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

Author Topic: Why Sungenis's Geocentrism model is wrong  (Read 5387 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Augustinus

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 91
  • Reputation: +21/-38
  • Gender: Male
Re: Why Sungenis's Geocentrism model is wrong
« Reply #45 on: March 30, 2017, 02:32:22 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Note to cassini: you do not need to type or paste a WALL OF TEXT to answer a simple question.
    So, now we have, from your very verbose response, that you do not believe the earth is rotating, and that you believe the sun is, in fact, rotating about the earth, along with all the rest of the "universe" in the ether.
    Therefore, you have proved my point:
    You accept the heliocentric distance to the sun of 93 million miles.
    Therefore, according to YOU, the sun is traversing a 584 million mile long circular path around the earth EVERY 24-hours.
    THAT is more absurd than a flat earth plane with the Firmament above, enclosing the earth from the waters of the great deep, with the sun and moon and stars circling above, could ever be.
    Again: draw a physical model of the south celestial pole and its relation to the North Pole AND explain our ability to circuмnavigate the world in relation to the south celestial pole.
    You COULD posit our land mass is within a dome that exceeds its diameter, and that the star fields spin on a central axis that becomes altered by perspective, but then you destroy circuмnavigation. You could posit a disc earth with continents radiating from the center, but you displace the South Pole. The only physical workable model is the sphere.
    The saints are few, but we must live with the few if we would be saved with the few. O God, too few indeed they are; yet among those few I wish to be!
    -St. Alphonsus Liguori. (The Holy Eucharist, 494)


    Offline Truth is Eternal

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1768
    • Reputation: +790/-1995
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Why Sungenis's Geocentrism model is wrong
    « Reply #46 on: March 30, 2017, 04:45:07 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Again: draw a physical model of the south celestial pole and its relation to the North Pole AND explain our ability to circuмnavigate the world in relation to the south celestial pole.
    You COULD posit our land mass is within a dome that exceeds its diameter, and that the star fields spin on a central axis that becomes altered by perspective, but then you destroy circuмnavigation. You could posit a disc earth with continents radiating from the center, but you displace the South Pole. The only physical workable model is the sphere.
    The horizon always rises to the eye level of the observer as altitude is gained, so you never have to look down to see it. If Earth were in fact a globe, no matter how large, as you ascended the horizon would stay fixed and the observer / camera would have to tilt looking down further and further to see it.
    "I Think it is Time Cathinfo Has a Public Profession of Belief." "Thank you for publicly affirming the necessity of believing, without innovations, all Infallibly Defined Dogmas of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church."


    Offline mw2016

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1351
    • Reputation: +765/-544
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Why Sungenis's Geocentrism model is wrong
    « Reply #47 on: March 31, 2017, 10:30:12 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Cassini - here is one your earth pics you posted from NASA. We'll be charitable and assume it is real...*cough*

    I use this one because it illustrates one of the things that brought me to flat earth.

    Can you see what it is?

    If you look at the curvature in this photo of only the Great Lakes, you will quickly notice that if you extend that curve the full 360 degrees, it will not nearly be large enough to encompass the earth.



    Game over. Earth is flat.

    http://www.fropky.com/jaw-dropping-images-our-planet-nasa-vt59792-20.html

    Offline Augustinus

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 91
    • Reputation: +21/-38
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Why Sungenis's Geocentrism model is wrong
    « Reply #48 on: April 01, 2017, 12:11:25 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Cassini - here is one your earth pics you posted from NASA. We'll be charitable and assume it is real...*cough*

    I use this one because it illustrates one of the things that brought me to flat earth.

    Can you see what it is?

    If you look at the curvature in this photo of only the Great Lakes, you will quickly notice that if you extend that curve the full 360 degrees, it will not nearly be large enough to encompass the earth.



    Game over. Earth is flat.

    http://www.fropky.com/jaw-dropping-images-our-planet-nasa-vt59792-20.html
    Fisheye?
    The saints are few, but we must live with the few if we would be saved with the few. O God, too few indeed they are; yet among those few I wish to be!
    -St. Alphonsus Liguori. (The Holy Eucharist, 494)

    Offline mw2016

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1351
    • Reputation: +765/-544
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Why Sungenis's Geocentrism model is wrong
    « Reply #49 on: April 01, 2017, 01:07:54 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Fisheye?
    Fisheyes make straight lines curved.
    So, you're saying the horizon line in the photo is actually straight, in reality.
    Which it actually is, of course - that's why it is called a horizon, because it IS horizontal.


    Offline Augustinus

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 91
    • Reputation: +21/-38
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Why Sungenis's Geocentrism model is wrong
    « Reply #50 on: April 01, 2017, 03:02:36 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Fisheyes make straight lines curved.
    So, you're saying the horizon line in the photo is actually straight, in reality.
    Which it actually is, of course - that's why it is called a horizon, because it IS horizontal.
    A fisheye effect working against a curve would have the effect of leveling the curve. Look at the panning sections, clarity visible distortion is taking place.
    The saints are few, but we must live with the few if we would be saved with the few. O God, too few indeed they are; yet among those few I wish to be!
    -St. Alphonsus Liguori. (The Holy Eucharist, 494)

    Offline klasG4e

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2307
    • Reputation: +1344/-235
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Why Sungenis's Geocentrism model is wrong
    « Reply #51 on: April 04, 2017, 01:21:34 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • mw2016

    Quote
    If you take the figure that Sungenis, Fr. P. and cassini accept for the distance to the sun, of 93 million miles, then one can calculate the distance the sun must travel going around the earth in a single 24 hour day.
    If earth is center, and the radius of this circuit (R) is the distance of 93 million miles, we can calculate the circuмference (C).
    The equation is C = 2 x pi x R
    C = 2 x 3.14 x 93 million miles
    C = 584 million miles
    584 million miles per day/ 24 hours in a day = 24.3 million MPH (speed of the sun)
    Does ANYONE here really believe the sun is moving at an eye-watering speed of 24.3 million MPH around the earth every day?
    Actually, the speed you refer to here is child's play for one who truly understands astrophysics and hence how it is possible astrophysics wise for the entire universe to go around the Earth every 24 hours.

    For all of you non-science types out there let's skip the science for a second and just perform a rather simple thought experiment.  I don't imagine that anyone familiar with a basketball would try to argue that it is impossible for it to make one complete rotation within, well let's say 24 hours.  Obviously we know it could do that in 24 seconds and even a good deal less than 24 seconds.  After all, seeing is believing right?  Well, let's imagine now that you were of the smallest theoretical -- according to science (OK, sorry I had to mention it) -- size, i.e., Planck Length.  If we assign a size of 10 to the power of 0 for a full grown human, the Planck Length would be 10 to the power of negative 35 and the size of the known universe would be 10 to the power of 27.  Earth would be 10 to the power of 7.

    You can play around with these sizes and a whole lot more using the model shown here: http://htwins.net/scale2/
    In my thought experiment we have two little fellows reduced to the size of Planck Length or perhaps the size of a proton or neutron at the size of ten to the negative 15 or a neutrino at 10 to the negative 24, or smaller yet a quark at 10 to the negative 22 and they are placed inside a twirling basketball or shall we say at the very center of our Earth (which is ten to the power 7).  Since they are so small they can only observe the outer limits of the basketball or the Earth and thus they believe it to be the outer limits of the known universe.  Now, let's listen in on their discussion.  One is arguing vehemently that it is absolutely absurd to even imagine that the universe they observe could be rotating around them every 24 hours while the other one calmly retorts that it is perfectly possible.

    God looks down upon our tiny beings and certainly hears our back and forth discussions on geocentrism vs. heliocentrism.  Since God is eternally omnipotent He could certainly create a universe that goes around the Earth once every 24 hours.  If he wanted to He could have the universe going around the Earth a million or a billion times every 24 hours for that matter.  No problem!


    Offline happenby

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2768
    • Reputation: +1077/-1637
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Why Sungenis's Geocentrism model is wrong
    « Reply #52 on: April 04, 2017, 02:18:01 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • A fisheye effect working against a curve would have the effect of leveling the curve. Look at the panning sections, clarity visible distortion is taking place.
    Oh. My. Goodness.  This is the effect of imprecision fostered in those who live on a globe.  They have no foundation and what is level is curved for them and their up is often also down.  They say all manner of things contradictory like this.  Fisheye lenses necessarily do not correct, but distort for the purposes of gaining more view.  Fisheye lenses do not level the curve, but permit a level to be seen only when viewing directly straight on.  Rather, fisheyes have been used for many years in order to curve the level.  Earth is not a globe.  


    Offline happenby

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2768
    • Reputation: +1077/-1637
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Why Sungenis's Geocentrism model is wrong
    « Reply #53 on: April 04, 2017, 02:26:25 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • mw2016
    Actually, the speed you refer to here is child's play for one who truly understands astrophysics and hence how it is possible astrophysics wise for the entire universe to go around the Earth every 24 hours.

    For all of you non-science types out there let's skip the science for a second and just perform a rather simple thought experiment.  I don't imagine that anyone familiar with a basketball would try to argue that it is impossible for it to make one complete rotation within, well let's say 24 hours.  Obviously we know it could do that in 24 seconds and even a good deal less than 24 seconds.  After all, seeing is believing right?  Well, let's imagine now that you were of the smallest theoretical -- according to science (OK, sorry I had to mention it) -- size, i.e., Planck Length.  If we assign a size of 10 to the power of 0 for a full grown human, the Planck Length would be 10 to the power of negative 35 and the size of the known universe would be 10 to the power of 27.  Earth would be 10 to the power of 7.

    You can play around with these sizes and a whole lot more using the model shown here: http://htwins.net/scale2/
    In my thought experiment we have two little fellows reduced to the size of Planck Length or perhaps the size of a proton or neutron at the size of ten to the negative 15 or a neutrino at 10 to the negative 24, or smaller yet a quark at 10 to the negative 22 and they are placed inside a twirling basketball or shall we say at the very center of our Earth (which is ten to the power 7).  Since they are so small they can only observe the outer limits of the basketball or the Earth and thus they believe it to be the outer limits of the known universe.  Now, let's listen in on their discussion.  One is arguing vehemently that it is absolutely absurd to even imagine that the universe they observe could be rotating around them every 24 hours while the other one calmly retorts that it is perfectly possible.

    God looks down upon our tiny beings and certainly hears our back and forth discussions on geocentrism vs. heliocentrism.  Since God is eternally omnipotent He could certainly create a universe that goes around the Earth once every 24 hours.  If he wanted to He could have the universe going around the Earth a million or a billion times every 24 hours for that matter.  No problem!

    Another ridiculous notion: God can do anything... so He does the ridiculous.  The extremes global earth defenders go to maintain the pagan theory of heliocentrism is an embarrassment--to them.  Scripture, the saints and the Church, not to mention the reverse testimony of the pagans, teach that earth is not a globe.    


    Offline mw2016

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1351
    • Reputation: +765/-544
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Why Sungenis's Geocentrism model is wrong
    « Reply #54 on: April 05, 2017, 05:51:38 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • Offline Nadir

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11675
    • Reputation: +6999/-498
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Why Sungenis's Geocentrism model is wrong
    « Reply #55 on: April 05, 2017, 06:08:21 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • That newspaper article if from 1922! So is there an update yet?
    Help of Christians, guard our land from assault or inward stain,
    Let it be what God has planned, His new Eden where You reign.


    Offline BumphreyHogart

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 689
    • Reputation: +226/-662
    • Gender: Male
    "there can be no holiness where there is disagreement with the pope" - Pope St. Pius X

    Today, only Catholics holding the sedevacantist position are free from the anguish entailed by this truth.

    Offline happenby

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2768
    • Reputation: +1077/-1637
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Why Sungenis's Geocentrism model is wrong
    « Reply #57 on: April 05, 2017, 08:12:52 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • That newspaper article if from 1922! So is there an update yet?

    Getting modern science to update truth regarding God's earth is like getting the Freemasons to expound on the veracity of the Catholic Church.  You can hope, but it'll be in vain.

    Offline Nadir

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11675
    • Reputation: +6999/-498
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Why Sungenis's Geocentrism model is wrong
    « Reply #58 on: April 05, 2017, 08:47:54 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Getting modern science to update truth regarding God's earth is like getting the Freemasons to expound on the veracity of the Catholic Church.  You can hope, but it'll be in vain.
    I'm not expecting "modern science" to give an update. Somebody must know what happened with the experiment! It's been 90 years! Somebody must be keeping records. Wouldn't the flat-earthers grab and hold such a lifeline?
    Help of Christians, guard our land from assault or inward stain,
    Let it be what God has planned, His new Eden where You reign.

    Offline mw2016

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1351
    • Reputation: +765/-544
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Why Sungenis's Geocentrism model is wrong
    « Reply #59 on: April 05, 2017, 09:15:10 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I'm not expecting "modern science" to give an update. Somebody must know what happened with the experiment! It's been 90 years! Somebody must be keeping records. Wouldn't the flat-earthers grab and hold such a lifeline?
    Wilbur Voliva never took the trip.
    I would LOVE for someone to do it.