinde is among a number of physicists who say that science has been looking at gravity the wrong way and that there is something more basic, from which gravity “emerges,” the way stock markets emerge from the collective behavior of individual investors or that elasticity emerges from the mechanics of atoms.

You seem somewhat less than impressed by CHL.

Recall that gravity has never been proven...

Heliocentrism depends entirely on the notion of "gravity" which has indeed never been understood or proven to exist.  So heliocentism is nothing more than a theory.

So I can only conclude that he seems to have a serious blindspot in his brain, wisdom, etc. when it comes to science. I wish I understood why, but unfortunately I don't know Mr. P. M. well enough to know the backstory on this.