Many have tried, and all have failed.
Men have devised all sorts of ingenious experiments that would demonstrate that the Earth physically moves through space, if such is the case. The experiments they designed involved lasers, mirrors, and other devices.
All such experiments shocked the authors by the results: no movement.
Many have tried, and all have failed.
Men have devised all sorts of ingenious experiments that would demonstrate that the Earth physically moves through space, if such is the case. The experiments they designed involved lasers, mirrors, and other devices.
All such experiments shocked the authors by the results: no movement.
Relative motion was Einstein's lie.Relativity is the secular bulwark for modernism and especially, moral decline. Nothing is certain for modern man. We are forbidden tradition, reality, and absolutes. We are taught semantics in order to ease the contradictions of natural law. This applies especially to Catholic dogmas. Everything is relative: a slippery "fact" set in scientific stone.
As one scientist interviewed in The Principle stated, it would be ridiculously easy to send a Michelson-Morley apparatus to the moon. Why haven't they done it?.
Bible says:.
EARTH DOES NOT MOVE.
I'm curious. What sort of experiment would demonstrate, to your satisfaction, that the earth moved?.
Or, if you were in a car train, how would you prove that the car or train is moving past the countryside, rather than the reverse?
.Oh brother. As if an earthquake moves the entire earth. If you read Scripture you'd know it says repeatedly that the earth is stationary, has a foundation and doesn't move around as modern science says, in four different directions through space.
Bible says:
THERE ARE NO EARTHQUAKES ------------- wait... actually the Bible doesn't say that.
Natural science is inferential. No one piece of info is going to prove something. Proofs are for ideal subjects like mathematics.
Since earthquakes were brought up, after an earthquake, the stars are in a slightly different position.
I would like to see the evidence for this. What size earthquake. What proof. Scientists have told us for years that we went to the moon, but it turns out they lied. Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proofs.
This suggests that earthquake is slightly affecting the earth's rotation. And this cause is local and reasonable according to our personal experiences with angular momentum.
It is impossible for earth to have rotation since Scripture predates and trumps anything science says. Scripture insists earth is fixed. And the Church officially condemned the proposition that the earth moves from its foundation.
How does a geocentrist view this? Do they say the earthquake causes the locations of the stars to change slightly? An earthquake on earth affects the distant stars in the universe? That just seems like causally backwards.
It seems even more curious to me when we're not talking about the stars, but about man-made spacecraft in the solar system. Consider the Pioneer anomaly. The Pioneer spacecraft was decelerating slightly differently than expected. (The best explanation is a small force from heat radiating from the spacecraft.) But the effect was very small, so careful measurements had to account for earthquakes, tide variations, and other earth-based events in determining the location of Pioneer. And there was a several hour delay in communications with Pioneer. So does a geocentrist say that Pioneer spacecraft changed in ways that predicted, by the delay time, events on earth? Isn't it more natural to say the these events affected earth's rotation, and so the earth-based observation of Pioneer?
My answer is the same. Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof. NASA tried to claim they sent a car into space. That has been proven to be a giant hoax and Elon Musk a fraud. Why should we believe them when they tell us things about "The Pioneer" spacecraft?
Natural science is inferential. No one piece of info is going to prove something. Proofs are for ideal subjects like mathematics.Answering this person is a waste of typing.
Since earthquakes were brought up, after an earthquake, the stars are in a slightly different position. This suggests that earthquake is slightly affecting the earth's rotation. And this cause is local and reasonable according to our personal experiences with angular momentum.
How does a geocentrist view this? Do they say the earthquake causes the locations of the stars to change slightly? An earthquake on earth affects the distant stars in the universe? That just seems like causally backwards.
It seems even more curious to me when we're not talking about the stars, but about man-made spacecraft in the solar system. Consider the Pioneer anomaly. The Pioneer spacecraft was decelerating slightly differently than expected. (The best explanation is a small force from heat radiating from the spacecraft.) But the effect was very small, so careful measurements had to account for earthquakes, tide variations, and other earth-based events in determining the location of Pioneer. And there was a several hour delay in communications with Pioneer. So does a geocentrist say that Pioneer spacecraft changed in ways that predicted, by the delay time, events on earth? Isn't it more natural to say the these events affected earth's rotation, and so the earth-based observation of Pioneer?
As one scientist interviewed in The Principle stated, it would be ridiculously easy to send a Michelson-Morley apparatus to the moon. Why haven't they done it?Because we cannot get to the moon.
Answering this person is a waste of typing.Apparently. But you always hope.
He does not accept the Bible says earth does NOT move.
>Answering this person is a waste of typing.Well, here is an opportunity for you to prove it, happenby.
>He does not accept the Bible says earth does NOT move.
Apparently. But you always hope.
Well, here is an opportunity for you to prove it, happenby.Been there done that throughout the FE pages on CI. Where's your proof you believe the Bible, and the Church, and the Fathers, that earth does not move?
Been there done that throughout the FE pages on CI. Where's your proof you believe the Bible, and the Church, and the Fathers, that earth does not move?What? I don't understand what you mean here.
What? I don't understand what you mean here..
I guess not.Good luck. But don't hold your breath.Been there done that throughout the FE pages on CI. Where's your proof you believe the Bible, and the Church, and the Fathers, that earth does not move?What? I don't understand what you mean here.
What? I don't understand what you mean here..
Good luck. But don't hold your breath.
I guess not.
Stanley does not believe the Bible where it says earth does NOT move.The nicest thing I can say at this point is this assumes facts not in evidence.
.
Quote from: Smedley Butler on Today at 02:42:24 PM (https://www.cathinfo.com/the-earth-god-made-flat-earth-geocentrism/no-scientific-experiment-can-prove-earth-moves-through-space/msg622920/#msg622920)QuoteStanley does not believe the Bible where it says earth does NOT move.
The nicest thing I can say at this point is this assumes facts not in evidence.
Stanley does not believe the Bible where it says earth does NOT move.Do you believe the Bible in the sense understood by the Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church? Are you Catholic?
The Roman Catholic Church condemned heliocentrism and called it "ALTOGETHER FALSE".Assumes facts not in evidence.
Scripture and Tradition are the two forms of revelation in the Church. Neither show earth is a globe but the majority of the Fathers show Scripture taught a flat earth. Math and science also prove the earth is incompatible with rotundity or movement or any of the other ridiculous notions spread by NASA and modern science.
Assumes facts not in evidence.Sir, I have posted my evidence from the Church, Fathers and Scripture in these threads for almost two years. It's up to you to study first and argue after you get the information. Yes, Catholic flat earthers condemn the pagan science of the Greeks as did the Fathers. If you want information, ask before condemnation and I will be happy to answer your questions.
If you're so sure of this, why not post your evidence from the Magisterium and from Scripture? As for the fathers, sure, some believed in a flat earth, but there were certainly globe earth fathers as well.
Science definitely does not currently support flat earth. Math has nothing to do with this except as a tool for the science.
Finally, you must realize that the unambiguously pagan thought of, say, China, was flat earth. Catholics, however, are heirs to Greek thought, which the Church recognized had some elements of truth and has used a lot. Is that the pagan globe science you're condemning?
Sir, I have posted my evidence from the Church, Fathers and Scripture in these threads for almost two years. It's up to you to study first and argue after you get the information. Yes, Catholic flat earthers condemn the pagan science of the Greeks as did the Fathers. If you want information, ask before condemnation and I will be happy to answer your questions.It's up to you to provide your evidence so I can understand YOUR thinking. I have not seen anything flat earth in catechisms, doctrinal manuals, and church docuмents, so by all appearances, FE is not something the Church teaches.
It's up to you to provide your evidence so I can understand YOUR thinking. I have not seen anything flat earth in catechisms, doctrinal manuals, and church docuмents, so by all appearances, FE is not something the Church teaches.
It's up to you to provide your evidence so I can understand YOUR thinking. I have not seen anything flat earth in catechisms, doctrinal manuals, and church docuмents, so by all appearances, FE is not something the Church teaches.Catechisms do not even discuss the form of the earth and certainly do not teach earth is a globe. So that concern is non existent. Not sure what a "doctrinal manual" is, but most of these will not discuss much on the subject, either. Church docuмents skim the subject somewhat but shine in their fullness when viewed in light of the teachings of Scripture and the Fathers. St. John Chrysostom, St. Jerome, Methodius, Lactanctius, Severian, Cosmos, and a whole host of Fathers and saints were flat earthers as their writings prove. Not one Father of the Church teaches earth is a globe using Scripture. Not one.
Catechisms do not even discuss the form of the earth and certainly do not teach earth is a globe. So that concern is non existent. Not sure what a "doctrinal manual" is, but most of these will not discuss much on the subject, either. Church docuмents skim the subject somewhat ...Which is what I was saying. I haven't seen any indication the Church has a doctrine about this, any more than the Church has a doctrine about the nature of clouds, the number of chromosomes in humans, the speed of light, or the vast majority of things under the field of science.
but shine in their fullness when viewed in light of the teachings of Scripture and the Fathers. St. John Chrysostom, St. Jerome, Methodius, Lactanctius, Severian, Cosmos, and a whole host of Fathers and saints were flat earthers as their writings prove. Not one Father of the Church teaches earth is a globe using Scripture. Not one.Not one? Even if that were true, which I rather doubt, would that matter? I bet not one Father of the Church taught about DNA, and yet DNA does exist.