Author Topic: THE EARTHMOVERS (Read 119213 times)

cantatedomino · « **Reply #40 on:** January 25, 2014, 11:42:33 AM »

THE EARTHMOVERS:

Preface

I add that the words “the sun also riseth and the sun goeth down, and hasteneth to the place where he ariseth, etc.” were those of Solomon, who not only spoke by divine inspiration but was a man wise above all others and most learned in human sciences and in the knowledge of all created things, and his wisdom was from God. Thus it is not too likely that he would affirm something which was contrary to a truth either already demonstrated, or likely to be demonstrated. - - - Cardinal Bellarmine, Letter to Foscarini, 12 April, 1615.

'Give me but one firm point on which to stand, and I will move the earth’ wrote Archimedes of Syracuse (287-212BC); unwittingly coining for posterity the problem faced by man in their quest to move the earth. No doubt most believe modern science has, or will figure out, the nature of the universe, its origins and laws and how the many movements within it are dictated by Newton’s ‘universal gravity.’

In truth however, as we have learned, science isn’t within a light-year of understanding the nature of space by way of natural philosophy or the empirical method as it is called today. We see then it was Cardinal Bellarmine, as quoted above, who was vindicated, and not Galileo as asserted everywhere for centuries. Yes, Cardinal Bellarmine deducted by faith alone what it took science centuries to admit, that it will never be able to confirm the order of our cosmos. To understand this turnaround let us read the following:

Misconceptions about the nature and practice of science abound, and are sometimes even held by otherwise respectable practicing scientists themselves. Unfortunately, there are many other misconceptions about science. One of the most common misconceptions concerns the so-called “scientific proofs.” Contrary to popular belief, there is no such thing as a scientific proof. Proofs exist only in mathematics and logic, not in science. Mathematics and logic are both closed, self-contained systems of propositions, whereas science is empirical and deals with nature as it exists. The primary criterion and standard of evaluation of scientific theory is evidence, not proof. All else equal (such as internal logical consistency and parsimony), scientists prefer theories for which there is more and better evidence to theories for which there is less and worse evidence. Proofs are not the currency of science. (Satoshi Kanazawa’s The Scientific Fundamentalist, published on Nov. 16, 2008.)

There are therefore many areas in which science, as we call it, cannot produce truths, and the order of our world is one of them. This being the case let us now remind ourselves what the papal commission on Galileo reported as the reason why the Catholic Church did its U-turn on Pope Paul V’s 1616 decree condemning Copernicanism as formal heresy:

In 1741, in the face of optical proof of the fact that the earth revolves round the sun, Pope Benedict XIV had the Holy Office grant an imprimatur to the first edition of the Complete Works of Galileo.

Now it is one thing churchmen believing science proved heliocentrism true in 1741, but another saying it was so in 1992 when even the dogs in the street knew otherwise.

cantatedomino · « **Reply #41 on:** January 25, 2014, 11:44:35 AM »

THE EARTHMOVERS: The problem for the ‘proof that the earth revolves round the sun’ came to a head in the wake of the famous Mitchelson & Morley experiment of 1887. This series of trials, which we will examine in detail later, produced results signifying that there is no movement of the earth through space as it supposedly orbits the sun.

For eighteen years after the 1887 M&M experiment, physicists searched for something that could explain away this unwelcome geostatic result. Finally, in 1905, Einstein offered what he called his Special Theory of Relativity to reinstate heliocentrism. The theory had to admit the fact that there is no experiment known to man that could detect absolute motion or absolute rest for us in the cosmos. Yes, science finally conceded that there is no empirical way of knowing the true order of the universe - and therefore its laws - for the simple reason that man cannot confirm for certain that ‘one firm point’ in space from which to determine any absolute movement between the earth, sun and stars.

In other words, even with modern scientific technology, we have never been able to resolve whether the sun and stars rotate around a fixed earth or if the earth turns about a fixed sun within a fixed stars cosmos. This now intractable problem for science is called relative movement in space, and this simple relativity was once, and has become again, an accepted fact by all of sane and sound reason. Only if we could position ourselves outside the universe and look inwards at it, would it be possible for us to see which body or bodies are really fixed, if any is or are fixed, and thus know the true order and harmony of its many movements. But because we are confined within our place in space and are never likely to get beyond the stars for the purpose of observation and communication, man’s scientific knowledge of the true order of the universe has and will always be little more than conjecture.

[This concept can be recognised by modern academics through Kurt Gödel’s second incompleteness theorem, that full validity of a system, including a scientific one, cannot be demonstrated within that system itself. McGrath writes: ‘Gödel famously proved that however many rules of inference we formulate, there will still be some valid inferences that are not covered by them. In other words there are some statements that are true that we may not be able to show to be true. The philosophical implications of this are considerable.]

cantatedomino · « **Reply #42 on:** January 25, 2014, 11:47:04 AM »

THE EARTHMOVERS: Whether the earth rotates once a day from west to east as Copernicus taught, or the heavens revolve once a day from east to west as his predecessors believed, the observable phenomena will be exactly the same. This shows a defect in Newtonian dynamics, since an empirical science ought not to contain a metaphysical assumption that cannot be proved or disproved by observation. (Bertrand Russell: quoted in D.D. Sciama’s The Unity of the Universe, p.18.)

The atheist Bertrand Russell (1872-1970) was but one on a long list, including Bishop Nicole Oresme (d.1382), Copernicus, and even Isaac Newton, who knew science never proved absolute motion or absolute rest. They recognised that the stumbling block of relative motion had to be overcome before the true order of the universe could be known for sure and Galileo ignored this fact when asserting his ‘proofs.’

Four hundred years later, science has reached deadlock, allowing for at least two main possibilities for us on earth, an orbiting earth around the sun in a fixed star cosmos, or the sun, planets and stars moving around the earth. Thus all cosmic observations from earth have a heliocentric or geocentric explanation, a fact most will not or are unable to accept and thus grasp, even when it is pointed out explicitly to them.

As regards the ‘scientific’ centre of the universe, well, according to Einstein’s finite curved universe in which anywhere can be the centre we now have countless choices for that centre; none, the sun, moon, a planet, a star, and, dare we say it, even the earth. Now while the above is standard physics for first year science students, nearly everyone else has been indoctrinated from primary school into believing that the earth has to orbit the sun, just as the planets do. Thus we are led to believe in a cosmic order that denies any possibility of the movements we witness with our own eyes every day, every year and multiple years.

Yes, even within the Catholic Church today, we have all been trained to think as Hermetic sun-dwellers. But note what Bertrand Russell recognised and confirmed after 400 years of scientific study and experiment; that the question as to whether geocentrism or heliocentrism is true is not one belonging to science, but one belonging to metaphysics, or to put it more bluntly, a matter of faith. This being so, what the Scriptures reveal about the order of the universe is a question for faith to decide, not for science to assert.

Cardinal Bellarmine alluded to this in his 1615 Letter to Foscarini, quoted at the beginning of this preface. The Galileo case now comes down to one of faith, human faith against divine faith. Recognition of this fact changes history, a story that needs correcting. Needless to say the ramifications of this rectification are also extremely serious for the Catholic Church.

cantatedomino · « **Reply #43 on:** January 25, 2014, 11:49:32 AM »

THE EARTHMOVERS: The Copernican revolution, while classed as a scientific revolution, was in fact a religious revolution. It is impossible to separate cosmology from theology and the divine, as both are well connected in the Scriptures. Add to this the utterances of many bygone astronomers and contemporary writers on this theme. Carl Sagan, in his introduction to Stephen Hawking’s book A Brief History of Time states:

This is also a book about God… or perhaps the absence of God. The word God fills these pages. Hawking embarks on a quest to answer Einstein’s famous question about whether God had any choice in creating the universe. Hawking is attempting, as he states, to understand the mind of God. (Stephen. Hawking: Brief History of Time, Bantam Press, 1988.)

There is however, something further we should know:

HAWKING AND THE MIND OF GOD. He does not believe in anything resembling the Christian God…his theory of everything has no place at all for a Creator…. By his playing the God card, Hawking has cleverly fanned the flames of his own publicity appeal directly to the popular allure of scientist as priest. (Peter Coles: Hawking, Postmodern Encounters, Icon Books, 2000, p.47.)

For hundreds of years now, so certain are we that the earth spins and orbits the sun like a planet, nobody needs or wants proof or verification for it anymore. Even now, any suggestion that the universe could be geocentric and geostatic always generates curious incredulity followed by derision and laughter. Even being asked to entertain the idea is a challenge to one’s intellectual ego, like being asked to believe the earth is flat. Thus, like a magic spell, the Hermetic cosmology has a grip on the human mind in the same manner as addictive illusionary substances have on the drug-addict.

Yes, this belief system, long implanted into the minds of mankind, is now virtually impossible to break free from, as most of you readers are no doubt already experiencing. To demonstrate this hold, we again refer to Stephen Hawking’s Brief History of Time, the book released on ‘April fools day’ 1988, the one 26 million bought:

We may have no idea what Professor Hawking does – but everyone knows it is damned clever stuff. So dauntingly clever that I suspect a hefty percentage of the 25 million copies of his book 'A Brief History of Time', still remain unopened since it came out. But the sales prove we are, in theory anyway, hungry to learn about his heroic search for the so-called Theory of Everything that will explain once and for all the universe and its purpose. (R. Gore-Langton: Daily Express, Friday 1st Sept 2000.)

The above review of the play God and Stephen Hawking illustrates the heliocentric magic to perfection. As with Satan’s inducement to Adam that he could know all things like God, Hawking, a professed atheist, invited onto the Pontifical Academy of Sciences in Rome in 1986 by the way, is now promoted as the guru to follow. With no idea what he ‘does,’ and without understanding what he writes, Hawking and his ilk are held in awe by the Press, the public, even popes in Rome, for their ‘truths.’ ‘Cleverness’ is now classed as ‘stuff’ that cannot be understood, which, from a convincing propaganda and financially rewarding point of view, is indeed very ‘clever.’

cantatedomino · « **Reply #44 on:** January 25, 2014, 11:56:19 AM »

+WILLIAMSON: In the 18th century, the 17th-century Catholicism soured with Jansenism. Jansenism was a form of Protestant Catholicism, and Jansenism led to Liberalism. Jansenism is very strict, on the right, and then the pendulum swings. It’s unbalanced, it’s too far out, and the pendulum swings in the opposite direction, and you get somebody who’s very strict suddenly becoming very liberal, and so Jansenists turn into liberals. The same thing happened in England. The Puritans turned into Whigs about the same time, towards the end of the 17th century.

This idea presupposes another. For if a thing be able to swing and drift from one polarity or tendency to another, then we must presuppose an inherent instability in the mechanism. Inherent instability is potency for movement. But there is no movement in God and His Truth is immutable. By definition, true Catholics are the most stable beings in the changeable universe because they participate, by grace, in Essential Immutability. Thus if the Catholics of 18th and 19th centuries were so moveable, then what caused the instability in the first place? I say that it was scientist earth-moving confirmed in its revolutionism by ecclesiastical pretension.

When they moved the Earth they unmoored and unhinged the basic intelligibility of reality. When they moved the Earth off its bases, they made the entire universe (Man being its microcosm) unstable.

All manner of instability - physical, intellectual, moral, spiritual, and temporal - has insistently and implacably followed in its wake.

When Our Lady Triumphs, stability will return to the Universe.

On this topic I recently gave consideration to some ideas related to the holiday rush. The pathological commercialism in which we are awash, is a prime example of the artificially injected instability that is the favorite soft-kill weapon of the revolutionary establishment.

In the beginning God created the Heavens and the Earth. Then, over the course of Six Days, He filled and adorned both. He placed the sun, moon, and stars in the firmament, for the regulation of days, nights, years, months, and seasons. The circuit of the sun makes both the diurnal cycle and the procession of the seasons. The profound stability and predictability of this unshakeable natural order operates as a mighty regulatory principle in the affairs of men, even unto their interior state of happiness and tranquillity. It silently and unobtrusively regulates everything - the activities of the individual person, family life, community life, the affairs of State, and the great cycles and seasons of the life of the Church.

The happiness and tranquillity of all levels of the social order depends in great part upon the order, harmony, predictability, and regularity of the cosmological processions.

Thus if an enemy were to come with the intention of injecting disorder into the ecclesiastical, political, and social fabric, he would do well to interfere with the regularity of Divine, natural, and human cycles.

The first wave of invasion begins with copernicanism, which violently dislodges the Earth from its place in the cosmos. The intellectual effect on mankind is that Earth, in reality stable, immoveable, unshakeable, at rest, and centrally located, is now erroneously believed to hurtle through random space at truly obscene speeds. Man now believes in the operation of error. His intellect is deformed, and consequently, so too are his appetites, for the will is moved by the intellect.

Disorder, irregularity, unpredictability, uncertainty, and ignorance follow in the wake of this first invasion.

But that is not enough because nature always reasserts itself almost as violently as its aggressors tear away at it. Thus a natural conservatism keeps replenishing stability wherever and whenever it can. Yes the Earth is alleged to move, but the seasons still change, the day is still 24 hours, the sun still rises, and the moon maintains its phases. Holidays, festivities, and daily activities may thus continue on their course.

But this is unacceptable to the revolution establishment, as this is a constant threat to their dominion and control, which is based upon mass intellectual delusion. They must constantly fight against implacable nature - the report of the senses, including common sense - reasserting itself, the way weeds implacably reassert themselves in a landscape.

Hence we see ever increasing varieties of destabilizing strategies, aimed at keeping populations in a state of reactionism, confusion, disequilibrium, disorder, and, ultimately infantile dependency with blind obedience. [I submit the diabolical novelty called Black Friday as an example of the latest trend in destabilization strategy. Black Friday is their anti-First Sunday of Advent, ushering in their satanic, pagan "holiday" season. It is a satanic rite of greed, hatred of neighbor, chaos, disorder, agitation, belligerence, and murderous designs. How many of us participated in it?]

Another destabilization strategy is the changing of the traditional calendars, as at the French Revolution and Vatican II. Vatican II goes so far as to interfere with the Church's liturgical seasons, so beautifully aligned with the rhythms of nature, that they supernaturalize and adorn the natural order in a way that could almost make Earth the end of our existence, did we not know better.

The revolution establishment, responsible for the wreckage of the liturgical calendar, aids and abets the crimes of the pseudo-churchmen, in the commercial sphere. Calendar-tinkering was really bad twenty years ago, but it is all out mayhem in 2012. We now see Christmas decorations go up in stores on October 1st, competing with the lurid filth peddled in the Halloween market.

And the thing of it is: What about Catholics? This is the season of Advent. There should be no lights, no tree, no decorations, no parties, until December 25th. Yet how many of us fell for it and put the stuff up in our homes right after Thanksgiving, thereby allowing ourselves to be further destabilized by enemy forces?

Yet another very insidious destabilization strategy is what I call the "war on thinking." The emotions and passions reside in the matter of the body. They are extremely moveable, even volatile. They are difficult to control, even when put under the influence of grace. If not kept under strict control, they will destabilize thinking, judging, and acting. Whereas the intellect, which is a spiritual faculty, is much more stable and immoveable, as it is made in the image and likeness of the Immutable God. The war on thinking targets the passions and emotions, seeking to stir them up, while simultaneously feeding the intellect pabulum and low-grade garbage. This greatly destabilizes the individual, who, in turn, destabilizes the social, political, and spiritual cells in which he participates.

What kind of environment do we live in, if not one that is dumbed down and hyper-sensitized, hyper-sentimentalized in the extreme?

Thus we see that copernicanism is an arch-system of destabilization of nature, human activity, and grace, resulting in a breakup of order, harmony, tranquillity, predictability, and hence happiness.

We must fight all instability by the restoration of stability. And we do this, first, by traveling back to the place where it all broke down - the Cosmology. If we get that right, we get a fighting chance to rebuild Christendom.

Viva Christo Rey!
[/color]