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

Author Topic: 50 Plus Reasons The Earth Is Not Flat  (Read 241516 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline FlatEarthInquisitor

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 73
  • Reputation: +38/-40
  • Gender: Male
50 Plus Reasons The Earth Is Not Flat
« Reply #345 on: March 12, 2017, 01:12:58 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: BumphreyHogart
    Quote from: happenby
    The Church teaches infallibly that heliocentrism, the notion that earth moves and sun is stationary, IS FALSE and contrary to the Faith. The Church also teaches that the sun, moon and stars reside inside a visible firmament that is laid out as a firm boundary, like a tent, between heaven and earth.  


    The Church teaches no such thing.  The Church has for generations taught heliocentrism in Her parish schools. This would not happen if it were against Catholic teaching.


    Here's some quotes to chew on....
    http://flatearthtrads.forumga.net/t60-pertinent-quotes-from-fathers-and-tradition

    Offline BumphreyHogart

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 689
    • Reputation: +226/-662
    • Gender: Male
    50 Plus Reasons The Earth Is Not Flat
    « Reply #346 on: March 12, 2017, 03:43:39 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: FlatEarthInquisitor
    Quote from: BumphreyHogart
    Quote from: happenby
    The Church teaches infallibly that heliocentrism, the notion that earth moves and sun is stationary, IS FALSE and contrary to the Faith. The Church also teaches that the sun, moon and stars reside inside a visible firmament that is laid out as a firm boundary, like a tent, between heaven and earth.  


    The Church teaches no such thing.  The Church has for generations taught heliocentrism in Her parish schools. This would not happen if it were against Catholic teaching.


    Here's some quotes to chew on....
    http://flatearthtrads.forumga.net/t60-pertinent-quotes-from-fathers-and-tradition


    I not only chewed on them, I blew bubbles.

    None of it was from the magisterium. A disciplinary prohibition from the Holy Office is not the magisterium. That is why it says, "the present decree respectively prohibits, condemns, and suspends all."

    Same problem the Feeneyites have, not noticing that a divine Church cannot allow something inherently dangerous to faith, universally, and for generations, which the Church has, as previously mentioned.


    Offline cassini

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3820
    • Reputation: +2864/-274
    • Gender: Male
    50 Plus Reasons The Earth Is Not Flat
    « Reply #347 on: March 12, 2017, 03:53:55 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: BumphreyHogart
    Quote from: happenby
    The Church teaches infallibly that heliocentrism, the notion that earth moves and sun is stationary, IS FALSE and contrary to the Faith. The Church also teaches that the sun, moon and stars reside inside a visible firmament that is laid out as a firm boundary, like a tent, between heaven and earth.  


    The Church teaches no such thing.  The Church has for generations taught heliocentrism in Her parish schools. This would not happen if it were against Catholic teaching.


    We better not get into this discussion on this thread Bumphy, but you deserve an answer to your post.

    in 1613 Galileo was asserting heliocentrism was a proven scientific fact and that the references to a moving sun and stars in Scripture were not literal but merely reflected the illusion of motion as man sees it. All the Church Fathers had interpreted the Scriptures as literally revealing a fixed earth and moving sun, moon and stars. Now at the Council of Trent it decreed that the unanimous interpretation of the Fathers cannot be contradicted and anybody doing so had to be stopped. Thus the Church of 1616 had to settle the matter.

    In 1616 Pope Paul V defined that the Scriptures reveal a geocentric world and to deny this was formal heresy. Churchmen decided the issue there and then, there cannot be proof for that would make scripture false, nor can there ever be proof found for that again would make scripture reveal in error. The FAITH of these churchmen decided the matter.

    This decree was made universal and declared absolute in 1633 by Pope Urban VIII. As it happened when examined all now agree Galileo had no such proof.

    By 1700, other philosophers like Newton were claiming they had the proof for heliocentrism. Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ then took over the dictates of science and convinced many that proofs had been found. Some high officials in the Church started to believe Pope Paul V and Urban VIII has made a disasterous mistake and this began what can only be described as the FIRST MODERNIST U-TURN IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

    By 1835, most members of the Holy Office had convinced the pope to allow heliocentrism to be accepted by the flock, while others advised him it was an irreversible decree and that no proof for heliocentrism actually existed. Such was the pressure from within and from without to allow heliocentric books He did this,  BUT, and I quote "without comment." In other words it was all done without the abrogation of the 1616 decree. In more words, the popes dared not address or contradict the 1616 decree and say it was wrong, simply ignored it and hoped it would disappear into oblivion.

    And it did. Search as much as you like and whereas you will find in Catholic books every Holy Office decree on this and that but the only one that decreed an error formal heresy IS MISSING.

    Given the SUBJECT MATTER of the heresy was not THEOLOGICAL it disappeared, and a thousand books assured all Catholics that the 1616 decree was reversible and that the matter was ended, a once-off mistake. But the enemies of the Church saw their chance and let all know that one such mistake proves the Catholic Church is not protected from error by their God. Even today these book are everywhere. Why even Catholic theologians like Hans Kung use this case to argue the Catholic Church is NOT INFALLIBLE. (I read Pope Francis is to have a chat with him about this)

    In 1887 however a scientific experiment showed the earth does not move. This sent scientists wild with horror and it took 17 years to get heliocentrism back as a POSSIBILITY. Albert Einstein was used to aschieve this by saying, Yes, geocentrism is a scientific possibility, but because of relativity so is heliocentrism.

    So, one hundred years ago science KNEW the 1616 decree was not falsified, that to be at one with science one had to accept geocentrism could well the real order of the universe. So, did ANYONE in the Church at that time, from Pope to Catholic scientist  consider the U-turn had been the disasterous mistake? You bet your life they did but that U-turn kept the world from laughing at a Church that had to believe in the geocentric POSSIBILITY.

    Of course Bumphry they didn't dare stop teaching heliocentrism in Church and State, to you and me. Indeed the only way to have to avoid admitting the U-turn mistake was to actually go along with all scientific theories saying of course God did it that way. At Vatican II it became so important to keep all Catholics ignorant heliocentrists that they put in its Gaudium et Spes a criticism of the geocentric popes and theologians of 1616 and 1633.

    So, there you are bumphry, hard to believe isn't it. The Church that is supposed to teach the truth of faith and to prevent false philosophy among its flock wouldn't touch the 1616 decree with a long pole. It would make them look like idiots in a world 400 years now under the propaganda that the earth moves around the sun and to adhere to the 1616 decree of faioth would make them look like idiots in this rotten world. Yes, intellectual pride is far more important now than faith in the Scriptures.



    Offline FlatEarthInquisitor

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 73
    • Reputation: +38/-40
    • Gender: Male
    50 Plus Reasons The Earth Is Not Flat
    « Reply #348 on: March 12, 2017, 04:23:54 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: BumphreyHogart
    Quote from: FlatEarthInquisitor
    Quote from: BumphreyHogart
    Quote from: happenby
    The Church teaches infallibly that heliocentrism, the notion that earth moves and sun is stationary, IS FALSE and contrary to the Faith. The Church also teaches that the sun, moon and stars reside inside a visible firmament that is laid out as a firm boundary, like a tent, between heaven and earth.  


    The Church teaches no such thing.  The Church has for generations taught heliocentrism in Her parish schools. This would not happen if it were against Catholic teaching.


    Here's some quotes to chew on....
    http://flatearthtrads.forumga.net/t60-pertinent-quotes-from-fathers-and-tradition


    I not only chewed on them, I blew bubbles.

    None of it was from the magisterium. A disciplinary prohibition from the Holy Office is not the magisterium. That is why it says, "the present decree respectively prohibits, condemns, and suspends all."

    Same problem the Feeneyites have, not noticing that a divine Church cannot allow something inherently dangerous to faith, universally, and for generations, which the Church has, as previously mentioned.


    You should not compare this to the Feeneyites. You know that it not the same.

    Do you understand the purpose of an infallible decree is? It is so the faithful can be under no illusion on a certain point. But it does not mean that there are other points which it has not clarified which can be part of the faith.

    I think you should be careful in coming down too hard on this, because it may come back to bite you someday. Most especially because you have virtually nothing from the Holy office or the Fathers of the church in favour of globalism.

    Also, your lack of humility in face of these quotes is astonishing.

    But you cannot ultimately win especially because scientifically you are wrong about the globe earth.

    Cassini's post was interesting, but it should be borne in mind that he is clearly (you can read a list of his posts to confirm) not a resistance Catholic.

    On a separate note, here is a interesting video:

    [youtube]https://www.youtube.com/embed/p5asOJGkCQI[/youtube]

    Offline mw2016

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1351
    • Reputation: +765/-544
    • Gender: Female
    50 Plus Reasons The Earth Is Not Flat
    « Reply #349 on: March 12, 2017, 08:42:52 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: BumphreyHogart
    Quote from: happenby
    The Church teaches infallibly that heliocentrism, the notion that earth moves and sun is stationary, IS FALSE and contrary to the Faith. The Church also teaches that the sun, moon and stars reside inside a visible firmament that is laid out as a firm boundary, like a tent, between heaven and earth.  


    The Church teaches no such thing.  The Church has for generations taught heliocentrism in Her parish schools. This would not happen if it were against Catholic teaching.


     :facepalm:

    Poor Bumphrey Hogart. He has just arrived and thinks he's going to go a few rounds against happenby.

    Good luck, pal.


    Offline mw2016

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1351
    • Reputation: +765/-544
    • Gender: Female
    50 Plus Reasons The Earth Is Not Flat
    « Reply #350 on: March 12, 2017, 08:45:26 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: cassini
    Quote from: BumphreyHogart
    Quote from: happenby
    The Church teaches infallibly that heliocentrism, the notion that earth moves and sun is stationary, IS FALSE and contrary to the Faith. The Church also teaches that the sun, moon and stars reside inside a visible firmament that is laid out as a firm boundary, like a tent, between heaven and earth.  


    The Church teaches no such thing.  The Church has for generations taught heliocentrism in Her parish schools. This would not happen if it were against Catholic teaching.


    We better not get into this discussion on this thread Bumphy, but you deserve an answer to your post.

    in 1613 Galileo was asserting heliocentrism was a proven scientific fact and that the references to a moving sun and stars in Scripture were not literal but merely reflected the illusion of motion as man sees it. All the Church Fathers had interpreted the Scriptures as literally revealing a fixed earth and moving sun, moon and stars. Now at the Council of Trent it decreed that the unanimous interpretation of the Fathers cannot be contradicted and anybody doing so had to be stopped. Thus the Church of 1616 had to settle the matter.

    In 1616 Pope Paul V defined that the Scriptures reveal a geocentric world and to deny this was formal heresy. Churchmen decided the issue there and then, there cannot be proof for that would make scripture false, nor can there ever be proof found for that again would make scripture reveal in error. The FAITH of these churchmen decided the matter.

    This decree was made universal and declared absolute in 1633 by Pope Urban VIII. As it happened when examined all now agree Galileo had no such proof.

    By 1700, other philosophers like Newton were claiming they had the proof for heliocentrism. Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ then took over the dictates of science and convinced many that proofs had been found. Some high officials in the Church started to believe Pope Paul V and Urban VIII has made a disasterous mistake and this began what can only be described as the FIRST MODERNIST U-TURN IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

    By 1835, most members of the Holy Office had convinced the pope to allow heliocentrism to be accepted by the flock, while others advised him it was an irreversible decree and that no proof for heliocentrism actually existed. Such was the pressure from within and from without to allow heliocentric books He did this,  BUT, and I quote "without comment." In other words it was all done without the abrogation of the 1616 decree. In more words, the popes dared not address or contradict the 1616 decree and say it was wrong, simply ignored it and hoped it would disappear into oblivion.

    And it did. Search as much as you like and whereas you will find in Catholic books every Holy Office decree on this and that but the only one that decreed an error formal heresy IS MISSING.

    Given the SUBJECT MATTER of the heresy was not THEOLOGICAL it disappeared, and a thousand books assured all Catholics that the 1616 decree was reversible and that the matter was ended, a once-off mistake. But the enemies of the Church saw their chance and let all know that one such mistake proves the Catholic Church is not protected from error by their God. Even today these book are everywhere. Why even Catholic theologians like Hans Kung use this case to argue the Catholic Church is NOT INFALLIBLE. (I read Pope Francis is to have a chat with him about this)

    In 1887 however a scientific experiment showed the earth does not move. This sent scientists wild with horror and it took 17 years to get heliocentrism back as a POSSIBILITY. Albert Einstein was used to aschieve this by saying, Yes, geocentrism is a scientific possibility, but because of relativity so is heliocentrism.

    So, one hundred years ago science KNEW the 1616 decree was not falsified, that to be at one with science one had to accept geocentrism could well the real order of the universe. So, did ANYONE in the Church at that time, from Pope to Catholic scientist  consider the U-turn had been the disasterous mistake? You bet your life they did but that U-turn kept the world from laughing at a Church that had to believe in the geocentric POSSIBILITY.

    Of course Bumphry they didn't dare stop teaching heliocentrism in Church and State, to you and me. Indeed the only way to have to avoid admitting the U-turn mistake was to actually go along with all scientific theories saying of course God did it that way. At Vatican II it became so important to keep all Catholics ignorant heliocentrists that they put in its Gaudium et Spes a criticism of the geocentric popes and theologians of 1616 and 1633.

    So, there you are bumphry, hard to believe isn't it. The Church that is supposed to teach the truth of faith and to prevent false philosophy among its flock wouldn't touch the 1616 decree with a long pole. It would make them look like idiots in a world 400 years now under the propaganda that the earth moves around the sun and to adhere to the 1616 decree of faioth would make them look like idiots in this rotten world. Yes, intellectual pride is far more important now than faith in the Scriptures.




    Bumphrey even thinks he's going to take on the geocentrists AND the FE'ers.

    ROFL

    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18177
    • Reputation: +8277/-692
    • Gender: Male
    50 Plus Reasons The Earth Is Not Flat
    « Reply #351 on: March 12, 2017, 09:34:27 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Some day, cassini, readers of CI will realize what a signal grace it is to have you as a member of this forum.

    Post
    Quote from: cassini
    Quote from: BumphreyHogart
    Quote from: happenby
    The Church teaches infallibly that heliocentrism, the notion that earth moves and sun is stationary, IS FALSE and contrary to the Faith. The Church also teaches that the sun, moon and stars reside inside a visible firmament that is laid out as a firm boundary, like a tent, between heaven and earth.  

    The Church teaches no such thing.  The Church has for generations taught heliocentrism in Her parish schools. This would not happen if it were against Catholic teaching.


    We better not get into this discussion on this thread Bumphy, but you deserve an answer to your post.

    in 1613 Galileo was asserting heliocentrism was a proven scientific fact and that the references to a moving sun and stars in Scripture were not literal but merely reflected the illusion of motion as man sees it. All the Church Fathers had interpreted the Scriptures as literally revealing a fixed earth and moving sun, moon and stars. Now at the Council of Trent it decreed that the unanimous interpretation of the Fathers cannot be contradicted and anybody doing so had to be stopped. Thus the Church of 1616 had to settle the matter.

    In 1616 Pope Paul V defined that the Scriptures reveal a geocentric world and to deny this was formal heresy. Churchmen decided the issue there and then, there cannot be proof for that would make scripture false, nor can there ever be proof found for that again would make scripture reveal in error. The FAITH of these churchmen decided the matter.

    This decree was made universal and declared absolute in 1633 by Pope Urban VIII. As it happened when examined all now agree Galileo had no such proof.

    By 1700, other philosophers like Newton were claiming they had the proof for heliocentrism. Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ then took over the dictates of science and convinced many that proofs had been found. Some high officials in the Church started to believe Pope Paul V and Urban VIII has made a disasterous mistake and this began what can only be described as the FIRST MODERNIST U-TURN IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

    By 1835, most members of the Holy Office had convinced the pope to allow heliocentrism to be accepted by the flock, while others advised him it was an irreversible decree and that no proof for heliocentrism actually existed. Such was the pressure from within and from without to allow heliocentric books He did this,  BUT, and I quote "without comment." In other words it was all done without the abrogation of the 1616 decree. In more words, the popes dared not address or contradict the 1616 decree and say it was wrong, simply ignored it and hoped it would disappear into oblivion.

    And it did. Search as much as you like and whereas you will find in Catholic books every Holy Office decree on this and that but the only one that decreed an error formal heresy IS MISSING.

    Given the SUBJECT MATTER of the heresy was not THEOLOGICAL it disappeared, and a thousand books assured all Catholics that the 1616 decree was reversible and that the matter was ended, a once-off mistake. But the enemies of the Church saw their chance and let all know that one such mistake proves the Catholic Church is not protected from error by their God. Even today these book are everywhere. Why even Catholic theologians like Hans Kung use this case to argue the Catholic Church is NOT INFALLIBLE. (I read Pope Francis is to have a chat with him about this)

    In 1887 however a scientific experiment showed the earth does not move. This sent scientists wild with horror and it took 17 years to get heliocentrism back as a POSSIBILITY. Albert Einstein was used to aschieve this by saying, Yes, geocentrism is a scientific possibility, but because of relativity so is heliocentrism.

    So, one hundred years ago science KNEW the 1616 decree was not falsified, that to be at one with science one had to accept geocentrism could well the real order of the universe. So, did ANYONE in the Church at that time, from Pope to Catholic scientist  consider the U-turn had been the disasterous mistake? You bet your life they did but that U-turn kept the world from laughing at a Church that had to believe in the geocentric POSSIBILITY.

    Of course Bumphry they didn't dare stop teaching heliocentrism in Church and State, to you and me. Indeed the only way to have to avoid admitting the U-turn mistake was to actually go along with all scientific theories saying of course God did it that way. At Vatican II it became so important to keep all Catholics ignorant heliocentrists that they put in its Gaudium et Spes a criticism of the geocentric popes and theologians of 1616 and 1633.

    So, there you are bumphry, hard to believe isn't it. The Church that is supposed to teach the truth of faith and to prevent false philosophy among its flock wouldn't touch the 1616 decree with a long pole. It would make them look like idiots in a world 400 years now under the propaganda that the earth moves around the sun and to adhere to the 1616 decree of faioth would make them look like idiots in this rotten world. Yes, intellectual pride is far more important now than faith in the Scriptures.


    Your reliably appropriate and well-informed posts are a blessing for the readers.

    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.

    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18177
    • Reputation: +8277/-692
    • Gender: Male
    50 Plus Reasons The Earth Is Not Flat
    « Reply #352 on: March 12, 2017, 09:49:51 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • We also ought not forget that Isaac Newton's work, along with others (Rene Descartes, Voltaire, Immanuel Kant, etc.) gave the philosophical turmoil and underpinnings necessary for the French Revolution, which had a primary object of attacking the Church -- and the Royalty of France was necessary collateral damage. The fallout from those dark days consequent to Luther's heresy gave Charles Lyell and Charles Darwin the open field they needed to further demolish popular confidence in the Church and her teachings. From there came the rise of Communism and the push for Zionist illegitimate confiscation of land in Palestine, which has been two world wars......... so far.

    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.


    Offline Truth is Eternal

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1768
    • Reputation: +790/-1995
    • Gender: Male
    50 Plus Reasons The Earth Is Not Flat
    « Reply #353 on: March 12, 2017, 11:05:55 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Neil Obstat
    Some day, cassini, readers of CI will realize what a signal grace it is to have you as a member of this forum.

    Post
    Quote from: cassini
    Quote from: BumphreyHogart
    Quote from: happenby
    The Church teaches infallibly that heliocentrism, the notion that earth moves and sun is stationary, IS FALSE and contrary to the Faith. The Church also teaches that the sun, moon and stars reside inside a visible firmament that is laid out as a firm boundary, like a tent, between heaven and earth.  

    The Church teaches no such thing.  The Church has for generations taught heliocentrism in Her parish schools. This would not happen if it were against Catholic teaching.


    We better not get into this discussion on this thread Bumphy, but you deserve an answer to your post.

    in 1613 Galileo was asserting heliocentrism was a proven scientific fact and that the references to a moving sun and stars in Scripture were not literal but merely reflected the illusion of motion as man sees it. All the Church Fathers had interpreted the Scriptures as literally revealing a fixed earth and moving sun, moon and stars. Now at the Council of Trent it decreed that the unanimous interpretation of the Fathers cannot be contradicted and anybody doing so had to be stopped. Thus the Church of 1616 had to settle the matter.

    In 1616 Pope Paul V defined that the Scriptures reveal a geocentric world and to deny this was formal heresy. Churchmen decided the issue there and then, there cannot be proof for that would make scripture false, nor can there ever be proof found for that again would make scripture reveal in error. The FAITH of these churchmen decided the matter.

    This decree was made universal and declared absolute in 1633 by Pope Urban VIII. As it happened when examined all now agree Galileo had no such proof.

    By 1700, other philosophers like Newton were claiming they had the proof for heliocentrism. Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ then took over the dictates of science and convinced many that proofs had been found. Some high officials in the Church started to believe Pope Paul V and Urban VIII has made a disasterous mistake and this began what can only be described as the FIRST MODERNIST U-TURN IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

    By 1835, most members of the Holy Office had convinced the pope to allow heliocentrism to be accepted by the flock, while others advised him it was an irreversible decree and that no proof for heliocentrism actually existed. Such was the pressure from within and from without to allow heliocentric books He did this,  BUT, and I quote "without comment." In other words it was all done without the abrogation of the 1616 decree. In more words, the popes dared not address or contradict the 1616 decree and say it was wrong, simply ignored it and hoped it would disappear into oblivion.

    And it did. Search as much as you like and whereas you will find in Catholic books every Holy Office decree on this and that but the only one that decreed an error formal heresy IS MISSING.

    Given the SUBJECT MATTER of the heresy was not THEOLOGICAL it disappeared, and a thousand books assured all Catholics that the 1616 decree was reversible and that the matter was ended, a once-off mistake. But the enemies of the Church saw their chance and let all know that one such mistake proves the Catholic Church is not protected from error by their God. Even today these book are everywhere. Why even Catholic theologians like Hans Kung use this case to argue the Catholic Church is NOT INFALLIBLE. (I read Pope Francis is to have a chat with him about this)

    In 1887 however a scientific experiment showed the earth does not move. This sent scientists wild with horror and it took 17 years to get heliocentrism back as a POSSIBILITY. Albert Einstein was used to aschieve this by saying, Yes, geocentrism is a scientific possibility, but because of relativity so is heliocentrism.

    So, one hundred years ago science KNEW the 1616 decree was not falsified, that to be at one with science one had to accept geocentrism could well the real order of the universe. So, did ANYONE in the Church at that time, from Pope to Catholic scientist  consider the U-turn had been the disasterous mistake? You bet your life they did but that U-turn kept the world from laughing at a Church that had to believe in the geocentric POSSIBILITY.

    Of course Bumphry they didn't dare stop teaching heliocentrism in Church and State, to you and me. Indeed the only way to have to avoid admitting the U-turn mistake was to actually go along with all scientific theories saying of course God did it that way. At Vatican II it became so important to keep all Catholics ignorant heliocentrists that they put in its Gaudium et Spes a criticism of the geocentric popes and theologians of 1616 and 1633.

    So, there you are bumphry, hard to believe isn't it. The Church that is supposed to teach the truth of faith and to prevent false philosophy among its flock wouldn't touch the 1616 decree with a long pole. It would make them look like idiots in a world 400 years now under the propaganda that the earth moves around the sun and to adhere to the 1616 decree of faioth would make them look like idiots in this rotten world. Yes, intellectual pride is far more important now than faith in the Scriptures.


    Your reliably appropriate and well-informed posts are a blessing for the readers.



    YOU FORGOT TO WATCH THE VIDEO OF THE SUN MOVING ACROSS THE SKY!
    [youtube]https://www.youtube.com/embed/7Zy_qg5EbJk[/youtube]

    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18177
    • Reputation: +8277/-692
    • Gender: Male
    50 Plus Reasons The Earth Is Not Flat
    « Reply #354 on: March 12, 2017, 11:22:42 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • This time exposure shows star tracks from Ogden, Utah, at 41 degrees latitude:

    Quote from: [url=http://physics.weber.edu/schroeder/ua/starmotion.html
    source[/url]]
    In the north, the motion is most interesting. Stars rise in the northeast and set in the northwest, moving in counter-clockwise circles around a point that's high above the northern horizon:

    Half-hour time exposure facing north and slightly west, from the same location as the previous three photos [Ogden, UT, 41 deg. lat.]. The stars are tracing counter-clockwise circles, centered on a point near the prominent North Star (Polaris). Notice the Big Dipper at the lower-left.

    The majestic motions of the night sky were intimately familiar to ancient people. Today this familiarity has been lost (except by astronomy geeks), so you'll need to make a special effort to remember and visualize the patterns. It helps to stand under the night sky and point with your hands, tracing out the paths of different stars. In summary:

    Some stars rise directly east, heading to the right, then cross the high southern sky, and eventually set directly west.

    Other stars rise in the southeast and follow shorter, lower arcs across the south before setting in the southwest.

    And in the north, there are many stars that never rise or set at all; these “circuмpolar stars” follow counter-clockwise circles. (In fact, it is the center of these circles that defines what we mean by “north”.)

    ...Measuring Angles

    When we talk about the apparent "distance" between two points in the sky, we're really talking about an angle, measured between the two imaginary lines running from your your eye out to those points:


    The angle between two points in the sky is defined as the angle between two imaginary lines running from you out to those points. For the two stars shown, the angle is about 16 degrees.


    The bowl of the Big Dipper is about 10° wide and 5° deep. The entire handle is 16° long, and the whole Dipper is 26° long.

    Similarly, the width of Orion's Belt is a little under 3°, and the four star-trail photos above each span a width of about 60° from side to side.

    To measure the angles between stars and other points in the sky, astronomers use protractors and similar instruments, often attached to a telescope for accurate pointing [e.g., sailors use a sextant which is a protractor telescope combination]. To get an approximate measurement, however, you can use instruments that are always with you: your hands. The width of your fist, held at arm's length, is about 10°, while the width of your little finger tip, also held at arm's length, is about 1°.

    The rate of angular motion is the same in other parts of the sky, although you can't just measure the angles with your hands because you're not at the center of the circles. In the northern sky, however, you can measure the angles directly by laying a protractor down on a photograph. Here's a longer time exposure of star trails near the North Star:


    In the northern sky, all stars move at the same rate around the common center of their circles. During this 75-minute time exposure, the stars rotated by approximately 19°.

    To simplify their understanding of the motions of the sky, ancient people invented a mechanical model to explain these motions. We still use this model today because it's so convenient... If you can visualize the model, you won't have to memorize a whole bunch of separate facts about how the stars move.


    The stars appear to be attached to a giant celestial sphere, spinning about the celestial poles, and around us, once every 23 hours and 56 minutes.

    The model is simply that the stars are all attached to the inside of a giant rigid celestial sphere that surrounds the earth and spins around us once every 23 hours, 56 minutes. The spinning carries each star around in its observed circular path, while a special point in the northern sky, at the center of the circles, remains fixed. The sphere's rigidity accounts for how the shapes of the constellations never change, and its enormous size accounts for how the constellations never grow or shrink, as they would if a particular point on earth were significantly closer to one side of the sphere than the other.

    To better describe locations in the sky, we give names to the various parts of the celestial sphere. The fixed point in the northern sky is called the north celestial pole, and is located only about a degree away from the famous North Star (which makes tiny circles around it). Ninety degrees from the pole is the celestial equator, a great circle that runs from directly east to directly west, passing high above our southern horizon. Mintaka, the rightmost star in Orion's Belt, happens to lie almost exactly on the celestial equator, so you can think of the celestial equator as tracing the path of this star. Another important great circle is the meridian, which runs from directly north to directly south, passing straight overhead. As the sphere turns, the meridian remains fixed in the sky. The point straight overhead is called zenith.

    The Stars from Other Locations

    I've described the stellar motions as they appear from my home in Ogden, Utah, at a latitude of 41° north of the equator. What about other locations?

    Moving east or west makes no difference, except to determine when you see things. If you live farther east, you'll see any given star rise and set sooner; if you live farther west, each star rises and sets later. We compensate for these differences, in an approximate way, by setting our clocks according to different time zones.

    Moving north or south is more interesting. The farther north you go, the higher in the sky you'll see the north celestial pole and the stars around it—and the lower all the stars will appear in the south. In fact, the angle between your northern horizon and the north celestial pole is precisely equal to your latitude.

    For example, in Ogden the north celestial pole is 41° above my northern horizon, but if you're in Anchorage, Alaska, the angle is 61°. At the earth's north pole, you would see the north celestial pole straight overhead, and the celestial equator would lie along your horizon, so you would never see any stars rise or set; they would just move in counter-clockwise circles if you're facing upward, or horizontally to the right if you're facing the horizon. Stars below your horizon (that is, south of the celestial equator) would always be hidden from your view.

    On the other hand, if you travel south to Mexico City, you'll see the north celestial pole only 19° above your northern horizon. The Big Dipper will no longer always be visible, setting in the northwest and rising in the northeast instead. But in the southern sky, you'll see stars that are never visible in Utah, including the famous Southern Cross.

    Farther south, at earth's equator, the north celestial pole lies on the northern horizon, and the celestial equator passes straight overhead. From here, as the constellations rise in the east, they appear to head straight up, rather than along a diagonal. In the west, they head straight down as they set. Even more stars are visible in the southern sky, making clockwise half-circles about a point on the southern horizon, the south celestial pole.

    From the southern hemisphere, you can't see the north celestial pole at all. The south celestial pole, however, will appear above your southern horizon, by an angle equal to your southern latitude. Stars rising in the east will head upward and to the left, toward the northern sky. The celestial equator will also pass through the northern sky, lower and lower as you head farther south.


    The point of this quote is that from Ogden UT, or any other point on the 41st parallel, Polaris will always be 41 degrees above the visible horizon. Of course, you must be able to identify the horizon, which is easy on a very flat plain of which there are many in the midwest USA. Otherwise, the open ocean is a good place to see the horizon.

    When you move north to say Anchorage, AK, the measurement is 61 degrees, as it is at any other place on that parallel around the world.

    At the North Pole the north star (Polaris) is directly overhead at 90 degrees.

    When you move south to Mexico City, the measurement is 19 degrees.

    Quote

    The explanation for all these effects is simply that the earth's surface is curved.

    Conversely, if the earth's surface were flat, there would be no different measurements like these, the Southern Cross would be visible in the northern hemisphere and the north star would be visible in the southern hemisphere.

    However, in fact the Southern Cross is not visible in the northern hemisphere, and Polaris is not visible in the southern hemisphere. The reason this is true is that the earth is spherical (approximately).

    Quote


    This several-hour-long time exposure, taken from tropical northern Australia, shows the clockwise motion of the southern stars around the south celestial pole. The trails of the Southern Cross start at the top of the image, with the top of the cross initially above the edge. Photo by David Miller/DMI.

    Finally, if you visit earth's south pole, you'll see the south celestial pole straight overhead, with the stars making clockwise circles around it. The celestial equator will lie on your horizon, with the stars moving parallel to it, from right to left. You always see the same half of the celestial sphere, completely distinct from the half that you would see from earth's north pole.


    In the southern hemisphere navigators use the Southern Cross instead of the north star, because the latter cannot be seen from south of the equator at sea level. At the equator, Polaris appears to be just on the horizon due north, and the Southern Cross rotates (clockwise) due south.

    Some flat-earther in a previous thread claimed that the north star can be seen up to 20 degrees south of the equator but provided no reference or evidence of this. Perhaps it is visible from the highest peaks of the Andes mountains, but most certainly not from the surface of the ocean or anywhere close to sea level. The curvature of the earth at the equator prevents a view of Polaris south of that latitude.

    Quote

    So when you travel to a different location, your horizon tilts with respect to the stars. Today every school child is taught that the earth is (approximately) a sphere. Even in ancient times, however, astute travelers realized that the changes in the stars as you travel north or south must be caused by the curvature of the earth. The ancient Greeks even reasoned that the earth must be a sphere, and thus pictured the universe as a pair of spheres: an enormous celestial sphere, carrying the stars around us once a day, and the much smaller spherical earth, fixed at the center of the universe.


    The ancient Greeks used this principle to estimate the diameter of the spherical earth, and they got surprisingly close to the reality. They measured shadow of a vertical pole at each of two locations at the same day of two years, since it took them about a year to travel to the second place in the south. This same experiment has been done in our time as well, and the same results are obtained, since the earth's axis has not changed (appreciably at least) since the time of the Greeks.

    Quote
    YOU FORGOT TO WATCH THE VIDEO OF THE SUN MOVING ACROSS THE SKY!

    No, I watched that silly video, which falsifies the movement of the sun by pretending that it just came from overhead and made some kind of right turn at the horizon.

    If they had shown where the sun had come from you would see that it was coming from the left side of the frame, as it does near the Arctic Circle at certain times of the year.  In the arctic, during summer, the sun moves around the horizon 360 degrees going up and down and consequently they have sunlight around the clock for some time, depending on how far north the observer is.

    Nobody in the lower 48 states ever sees the sun move like that video shows. Nobody.

    The video is a lie.

    At the end of the video it invites comments that will take 24 hours for any response, but comments are DISABLED.  They no doubt couldn't answer the questions, like, "Where was this video recorded?"




    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.

    Offline TomGubbinsKimmage

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 135
    • Reputation: +75/-89
    • Gender: Male
    50 Plus Reasons The Earth Is Not Flat
    « Reply #355 on: March 13, 2017, 06:36:26 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Neil may be dazzling people with his posts, which display a diabolical obstinacy, but we should all recall that he is unable to account for hundreds of feet of the mountain in this video, as per an earlier thread. The truth always exposes liars. That's why I love it.

    [youtube]https://www.youtube.com/embed/S4oT2EbDONs[/youtube]

    He was asked the question numerous times, but still to this day has not answered it.

    He just keeps coming back with other smaller issues, trying to confuse people.

    By the way here is how the stars actually work


    [youtube]https://www.youtube.com/embed/ahNfU7zYlmY[/youtube]


    and here are the proofs of the flat earth for those who are only tuning in now.

    http://flatearthtrads.forumga.net/f9-flat-earth-proofs



    Offline BumphreyHogart

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 689
    • Reputation: +226/-662
    • Gender: Male
    50 Plus Reasons The Earth Is Not Flat
    « Reply #356 on: March 13, 2017, 07:03:06 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: cassini
    Quote from: BumphreyHogart
    Quote from: happenby
    The Church teaches infallibly that heliocentrism, the notion that earth moves and sun is stationary, IS FALSE and contrary to the Faith. The Church also teaches that the sun, moon and stars reside inside a visible firmament that is laid out as a firm boundary, like a tent, between heaven and earth.  


    The Church teaches no such thing.  The Church has for generations taught heliocentrism in Her parish schools. This would not happen if it were against Catholic teaching.


    We better not get into this discussion on this thread Bumphy, but you deserve an answer to your post.




    The master of U-turn accusations just starts his post off with a U-turn!  You should have started another thread.

    Offline happenby

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2768
    • Reputation: +1077/-1637
    • Gender: Female
    50 Plus Reasons The Earth Is Not Flat
    « Reply #357 on: March 13, 2017, 11:41:55 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Pythagoras was recognized by Johannes Kepler as “grandfather of all Copernicans.” 1
    Galileo viewed the papal edict of 1616 as a “suppression of the Pythagorean opinion of the mobility of the earth”. 2
    Heliocentrism is the science of the Pythagorean Doctrine or Copernican Doctrine and is the model promoted today.

    The Jєωιѕн Encyclopedia states that the Kabbalah is the origin of the philosophy of Pythagoras.  It was the secrets of the Kabbalah that led Pythagoras to heliocentric philosophy.

    German humanist Johannes Reuchlin (1455-1522) says that Pythagorean philosophy emanated from the Jews, not the Greeks.

    Martin Wagner conducted an objective and thorough study of Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ and wrote a book about his findings titled “Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ: An Interpretation” In the book it is found that the Kabbalah is unadulterated witchcraft and occultism.
    The Zionist Kabbalah Jews hide behind Gentile Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ and control the sciences through various arms of the government, including NASA.

    Theological ‘pontiff’ for the Freemasonic religion and author of “Moral Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite”, Albert Pike teaches: “The Masonic Religion should be, by all of us initiates of the high degrees, maintained in the purity of the Luciferian Doctrine.”
    Albert Pike, Morals & Dogma, "Masonry is identical to  the ancient Mysteries ", which means that all their teachings in all their books are precisely the same as the Ancient, Pagan, Satanic Mysteries.
    NASA symbols and philosophy promote this same Freemasonic Luciferian
        doctrine.

    On the Space Administration's Web Page we read: "NASA's ORIGINS PROGRAM will search for clues to help us find our cosmic roots.“


    Now that we have a little history of NASA, Pythagorean/Copernicans and their "Luciferian doctrine" it is quite clear that those who adopt the heliocentric theory hold anti-Catholic belief.  The Church condemned this trash during the Galileo Affair.  


    Offline happenby

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2768
    • Reputation: +1077/-1637
    • Gender: Female
    50 Plus Reasons The Earth Is Not Flat
    « Reply #358 on: March 13, 2017, 12:04:37 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Dr Seth Pancoast wrote that “Isaac Newton was led to the discovery of physical laws (forces of gravitation and repulsion) through the study of Kabbalah.”

    <Isaac Newton> learned how to read Hebrew, scrolled through the Bible and delved into the study of Jєωιѕн philosophy, the mysticism of Kabbalah and the тαℓмυd — a compendium of Jєωιѕн oral law and stories about 1,500 years old.

    http://www.timesofisrael.com/sir-isaacs-Jєωιѕн-writings-enter-the-21st-century/

    He's considered to be one of the greatest scientists of all time. But Sir Isaac Newton was also an influential theologian who applied a scientific approach to the study of scripture, Hebrew and Jєωιѕн mysticism.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/booknews/9085812/Israeli-library-uploads-Sir-Isaac-Newtons-theological-texts.html


    I could go on and on, but I think this sufficient to show Newton was one of "them".

    Offline BumphreyHogart

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 689
    • Reputation: +226/-662
    • Gender: Male
    50 Plus Reasons The Earth Is Not Flat
    « Reply #359 on: March 13, 2017, 12:32:06 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Quote from: happenby

    Now that we have a little history of NASA, Pythagorean/Copernicans and their "Luciferian doctrine" it is quite clear that those who adopt the heliocentric theory hold anti-Catholic belief.  The Church condemned this trash during the Galileo Affair.  


    The Church' magisterium did not condemn it. The Church's disciplinary arm acted on a particular case to protect the faith of the faithful. You probably don't understand this because your own faith is screwed up (as shown in the Feeneyite sub-forum). The Church has, and always will, even condemn truth if it is worded improperly which is prone to mislead the common faithful.

    The Holy Office protected the faithful because geocentrism was so closely connected with Holy Scripture and commonly so. At a time when Protestant revolt was disfiguring the faith, the Galileo affair was disturbing the faithful in a sudden wave, and the Holy Office successfully protected the faithful. It appears to be true that the Holy Office considered the danger to be intrinsicly doctrinal, which we know now was a mistake, but it WAS NOT a doctrinal mistake of the magisterium, and in the end it showed itself to be an extrinsic danger to the faith. Extrinsic dangers pass with the passing of time and circuмstance.