Wow Neil, that is a wonderful story. God bless you mam. Of interest is that when I married my wife was a geo creationist. At that time I was a full blown intellectual helio-evolutionist. I put her illusion down to the fact I probably got a better education than she did or I was better able to understand helio-evoluition than she could. She based her belief on mere reasoning and refused to believe otherwise. Then we met an American who gave me a book on creation and the absurdity of evolution, especially the fact that every fossil ever found was complete. 'Life doesn't work without all the parts complete, finished and functioning' he said, 'so the evolution of something is pure simple nonsense.' They had to be created 'in all their substance, according to their kind' as the dogma says.  It took me a few minutes to see this clearly and I felt like a complete fool. Later, when, thank God, a man called Paul Ellwanger contacted me and sent me regular updates on the similar heliocentric fraud at his own expence, I was free of that worldwide fraud to deny God His ex nihilo crteation. There is no doubt the truth made me a better Catholic in my love for God. Now I see Him all the time in his creation as the dogma says I will. I watch many nature programmes and as the secrets of each creature is found, I see the perfection as having a divine planner. For example, the other day I watched a 'how its made' programme. They made shuttlecocks, using feathers. They then explained how the aerodynamics of a single swan feather is designed for perfect flight and they used such shaped feathers. In another I saw how the back of a certain insect had a skin that allowed it to pass through a substance that would kill others. The perfection of nature is absolute, each creature given a different ability to survive. No wonder Genesis said it was 'Good.' I watch the different cloud formations, some tiny some gigantic and see God putting beauty in the heavens above. Every few days, I get a different picture of the world with its mountains, valleys and plains on Google, every one more beautiful than the last. His perfections never end and each one reminds me of Him. And then I think of the billions who were mind-programmed into giving all this beauty to evolution, and I see how the Devil works.

Needless to say, my wife gets a constant laugh when I admit to my 'intellectual illusion.'

Finally, I too had correspondence from Paula Haigh. A friend who visited her in that home told me she quickly fell into dementia during her last two years of her life. And yes Neil, Catholicism can thank Paula and Paul for defending the Catholic doctrine on Creation.

I asked you what you meant. Is it now a problem for you to answer questions about what you said? I don't see how what I said was "amazing". We will be judged on everything we do or do not do. If someone were to spread errors about the Church in popular media, don't you think think there might be some accounting at death?

OK, maybe I was a bit too abrupt with you Stan.  So to backtrack, here's what I said: "Science says this.  Science says that.  Look at the history of science.  What it 'proves' today it "disproves" tomorrow and what it 'disproves' tomorrow it 'proves' the next day.  Science is true when it's true and false when it's false."  So just exactly what is it that you don't understand about that assertion?

As for your previous statement at December 22, 2018, 07:19:54 PM, "Perhaps, but that's assuming geocentrism were true. Which you have not shown," I would respond by saying that science cannot prove with any absolute certainty that geocentrism is true and neither I nor Sungenis have ever tried to establish any absolute proof of geocentrism via science.  In that regard, all we can do and have done is to point out various things which would be indicative of geocentrism via the natural sciences which Sungenis has docuмented in his written work to a great extent.  On the other hand I believe as does Sungenis that a traditional literal reading of Sacred Scripture does support an absolute certainty of geocentrism.  The Fathers of the Church and the Magisterium have been shown to "second the notion!"  You, unlike myself,  apparently do not accept geocentrism as being of the faith.  Sungenis in his writings as well as Cassini and myself in various threads on this forum have testified as to why we do hold that geocentrism is of the faith.

As for your my statement, "Now, if geocentrism is false, he [Sungenis] would have not only wasted 'most of his adult life', he would have even harmed the Church by misleading people, driving some people away from the Church, and giving others a false notion of the faith. And endangered his own salvation in the process," you don't see why that sounds "amazing" to me.  Perhaps, this will help you in understanding, if I were to say, "Now, if geocentrism is true, all those people who have taught it to be false have wasted all their time teaching it to be false and if they were Catholics they have even harmed the Church by misleading people, driving people away from the Church (such as the many people who may have concluded that since the Church got it wrong with Galileo and its interpretation of Scripture it must not be the true Church) and giving others a false notion of the faith."  In actuality, I certainly wouldn't say that and I thus remain amazed that you would say the reverse of it about Sungenis.  The point is that you apparently want to make Sungenis look bad, not so much in saying it directly, but in casting aspersions by way of casting these uncalled for doubts about his eternal salvation.  That I find not only amazing, but despicable. 

.

Why not? Seems legitimate to me.

.
What "seems legitimate" to you? The quote you're replying to has several subjects. "Why not" what?!?