I watched the entire DVD here:
http://gwwdvd.com/?wpam_refkey=4
and I am firmly convinced that the earth doesn't move.
They tried to prove the earth moved (the Copernican Principle) countless ways, devised many experiments, which all failed to show motion.
Then complicated and obtuse mathematical formula were created, to try to save the Copernican system. Einstein's theories of special relativity and general relativity,
Ok Matthew, this is for you and others on CIF, for having faith in the biblical revelation of a geocentric world.
The general consensus is that everything we witness has a geocentric and heliocentric explanation. This is called relative movement and was accepted by science when Einstein rescued heliocentrism from the M&M experiments.
Well They all missed something that Walter van der Kamp spotted, and it is related to the FACT of stellar aberration.
Let me remind readers of SA. Bradley, in 1726, looking for stellar parallax, found what is called stellar aberration. He found that in one year every star in the heavens does a similar size circle. Viewed from earth, these circles will have different shapes according to angles, if you know what I mean.
The Earthmovers said it was caused by a orbiting earth whereas it could also be caused by orbiting stars around the earth. Airy did a test that showed it was the movement of the stars that caused it but the Galileans ignored this and carried on claiming SA was proof for a spinning earth.
It was Walter who spotted something that blows the whole Einstein relativity rescue package apart.
The problem for the Copernicans is the FACT that all the stars do a similar size circular movement every year. There lies a big problem for science. I tell you why.
Stellar Aberration was found looking for stellar parallax. SP is only found with NEAR STARS. Far stars are so far away that their parallax cannot be seen.
Now apply this logic - THAT THE FURTHER AWAY A STAR IS THE SMALLER ANY MOVEMENT IT MAKES SHOULD BE SMALLER THAN NEARER STARS - to Stellar Aberration that has all stars showing the same size.
ACCORDING TO Einstein's RELATIVITY THERE SHOULD BE A GEOCENTRIC AND HELIOCENTRIC EXPLANATION FOR STELLAR ABERRATION.
Bradley’s stellar aberration is so important; for it alone among all the tests and ‘proofs’ provided by science incorporates the stars with the solar-system and the earth. Now if Einstein’s theory of relativity is to deliver, and science asserts that it does, we have to find a geocentric order that conforms to the stellar aberration that Bradley found. So, what geocentric arrangement must the universe have that will show us all the stars with an equal-size aberration? To do this we have to adopt the Tychonic model and geometrically centre the stars on the sun. Now, from earth, every star will be seen to rotate annually together with the sun’s orbit.
‘
Mediate for a few moments and the truth will dawn on you. Such a single observation, but one of momentous importance we have here. According to the ruling relativity it makes with regard to the cosmos that the astronomers observe no physical difference, pontificates Sir Fred Hoyle, whether we declare the universe centered on the sun or the earth. This profession, you will already have realized, is false. The two universes that this contention envisages could not physically be more different than they are. The earth-centered one basically requires a Stellatum like that of Antiquity and the Middle-Ages to account for what we “here below” diurnally and annually observe. The never proven, nor provable, gospel of Galileo has in the long run reduced us to little blobs of thinking jelly on a pellet of stardust corkscrewing from somewhere into the nowhere of nothingless. The Sun-centered hypothesis truly “saves the appearance,” but the Earth-centered view only will do this if we re-introduce the Stellatum of yore and arrange the stars in that celestial sphere. A simple observation, but the Einsteinian theories are thereby condemned irrefutably. Which in a manner of speaking puts us back to square one. That is in the cul-de-sac into which after 1887 classical science found itself….
And I have to stress the irrefutability of my conclusion. For here we have much more than a-by means of experimentation acquired “disproof” that can be overcome by suitable ad hocs. We have a logical and ontological impossibility. The structure of the universe that firsthand observations prompt us to extrapolate from an Earth at rest is totally different from that of a Sun at rest. Relativity maintains that there will be no physical differences between the two. Relativity is therefore wrong and Einstein thereby dethroned.’ --- Walter van der Kamp: The Cosmos… p.34-35.
Walter: ‘You mean to tell me that if from earth we see every star move in circles of the exact same size once a year, which we do as shown by stellar aberration, then, according to your theory of relativity and the heliocentric model, then we should see the orbit of the earth around the sun exactly the same as seen from each of these stars?’
Albert: ‘yes, of course.
Walter: ‘Is that a fact? Well let me simplify it for you Albert. First take a man on the geocentric earth. He, we know, sees all the stars make similar sized aberration orbits as Bradley did, yes? Now put men on all the stars in the relativity model above right. According to your theory every man on every star will see the earth make the same orbit.
Einstein: Of course. If, if, now let me see, ehhhhhh, ahhhhh, I…I… well you know I am no astronomer, but…mmmm, oh cripes, I see what you are getting at. The fixed stars are not all at the same distance from the earth so men on each star WILL NOT see the earth’s orbit the same size, for the further away the star is the smaller the earth’s orbit or circle would be seen.
‘Scientific theories come and go – but the clear and simple
trustworthy word of God stands forever.’
Walter van der Kamp. (D. 1998)
Topic: Was this video faked? (Read 5108 times)