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

Poll

What model do you believe most accurately describes the cosmos?

Modern Science:  earth revolves around barycenter of solar system as solar system moves through space, etc.
25 (25.3%)
Geocentrism:  earth is stationary, shaped like a globe, and the vast universe revolves around it
34 (34.3%)
Flat Earth:  earth is stationary, the surface we live on is flat, covered by a physical firmament, and the universe is closer than we're told
31 (31.3%)
Other
9 (9.1%)

Total Members Voted: 91

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 26

Author Topic: Cosmology Poll  (Read 63870 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline SperaInDeo

  • Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 343
  • Reputation: +269/-73
  • Gender: Male
Re: Cosmology Poll
« Reply #120 on: August 27, 2022, 10:07:15 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • I voted flat. About 75% certain on that. I have a major problem with being able to see “too far”. 


    I’m basically 100% on the firmament existing and the same for space being fake. Plus geocentrism, obviously. 
    Logged

    Offline Charity

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 885
    • Reputation: +444/-105
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Cosmology Poll
    « Reply #121 on: August 29, 2022, 04:30:30 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on August 26, 2022, 01:16:42 AM
    No one said he buys EVERYTHING NASA disseminates, just that he buys way too much of it.  He acknowledges a single instance of NASA fraud (where in point of fact entire books can be written about it that would be larger than his anti-FE book), and then euphemizes the fraud as a "foible".
    Can't you just give it a rest on Sungenis and NASA?  There's more to his life than the FE/G Question.  You sound as though you don't even come close to realizing that he openly rejects a huge amount of stuff that NASA spews out.  In general he recognizes it as an extremely evil,  lying enterprise.  If you don't believe me ask him yourself and let him personally prove it to you.
    Logged

    Offline Charity

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 885
    • Reputation: +444/-105
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Cosmology Poll
    « Reply #122 on: August 29, 2022, 04:34:01 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on August 26, 2022, 01:18:04 AM
    This putative "firmament" made of Planck particles is not capable of keeping water outside the earth.
    It's not intended to.  I would suggest you learn a bit more about Planck particles.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46911
    • Reputation: +27778/-5163
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Cosmology Poll
    « Reply #123 on: August 29, 2022, 05:00:32 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Charity on August 29, 2022, 04:34:01 PM
    It's not intended to.  I would suggest you learn a bit more about Planck particles.

    So then where is the "firmament" that keeps the waters out from the world?  When Sungenis was debating Skiba, and Skiba pointed out the firmament being solid, that's when Sungenis responded that in reality firmament refers to the infinitely dense fabric of space, etc.  So Sungenis clearly mean this to be an explanation for what the Fathers unanimously believed, that there was this solid firmament up there.

    Your assertion that it's "not intended do" is contrary to how Sungenis was presenting it in the debate.

    So "I would suggest you learn a bit more" about what Sungenis said in that debate.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46911
    • Reputation: +27778/-5163
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Cosmology Poll
    « Reply #124 on: August 29, 2022, 05:04:52 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Charity on August 29, 2022, 04:30:30 PM
    Can't you just give it a rest on Sungenis and NASA?  There's more to his life than the FE/G Question.  You sound as though you don't even come close to realizing that he openly rejects a huge amount of stuff that NASA spews out.  In general he recognizes it as an extremely evil,  lying enterprise.  If you don't believe me ask him yourself and let him personally prove it to you.

    Go ahead and read is 700+ page book, where he spends a great deal of it defending NASA against FE.  He rejects "a huge amount" only when it contradicts his theories, but then accepts whatever backs up his theories.  Of course, he says that both NASA and FE are wrong ... and only he is right and capable of deciding when NASA is wrong.  But if FEs argue that NASA is wrong, well, they're wrong about NASA being wrong.  :facepalm:
    Logged

    Offline Charity

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 885
    • Reputation: +444/-105
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Cosmology Poll
    « Reply #125 on: August 29, 2022, 05:45:17 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on August 29, 2022, 05:04:52 PM
    Go ahead and read is 700+ page book, where he spends a great deal of it defending NASA against FE.  He rejects "a huge amount" only when it contradicts his theories, but then accepts whatever backs up his theories.  Of course, he says that both NASA and FE are wrong ... and only he is right and capable of deciding when NASA is wrong.  But if FEs argue that NASA is wrong, well, they're wrong about NASA being wrong.  :facepalm:
    There you go again in speaking about "his theories."  When you put forth your assertions about FE why not refer to them as "my theories" or "Ladislaus' theories?"  You seem to do a lot of projecting in tearing into Sungenis because he doesn't buy into your sacred FE cow, even by such exorbitant claims as above where you state that he "says that both NASA and FE are wrong ...and only he is right and capable of deciding when NASA is wrong."  Here you've clearly gone into unwarranted hyperbolic overdrive attack.   In his entire FE book (have you read it yet?) Sungenis never said that!  
    Logged

    Offline Charity

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 885
    • Reputation: +444/-105
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Cosmology Poll
    « Reply #126 on: August 29, 2022, 05:48:13 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on August 26, 2022, 01:18:04 AM
    This putative "firmament" made of Planck particles is not capable of keeping water outside the earth.
    Says who?  Are you an "expert" on what would be the theoretical nature of a putative "firmament" made of Plank particles?
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46911
    • Reputation: +27778/-5163
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Cosmology Poll
    « Reply #127 on: August 29, 2022, 05:51:33 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Charity on August 29, 2022, 05:48:13 PM
    Says who?  Are you an "expert" on what would be the theoretical nature of a putative "firmament" made of Plank particles?

    1) you just conceded that it wasn't "meant to".  So now it IS meant to?

    2) this entire universe being filled with an infinite density of these things doesn't stop "bigger" matter from flowing around and moving in it ... it can't
    Logged

    Offline Charity

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 885
    • Reputation: +444/-105
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Cosmology Poll
    « Reply #128 on: August 29, 2022, 05:53:09 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on August 29, 2022, 05:00:32 PM

    So "I would suggest you learn a bit more" about what Sungenis said in that debate.
    I would suggest you debate Sungenis rather than singing to the choir in playing to your loyal FE fan base.
    Logged

    Offline Charity

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 885
    • Reputation: +444/-105
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Cosmology Poll
    « Reply #129 on: August 29, 2022, 06:11:09 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on August 29, 2022, 05:51:33 PM
    1) you just conceded that it wasn't "meant to".  So now it IS meant to?

    2) this entire universe being filled with an infinite density of these things doesn't stop "bigger" matter from flowing around and moving in it ... it can't
    I didn't say "meant to," but rather "intended to."  Nevertheless  you are right on that.  As for #2 I would hope (beyond hope?) that you would present your case directly to Sungenis.  Like Mark 79 (remember him?) the FE question is not really my bag.

    Logged

    Offline DigitalLogos

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8304
    • Reputation: +4718/-754
    • Gender: Male
    • Slave to the Sacred Heart
      • Twitter
    Re: Cosmology Poll
    « Reply #130 on: August 29, 2022, 06:30:18 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Charity on August 29, 2022, 05:53:09 PM
    I would suggest you debate Sungenis rather than singing to the choir in playing to your loyal FE fan base.
    I mean, if we're going to go that route, then no more discussions about any particular persons unless you are going to debate them directly. This includes priests, bishops, and other trads that one disagrees with. :facepalm:

    Disagree with +Barron? No talking about it here. Call him up and challenge him to a debate, Dimond-style. Francis? No criticisms. Send him an email, call the Vatican or seek out his Nuncio.

    Voicing criticisms of the works and positions of certain individuals is part-and-parcel of being on a forum. It is not calumny or detraction or anything of the sort to criticize the positions of someone who has made themselves a public figure on a subject. If Lad were actually making threads of complete falsities about Dr. Sugenis, then yes, you both would have a point. But just because you have a particular personal attachment to him, does not make his works beyond open criticism.
    Logged
    "Be not therefore solicitous for tomorrow; for the morrow will be solicitous for itself. Sufficient for the day is the evil thereof." [Matt. 6:34]

    "In all thy works remember thy last end, and thou shalt never sin." [Ecclus. 7:40]

    "A holy man continueth in wisdom as the sun: but a fool is changed as the moon." [Ecclus. 27:12]

    Offline Charity

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 885
    • Reputation: +444/-105
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Cosmology Poll
    « Reply #131 on: August 29, 2022, 07:32:41 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: DigitalLogos on August 29, 2022, 06:30:18 PM
    I mean, if we're going to go that route, then no more discussions about any particular persons unless you are going to debate them directly. This includes priests, bishops, and other trads that one disagrees with. :facepalm:

    Disagree with +Barron? No talking about it here. Call him up and challenge him to a debate, Dimond-style. Francis? No criticisms. Send him an email, call the Vatican or seek out his Nuncio.

    Voicing criticisms of the works and positions of certain individuals is part-and-parcel of being on a forum. It is not calumny or detraction or anything of the sort to criticize the positions of someone who has made themselves a public figure on a subject. If Lad were actually making threads of complete falsities about Dr. Sugenis, then yes, you both would have a point. But just because you have a particular personal attachment to him, does not make his works beyond open criticism.
    Dear Hero Member,

    You grossly overstate the case.  Where have I ever stated or even implied that Sungenis' works are beyond open criticism?

    I'm all for honest and constructive criticism and more than willing to accept less than that.  I merely suggested (not commanded) that Lad debate Sungenis since in my estimation the ex-seminarian comes across as a strongly opinionated know it all when it comes to FE, the exact same thing he would have us believe Sungenis is when it comes to FE.   Sure, I admit to goading the Numero 2 poster in all of CathInfo Kingdom, but hey then again Sungenis doesn't bite.  I don't think he even growls or snarls especially in a debate.

    P.S. Funny meme, but it's a bit of a stretch.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46911
    • Reputation: +27778/-5163
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Cosmology Poll
    « Reply #132 on: August 29, 2022, 08:28:28 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Charity on August 29, 2022, 05:53:09 PM
    I would suggest you debate Sungenis rather than singing to the choir in playing to your loyal FE fan base.

    I figure that I'm debating Sungenis groupees here on the forum.  If I were "singing to the choir", I wouldn't be spending most of this thread going back and forth with you.
    Logged

    Offline Tradman

    • Supporter
    • ***
    • Posts: 1355
    • Reputation: +863/-287
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Cosmology Poll
    « Reply #133 on: August 29, 2022, 09:41:36 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Charity on August 29, 2022, 04:34:01 PM
    It's not intended to.  I would suggest you learn a bit more about Planck particles.


    Planck was dabbling in eugenics and did research on living test subjects from nαzι cσncєnтrαтισn cαмρs! He was a nαzι precursor to the group that started NASA. That automatically makes his theories suspect at best. That Sungenis even considers Planck theory whatsoever is pretty sick.   

    Quote from Planck: "The belief in miracles must retreat step by step before relentlessly and reliably progressing science and we cannot doubt that sooner or later it must vanish completely.[42]"


    Noted historian of science John L. Heilbron characterized Planck's views on God as deistic.[43] Heilbron further relates that when asked about his religious affiliation, Planck replied that although he had always been deeply religious, he did not believe "in a personal God, let alone a Christian God."[44] 


    Planck made many substantial contributions to theoretical physics, but his fame as a physicist rests primarily on his role as the originator of quantum theory,[5] which revolutionized human understanding of atomic and subatomic processes. In 1948, the German scientific institution Kaiser Wilhelm Society (of which Planck was twice president) was renamed Max Planck Society (MPG). The MPG now includes 83 institutions representing a wide range of scientific directions.

    During World War II, some of the weapons and medical research performed by the KWI was connected to fatal human experimentation on living test subjects (prisoners) in nαzι cσncєnтrαтισn cαмρs.[5] In fact, members of the KWI of Anthropology, Human Heredity and Eugenics, particularly Otmar von Verschuer received preserved Jєωιѕн bodies and body parts such as eyes for study and display from Auschwitz.[6] These were provided by his pupil Dr. Josef Mengele from prisoners in his charge. He specialized in examining twins, and their genetic relationship, especially for their eye colour and other personal qualities.[7] As the American forces closed in on the relocated KWI, the organization's president, Albert Vögler, an industrialist and early nαzι Party backer, committed ѕυιcιdє, knowing he would be held accountable for the group's crimes and complicity in war crimes.[8]

    Logged

    Offline DigitalLogos

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8304
    • Reputation: +4718/-754
    • Gender: Male
    • Slave to the Sacred Heart
      • Twitter
    Re: Cosmology Poll
    « Reply #134 on: August 29, 2022, 09:58:29 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Did you really just break out the cσncєnтrαтισn cαмρ narrative to discredit Planck? :laugh2:
    Logged
    "Be not therefore solicitous for tomorrow; for the morrow will be solicitous for itself. Sufficient for the day is the evil thereof." [Matt. 6:34]

    "In all thy works remember thy last end, and thou shalt never sin." [Ecclus. 7:40]

    "A holy man continueth in wisdom as the sun: but a fool is changed as the moon." [Ecclus. 27:12]
    Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 26
    « previous next »