PDA

View Full Version : The Earth is NOT Moving!


Pages : [1] 2 3

rushdoony
12-12-2004, 05:32 PM
There is Something about Space that THEY ("the Illdarkinati) Don't Want You to Know .......

The Earth is NOT Moving!!

The Sun, Moon and Stars are going around a stationary Earth just as observed and just as the Bible says,

(Sun 24hrs...... Moon 24hrs 50min 28sec...... Stars 23hrs 56min 4sec...... all east-to-west).
More:
(Moving-Earth DECEPTION!!) (http://sites.google.com/site/earthdeception)

Daniel
12-12-2004, 07:25 PM
Is this an example of a Christian mind?

rushdoony
12-12-2004, 08:35 PM
To: Daniel

What does that mean?

Somebody posts 2 x 2 = 4 and then I say
Is that an example of a Christian mind?
What has that got to do with anything?

You want me executed because I'm disagreeing with your heliocentric brainwashing. OK what about the reverse, you should then be executed when you find out you are wrong and I was right. Unfortunately I would be dead under your rules even though I'd like to do it myself.

I am kicking you off this website because you gave an irrelevant response to a serious topic. Never come back. Are you going to follow my orders or not?

zanyzan311
12-12-2004, 09:16 PM
Hmmm... interesting stuff. I'ma look into it more. I dont know if i'm sold but as conspiracy nuts, we be should open to ALL possibilities.

rushdoony
12-12-2004, 09:33 PM
You should'nt be sold on only a few paragraphs from me. That's why I mentioned the two expert websites. Thanks for replying though.

Daniel
12-12-2004, 09:42 PM
Rush,
your words speak too your true character.

nohope187
12-12-2004, 10:11 PM
Hey Rushdy, fixedearth is a great website. They got alot of stuff over there too about NASA's virtual reality ventures. And Zan, that's a cool quote from Mudvayne. :-P

psholtz
12-13-2004, 04:36 AM
When the helicopter launches off from NYC, it launches w/ a radial velcotiy equal to the spin of the earth itself (if you choose to solve the problem in that frame of reference). For this reason, it continues "spinning" at the same rate as the surface of the earth underneath it (since there is no other force that would counteract or retard its motion in this respect).

Suppose you were on a speeding train, and jumped off. Inbetween the time you left the train, and when you hit the ground, you would be moving "laterally" at the same velocity as the train. You wouldn't just suddenly "stop moving" (i.e., b/c the surface of the earth isn't moving in frame of reference) just b/c you left the train (at least, not until you hit the ground).

Foucault's Pendulum proves that the earth is rotating.. you can use the pendulum to measure the rate of rotation, provided you know your latitude:

http://plus.maths.org/issue9/xfile/

Ahmad
12-13-2004, 05:48 AM
Peace all,

God sent us a proven final testament and it offers final answers to our questions. Quran confirms and supersedes the Torah and the Bible.

Quran was revealed around 1400 years ago, yet it confirms the movement of earth, as well as the bigbang:


From the authorized english translation of Quran by the messenger of the covenant Rashad Khalifa Ph.D:


1-Earth's Movement: A Scientific Miracle

[27:88] When you look at the mountains, you think that they are standing still. But they are moving, like the clouds. Such is the manufacture of GOD, who perfected everything. He is fully Cognizant of everything you do.


2- The Big Bang Theory Confirmed*

[21:30] Do the unbelievers not realize that the heaven and the earth used to be one solid mass that we exploded into existence? And from water we made all living things. Would they believe?

[21:31] And we placed on earth stabilizers, lest it tumbles with them, and we placed straight roads therein, that they may be guided.

[21:32] And we rendered the sky a guarded ceiling. Yet, they are totally oblivious to all the portents therein.

madkhao
12-13-2004, 01:31 PM
A certified pothead once said to me when I was driving and she was in the passenger seat and there was a fly hovering between us,

"Shouldn't this fly be at the back of the car since the car is moving forward?"

I don't have an answer, this forum just happened to remind me of that moment.

rushdoony
12-13-2004, 02:21 PM
dear madcow or madkhao, or whatever,

If a certified pothead could not answer the question, and you could not answer the question, then what does that make you?

It's a nice defamatory trick, that ad hominem attack that you pulled. But it's irrelevant to the issue whether she was an Einstein or a pothead.

The fly was at the back window until the car reached 60 miles per hour. Then moved to the front and hovered.
If the fly were to be outside it would be left behind just like the earths atmosphere would be left behind if it were really moving at the fantastic speeds around the sun and/or milky way that heliocentrists claim.

diamond
12-13-2004, 04:43 PM
Ever heard of the theory of relativity and relative motion? You can always keep a fixed earth as a frame of reference and then formulate your observations based on it. You can also keep a fixed sun as a frame of reference and then formulate a new set of observations. It just so happens that the heliocentric observations look more logical than the geocentric observations.

It's all about perception...nothing to do with religion!!!

Perhaps it's a good lesson on subjectivity of perception....if a person is preconditioned to look upon things in a certain way, then he can always find "evidences" that support his claim. That's probably why a Biblical observation and a Koranic observation seem equally valid to the respective people. There's a saying that if a person wears red glasses, everything appears red, even those that are not.

Perhaps we should all be asking ourselves what kind of colored glasses we are wearing, rather than how the "reality" appears to us. And I really think we should quit fighting over religious paradigms and focus more on developing more faith in the Divine Source and universal love towards all beings.

marypopinz
12-13-2004, 06:46 PM
Diamond,a gem of a statement.

Right on! Mary XXX

madkhao
12-13-2004, 07:10 PM
tsk! tsk! touchy touchy rushdoony


If a certified pothead could not answer the question, and you could not answer the question, then what does that make you?


It makes me a person who could not answer a potheads question.


It's a nice defamatory trick, that ad hominem attack that you pulled. But it's irrelevant to the issue whether she was an Einstein or a pothead.


You are absolutely correct, her question was not relative to her being an einstein or a pothead it was relative to me calling her that because that's who and what she is.

When you chose to read it as a defamatory trick pulled against you, THAT was relative to the contempt you felt for the posts before mine.

And THAT's why I'm going to let this slide.

I am delighted, by the way, that you were able to figure out the correct pronunciation of my name.

rushdoony
12-13-2004, 07:30 PM
Ya madcow ( you don't mind if I call you madcow do you? ) you're probably right, sorry. You're very perceptive too!

madkhao
12-13-2004, 07:47 PM
no hard feelings rushdoony, i luv ya :-)
and don't feel weird about that cuz I'm a madheifer if you know what I mean :-)

Jimbo
12-13-2004, 08:10 PM
As everyone else explained, the reason the helicopter doesn’t fly off to California, when hovering over NY for 4 hrs, is the same reason why if you jumped inside a commercial jetliner you don’t hit the back of the plane at a few hundred miles per hour. Everything inside the plane has become part of that relative frame. The entire frame is moving together, including the coffee inside the cups.

Another good example is the one where a group of people go inside an airplane that has its windows sealed, so that you can’t look outside (at the earth frame of reference). Then the airplane takes a vertical dive towards the ground. Now, the plane & the passengers are all falling together, except now instead of feeling that you are falling towards the earth, since your frame of reference is the inside of the plane, you instead feel, or are under the perception, that you are “weightless”. During the fall, you can literally push yourself away from the inside of the plane & fly as if you were experiencing almost no gravity whatsoever.

You might want to check w/ Richard C. Hoagland (www.enterprisemission.com). He used to be a very well respected scientist at NASA. But now that he doesn’t work for them & he is just an independent researcher, he constantly finds fault w/ a lot of the NASA findings, where he claims they are either leaving things out or flat out lying about it, he is very much repudiated. However, he talks about the rotation of the earth around the sun not being an even 365 days a year. The way science accounts for this unevenness is by adding leap-seconds to our year. You can read about it here (search for “earth’s rotation”),

The "Age of Horus" Dawns Or The Time is Now ...
http://www.enterprisemission.com/millenn5.htm

I personally believe that Richard is one of the very few scientists around our planet that actually tells it like it is. I believe he stands for truth & he wants to share his gained knowledge & findings w/ the rest of humanity.

Urzig_grain
12-13-2004, 08:17 PM
I'm tolerant of a lot of what most would consider fringe ideas but this is just silly. In order for us to have credibility on this forum posts like these should be deleted or at least frowned upon my the admin. Davai man !! High School Pyshics!!! The theory of Gravity fits. We're in no position to shake pillars as deep as the frickin theory of gravity and models of astrophysics. And we can do little more than throw out the dead end reality of different perspectives. That said... heck anything is possible and it is a THEORY of gravity but there are many more important and tangible topics. In response to the Mohammadan (I apologize I just love using that), there is a lot of extraordinary information and interesting models going on in the Koran and lesser books of Mohammadanism and they are valid points to study. The jump from valid to the supreme complete and final word of god, God, or that charlatan Yahwe is insubstantiated.
Dance friends :-D

Also anyone out there know about this... I read somewhere in the Koran or Hadiths that only god will ever know the gender of a fetus in the womb but now we can ?? Anyone know the source of this so I can quote it to my Mohammadan friends?

666
12-13-2004, 08:19 PM
Quote
----------------------------------------------
You are absolutely correct, her question was not relative to her being an einstein
----------------------------------------------

Here is another example of NWO thinkspeak.

" being an Einstein "

as good as Einstein was, next to Nikola Tesla,

Einstein is a retarded idiot ... before you

disagree, research what Nikola Tesla did for

you ... research what he was purported to have

done that is being supressed ... research

his philosophy and then compare Einstein to

Tesla ... I literally burned my posters of

Einstein and will teach my children to study

Tesla and FU*K Einstein even though I am

Jewish.

rushdoony
12-13-2004, 08:48 PM
Urzig_grain

As Bugs Bunny once said " Of course you know this means war"
Now you are going to get it.
Your kind is what the NWO is made of. You bring in no good response except to label a countervailing opinion with merit, privately acknowleged as valid by several other famous scientists who are afraid of the establishment or losing their paychecks/pensions if they speak out, you label it only silly.
You want the admin. to suppress/delete
unpopular information. You are NWO material. YOU GET OFF THIS WEBSITE FOREVER! DO YOU HERE ME?
You do not have one ten-trillionth of the knowledge of Dr. Neville Jones, Oxford scholar or Marshall Hall
who's websites I quoted.
For you to diss those two websites
www.midclyth.supanet.com and www.fixedearth.com is the height of arrogance. You are a nothing, an intellectual
ant compared to Marshall Hall and Neville Jones of the two websites I quoted.

Good Riddance

rushdoony
12-13-2004, 09:36 PM
Jimbo,

It is not valid to compare a closed system with an open system. A valid comparison would have the passengers outside standing on the planes wings with their feet super-glued to the planes structure, while smoking a cigarette. The smoke ( like the Earths atmosphere ) would be left behind
just like the Earths atmosphere would be left behind if it were really orbiting the sun at 67,000 mph and orbiting the milky way at 500,000+ mph.

Also I should not have brought gravity into this discussion because it is not relevant to the lateral position of the copter in relation to the Earth. Gravity just prevents the copter from gaining lots of altitude while hovering over New York or , if the Earth were rotating, on its trip to Los Angeles. The copters upward thrust would neutralise the downward pull of gravity so it would be stationary at a fixed distance, say enough to clear any mountains, above the Earth. We are just debating about the rotation or non-rotation of the Earth.

thokhanCep
12-14-2004, 01:28 AM
If you visit this website and post or try to fight for a belief YOU are already a glitch in the matrix. I would have never thought about this non rotation of the Earth maybe in the dark ages you could get guillotined for saying such things. Is the earth flat? Have you ever been in outer space beyond the atmosphere? Have you heard of planet X? Are there UFO's that are not man made with aliens on them traveling the regions of space? If yes to any of above questions? Do you have hard evidence to back up your claims?
I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with this post its like the water that goes down a toilet counter-clock wise south of the equator. What if that was a grand hoax? I have never been south of the equator to experience this and therefore have to rely on someone elses claims.
Which comes to the point of this website a Forum where we can post a belief and see who says what. I'd say hold off the personal attacks and attack the opinion. This allows constructive criticism and might open both eyes of the aggressor and the defender.

marypopinz
12-14-2004, 08:09 AM
Here! Here!

Mary XXX

rushdoony
12-14-2004, 09:40 AM
Mary,

Your cheers from the peanut gallery are admirable, but insufferable.
Actually, and I think I can speak for everyone here, they are irritating beyond belief.

Did you read my post #21
before you clapped for post #17?

I'm not a scientist but can still figure out some
relevant and logical questions and responses
to make concerning physics and so can you.

Best, RJ Rushdoony.

PS. If I recall correctly Mary Poppins has a special umbrella that can take her 200 metres up into the sky. See any movement from up there?
I hope you don't have one of those cheap, short tin-made umbrellas that could collapse and bring one into a rapid freefall.

marypopinz
12-14-2004, 09:43 AM
Rush,

Save your poo-poo comments for someone who cares.
I find you to be most negative at times.

Have no fear. I will not respond in future to your jibes... you bore me.

mary XXX

rushdoony
12-14-2004, 09:50 AM
Ditto,

Good. "Get out and stay out"! ( sound of door slamming ).
.. ( sound of door opening one more time )
"And why don't you take off about 60 pounds also, and get that damn shopping cart off my property"! ( sound of door slamming again )

rushdoony
12-14-2004, 01:41 PM
P Scholtz

Here is all the proof you need to know the Earth is geocentric and geostatic.
The Earths atmosphere would be left behind if
the Earth were travelling at 67,000 mph around the sun and 500,000+ mph around the milky way.
Just like a comets tail being left behind, it's the same with the Earth and its atmosphere.
The Earths atmosphere is a gas and the Earth is a solid so it is impossible for them to be attached. With your own eyes and hands you can see and feel to know that they are not attached in any way.
You do not believe what your own senses tell you because you are following the herd instict.
You do not hear the truth from NASA otherwise their 20,000 employees x $80,000 per year would vanish and they would have to go back to their home towns hanging around the video arcade and smoking pot just like mentor Carl Sagann used to do.

marypopinz
12-14-2004, 02:45 PM
Rush loonie...

Dittums...

If I lost 60 pounds, I would only weigh 60 pounds. You like anorexia, idiot?

Shopping cart... better men than you have picked through recyclables to provide for their families.

I hope you don't have children.

Ever read a book called small worlds, Einstein? It's quantum physics and it is more interesting than anything you could ever hope to proclaim as your own thoughts.

Your door must be broken... I just waltzed straight back in.

Don't hate loony, appreciate.

I guess you support Bush and his silence of the peanut gallery known as democracy and free speech.

Grow up man and get a life. Raed a book and learn to be civil. Ecology: you're a part of it. Stop being so damn poisonous. Again, grow up!


XOXOXOXOXOXXOXO

marypopinz
12-14-2004, 02:52 PM
Loony tune.

I am going to re-read your arguments and challenge your theories with my mind and my words. I was just watching the conversation, to see where your "logic" led.

Are you prepared to be challenged oh poisonous one?

Mary XXX

marypopinz
12-14-2004, 03:12 PM
Loonie man.

I read everything you wrote in this string again. You defended the mind of Dr. Jones and do you have one of your own?

Not an original thought did you express. Poison was the main just of your wording.

What those people of that site are talking about is an interesting perspective. You have obviously taken it as gospel. Good for you.

Play nice now.

Mary XXXXXXX

marypopinz
12-14-2004, 03:19 PM
Loony,

I'll be poppin in here and there just to remind you that a

"spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down!"

You are not going to get anyone to see your perspective, as valid as it may or may not be if you are unable to defend and debate and oppose to criticise and defame.

Play nicely, please. Don't be mean. It's not nice!"


Sending you loads of hugs and kisses

Mary XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:

rushdoony
12-14-2004, 08:12 PM
psholtz,

You say that Faucaults Pendulum ( FP ) proves that the Earth is rotating.
But the FP went haywire when the moon and sun lined up with the Earth (solar eclipse ).
So that means that the FP's movements are the result of the position and pull from the sun and moon on the Earth and have nothing to do with the pretended rotation of the Earth. During the eclipse both forces were concentrated on the Earth at the same time and exerted that extra strong pull that had that dramatic effect on the pendulum.
Also did you ever consider that the orbiting sun could be having and varying an electromagnetic influence on the Earth and the FP?
Also I don't believe that all these top scientists cannot explain the behavior of the FP during the solar eclipse. More likely is that they know what the experiment proves - that the sun orbits the Earth - and they are suppressing this information. Well this is a conspiracy website isn't it?
And now maybe I better hide in the woods because have you heard about the NASA assassination squad
conspiracy theory? I don't believe it though it's too wacky. Gotta go just heard footsteps com...

rushdoony
12-14-2004, 10:03 PM
Dear Julie Andrews,

Hey 120 pounds -that ain't too bad.
But tell me, Has your age passed your chest size yet? BADABING BADABANG BADABOOM
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT

But seriously Mary, sorry about being so hard on you, in fact I reread carefully the comment or thread that you were agreeing with and it turns out that you were just agreeing with a just or righteous statement, that people should stick to topics and not make personal attacks. I think I was maybe misinterpreting his intentions, I thought it was a personal attack against me.
I'm still not really sure.
And most of the off topic comments I make are just for fun and shouldn't be taken too seriously, sometimes I'm just looking to provoke and incite a response.

Best Wishes and Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious

nohope187
12-14-2004, 10:13 PM
I got yer back on this one, Rushdy. Okay, everyone, gather around for the simple answer.
When you see the sun RISE or SET, that's exactly what it's doing or do ya'll not believe what you see with your own eyes?

nohope187
12-14-2004, 10:18 PM
Now with that kind of reasoning, you must come to the conclusion that saying,"the earth revolves around the sun" is like saying,"2+2=5". end of case.

billiard
12-15-2004, 02:40 AM
just a thought rush but can you imagine the velocity the sun would have to be traveling at to go around the earth every 24 hrs? makes 67000 mph look very slow .let's see ...a journey the earth makes in a year you say the sun makes in one day ... that's 365 x 67000 gee that's 25,455,000 mph. that's more than 25 million mph ... that figure alone gives me great doubts on your theory .sorry .

rushdoony
12-15-2004, 09:30 AM
Billiard,

If you were God would it be possible for you to make the sun travel at 4% of the speed of light?

Mr_Shady
12-15-2004, 09:55 AM
Well now, if this thread doesn't look like a diversion from the truth, then I don't know what is.

Looks as if the thread starter is simply overjoyed at the fact that he's causing division on the board with a topic that DOES NOT MATTER.

Seriously, people. This thread is now 4 pages long. Other than the thread on Christianity, it's the longest one on this site. And what's it about? Whether or not the earth revolves around the sun. As if that's an erstwhile conversation while other, more important issues are going on at this minute.

My recommendation, lock this thread and any subsequent, insubstantial threads started by the OP. It almost looks as if he's a disinformationist looking to divide us and divert our attention from the more important issues.

Mr. Shady

rushdoony
12-15-2004, 11:05 AM
Mr.Shady,

You won't get away with suppressing the truth.
It seems to be a very popular topic and is generating a lot of interest. People are not forced to respond. You are jealous because your threads and ideas are unpopular , disinteresting and boring. You are the equivilent of a Statist book burner.
Why do you want to suppress?
That is very wierd.
This is a very important foundational topic. If Copernicanism falls then it trips a series of dominoes that cause Darwinism then Marxism then Freudism to fall, - all NWO/Satans lies. But we need the foundation to fall first and that is Copernicanism.
You are definitely one of Satans helpers and your name of Shady proves it.

www.midclyth.supanet.com
www.fixedearth.com

marypopinz
12-15-2004, 12:28 PM
Dear Shady, I like what I have read from your thoughts. I appreciate your perspective. It makes a lot of sense to me.

Rush, bullying will get you no where but alone. Give up that nasty spirit of attacking people when anyone dares to question your opinion.

It makes you look like the dufus holding tightly to the earth is flat syndrome.

In defense of Dufus Roony. There is a question that begs to be asked...

If the old way we used to look at the atom with a nucleus and concentric rings, protons, neutrons and electrons is by far out-dates by quantum physics and the quark, etc... It is a whole new ball game in the atomic world, moving in simultaneous directions of double spin.

Shroedinger's cat is a most interesting principle and book to read; and that double slit experiment where anticipated results effected actual experiment results? Food for thought. Is it a correct assumption, that our solar model may be also outdated?

I like rush for bringing up this "lunacy".

I took an apple and placed a sticker on it for earth and nutty Nazi Scotia. I also took a lemon for the sun and a tomato for the moon.

An experiment.

Observations from earth:
1) the sun rises in the east and sets in the west. This determines rotational direction and not necessarily the axis or who is moving. Try it each way.
2) there are seasons where not only duration of light but intensity of heat are altered. Sometimes, are we closer to the sun?
3) it is summer in Australia at Christmas-time, when it is winter and it is cold in Nazi Scotia
4) sometimes the moon appears larger and therefore closer
5) sometimes the moon appears farther away and smaller
6) sometimes the moon blocks out the sun, causing a solar eclipse
7) the moon appears in quarters and halves and such

Try and figure that one out.

Isn't God wonderful? Our perception is just that, our perception. We can focus on the really big picture, the creation of our world and how it works, or we can focus on the really small picture, ourselves, our communities and what we can do.

Sometimes, the big questions hold answers about ourselves as everything is realtive. Loony has a right to question and discuss and tirade... it won't win him many enthusiasts, nor converts.

He has a right to distract. Don't let him distract you.

Conclusion, I think that who designed this miracle was a wondrous being named God.

Peace Mary XXX

rushdoony
12-15-2004, 02:27 PM
Marypopins,

Oh now I see what's really happening.
The thread that I started is in danger of surpassing in number of hits the one that
Mary started and THATS why she is trying to ruin the discussion here. It's nothing but rants and spinny talk by her, a popularity contest to see who can post the most and get 5 stars.

She even agrees with the one who wanted my topic pulled. If you FORCE people not to discuss this topic then that is censorship. Now we know the type of person she is.
Now I know what's going on.

I have a good mind to make a complaint to the administrator if this defamation ( Doofus etc. ) continues. It's all there for Henry to see.

My wish is that Mary would stay off the thread I started but since she won't do that then stop with the namecalling and false associations like with the flat earth comment. The Earth is spherical and you know that the topic here is the non-movement of the Earth.

www.midclyth.supanet.com
www.fixedearth.com

marypopinz
12-15-2004, 03:48 PM
Oh my, Mr. Shady, please accept my apology.

Rush toonie, I didn't even bother to read most of your narrow minded opinions of your last attack, I skimmed.

Goood luck to you in seeking the truth.

You are not my cup of tea. You are far too aggressive too notice I actually was defending you as that you may be onto something...

I'm so happy not to be of your nature.

Complain to Henry. Wah, wah, wah.

So long chum, I won't bother with you again. You are apparently not of any kind of mind other than poison.

God bless you
Mary XXX

P.S. Do you really think it's a popularity contest here? Is that what you are here for? Notoriety for someone else's thoughts?

When you produce some of your own, I probably won't bother to look as I don't dance with the devil... I walk away.

Mary XXX

N.B. Rush Toonie? Did you try the experiment or was it beyond your comprehension?

:-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D I guess it is your thread just like it is their world... not open for discussion. You should seek help regarding apparent paranoia. The lunacy I quoted was meant to refer that people thought the man who said the earth was round to be a lunatic. The reference being, maybe people here think what you are suggesting is crazy,and you might be telling the truth. AND when we have been lied to by our government through our education system and what we are told to believe is science, absolute truth, we must question everything.

Rush was right to bring this question to this forum. He is wrong to be so poisonous. Lighten up dude, we're on your side. We're questioning too. If you dish it out, you have to be able to take it, so stop your whining.

billiard
12-16-2004, 12:21 AM
i think rushie is a kid with a "it's all about me" attitude . he can't handle anyone questioning any of his opinions , resorts to name calling and other insulting ugliness , is afraid of others appearing smarter or more interesting than himself , and when all else fails threatens to "tell the teacher" . you wouldn't be such a jerk if you'd listen to something other than the sound of your own voice . no one is suppressing you but i wish you'd either shut up or go away . either one is fine . and by the way i also think your theory is stupid .

rushdoony
12-16-2004, 10:09 AM
Here are the two sites that the truth suppressors don't want you to see:

www.fixedearth.com
www.midclyth.supanet.com

rushdoony
12-16-2004, 05:13 PM
Rushdoony dead

Vallecito, California — Rousas John Rushdoony, the "father of Christian Reconstructionism," and the founder of Christian home-schooling movement, died of prostate cancer on February 8 at the age of 84.
Rushdoony also founded the Chalcedon Institute and penned, in longhand, many books, including the influential The Institutes of Biblical Law.

Rushdoony taught that every aspect of society should be based upon Biblical law, which includes death by stoning for practicing homosexuals. His work greatly influenced the political agenda of the Religious Right.

12-16-2004, 11:34 PM
In spite of a world persuaded otherwise, Biblical cosmology stands just as impregnable in the 21st century as it did in 1600 AD. The Apollonian Model particularly shows the Earth at the center of the universe with a band of stars all around. Inside the misnamed "solar" system all the planets and the sun and the moon and the stars orbit the Earth, (The Earth is not a planet...which word means "wanderer" and--like "solar" system and capitalizing the planet's names and using the small "e" for Earth--are all just clever little indoctrination tools).

In short, the sun, moon, and stars are actually doing precisely what everyone throughout all history has seen them do. We do not believe what our eyes tell us because we have been taught a counterfeit system which demands that we believe what has never been confirmed by observation or experiment. That counterfeit system demands that the Earth rotate on an "axis" every 24 hours...at a speed of over 1000 MPH at the equator. No one has ever, ever, ever seen or felt such movement (nor seen or felt the 67000MPH speed of the Earth's alleged orbit around the sun...or its 500,000 MPH alleged speed around a galaxy...or its retreat from an alleged "Big Bang" at over 670,000,000 MPH! ).

nohope187
12-16-2004, 11:41 PM
Well hey, the Earth does move... when it's quaking. :-P hahahaaaaaaa!!!

marypopinz
12-17-2004, 12:25 AM
Anon Dude,

When you fly in a plane, do you feel like you are going that fast? Your body adjusts to the speed. Take off sucks you back into your seat and somehow you fly in time with the plane. Does being inside the earth's atmosphere qualify as the same idea?

Just a thought?

whoah! Fast ride, dude

XXX

thokhanCep
12-17-2004, 01:23 AM
I just don't know , you know?
Is there anyway to justify any of these posts?
Do we all need to be astronauts and go into outer space?
I know NASA is masonic ... I don't think we have been to the moon.
Imagine this , art imitates life imitates art.
Here's a favourite quote of mine:
"I'm trapped in a deadly video game, with just one man" the GZA Genuis from the Wu Tang Clan
Now I am not getting into reincarnation but sometimes life feels like a videogame or vice versa.
Video games have glitches. The program/code wasn't created all that well.
Life we have people with handicaps ... Was their program/code not created well?
Life and computers. We have the Human genome project. Check it out:
http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/home.shtml
Project goals were to
identify all the approximately 20,000-25,000 genes in human DNA,
determine the sequences of the 3 billion chemical base pairs that make up human DNA,
store this information in databases,
improve tools for data analysis,
transfer related technologies to the private sector, and address the ethical, legal, and social issues (ELSI) that may arise from the project.

SO you store "this" information in a data base. In other words a whole human body recognized as 0's and 1's. Does this mean that people would be able to download their body , have a computer search through the information , reach a diagnosis of past present and future problems in your DNA and you could swallow a "fix my personal ill's" pill??

There is more to that but i'll leave you with one last observation.
Your body and the computer.
1st the computer has its head the monitor.
You could say it has eye's if you have a web cam.
Monitor head is a little reversed , its meant for us to see whats on the screen.
2nd the keyboard and the mouse are like limbs. They allow an interaction between the user and the used. ( the computer is stuck in a oneway relationship!!.)
3rd we have the tower that stores the hard drive
(Brain) What we put into the brain is what we can get out. It comes with an operating system. Kinda like people. We didn't learn how to breathe
Its books and movies that we learn from are like the CD's dvd's and floppy disks we feed it.
and the one I found to be the funniest is ....
If you get too risky and visit or download questionable data packets YOU might get a virus.

Ha ha yeah So for how much we know about the "solar system" we don't really know anything.
Go ask Stephen Hawking about black holes...

http://www.hawking.org.uk/lectures/lindex.html
Does God play dice?.. Black holes! Find out what it's all about in the lectures

rushdoony
12-17-2004, 09:58 AM
Preliminary Conclusions

Differences, such as the actual times of dichotomy in each model, can be expected to show up because the geostatic and heliocentric(/geocentric) systems work in a different way. In particular, extra components of motion must be assigned to the World, in order for the heliocentric model to tally with reality. Here, though, we have deliberately sought a phenomenon that does not depend upon one such ad hoc motion (namely, the supposed rotation of the World about an 'axis'), and investigated the behaviour of the two conflicting models.

The correct model will agree with all observations. The phase 'anomaly' of Venus is an undeniable, observational fact, that has been known of for at least two hundred years (from the time of its description by Schröter). The heliocentric idea does not predict what actual observations consistently show. The heliocentric idea must therefore be wrong (as was demonstrated by Arago, Airy, Michelson & Morley, Michelson & Gale, Trouton & Noble, et al.). On the other hand, the geocentric, geostatic model, insofar as it has been tested, correctly matches the data.

These investigations remain on-going, but appear extremely promising. In particular, I remain confident that God's written word will once again prove to be totally vindicated and, if so, in a way that could not be more fitting, or ironic, for the observed phases of Venus is the exact same phenomenon that Galilei originally (and fraudulently) claimed disproved a geostatic cosmos

rushdoony
12-18-2004, 06:11 PM
God's written word is very much at stake, and we should read it in a literal way, not resort to hermeneutics, in an effort to convince others of how clever we are (or rather, how clever we think we are, since those that do this are usually particularly stupid). Also, "heliocentrism" is the religion that teaches the gullible and the willingly ignorant that the Sun is at the centre of the universe. Secular science has disproved this one itself.

Up until 2001/2, I believed what I had been taught - that the World hurtles around the Sun and that men had actually set foot on the Moon. Not now, though. I was always unhappy at the consequences of this system, even though Galilei was a "great man," Kepler was a "great man," Kopernik was a "great man," Newton was a "great man," ad infinitum. And what is the end product of this teaching? Simply that the World, which our Father created out of nothing, would be an insignificant little lump of rock orbiting an insignificant little star in an insignificant little galaxy ... in just one of an infinite number of "possible" universes. Not much love there, then. Nothing much special about that. Not much of a "footstool."

Except that it's all just lies and rubbish.

To those who think that it was proved long ago that the World orbits the Sun, it may surprise you to know that the likes of Prof. Sir Isaac Newton, Prof. Ernst Mach, Prof. Albert Einstein, Prof. Bertrand Russell, Prof. Sir Fred Hoyle, and so on, would not agree with you. In actuality, exactly the opposite is true. The results of two simple experiments, both performed in the 19th-century, showed that it is the stars which move, and not the World.

From: www.midclyth.supanet.com

marypopinz
12-18-2004, 06:58 PM
blah blah blah, blah blah blah blah

XOXOX

rushdoony
12-19-2004, 09:38 AM
Conclusions

The conclusion is that the World does not orbit the Sun and that it does not rotate about an axis, either. This can be reasoned via the following logic:

The stars complete circular paths every 23h 56m 4.091s, apparently as a consequence of the observer having completed a circle of absolute maximum circumference 24,860 miles.
No similar, annual motion of the stars is observed, in consequence of our supposedly hurtling around an (approximate) circle of 584,058,077 mile circumference (i.e., 23,494 times bigger than the equatorial maximum given in point number 1).
Precession of the World's imaginary axis, such that it always points to the same point in the northern sky, will not produce such an alignment in the south, and vice versa.
The World therefore would have to remain aligned with the north-south axis of the celestial sphere, which, in turn, means that it cannot be orbiting the Sun, unless the stars are somehow tied to the World as the World moves.
Such non-fixed 'background' stars would be contrary to the heliocentric scheme.
Heliocentrism is therefore an invalid model.
Acentrism is therefore an invalid model.
Geocentrism (with a rotating World) is therefore an invalid model (see Proof of Heliocentric Incorrectness 1), because it is geometrically equivalent to a heliocentric model. Hence, since the heliocentric one is wrong, the equivalent geocentric one must also be wrong, simply because of its equivalence.
Star circles cannot be due to a rotating World, because they do not vary with latitude (a camera situated at the North Pole will still capture Polaris moving around the same-sized circle).
We are therefore left with a World that must remain on the north-south axis of the celestial sphere, must be central, because of countless other observations (e.g., Y.P. Varshni's paper, briefly mentioned under "Solar System," elsewhere on this website), and which cannot be a World that rotates.

www.midclyth.supanet.com

rushdoony
12-19-2004, 03:41 PM
The belief that the Earth is rotating on an "axis" and orbiting the sun is
THE GRANDADDY OF ALL DECEPTIONS IN THE WORLD TODAY...


Launched from its modern founder's deathbed in 1543, the Copernican Revolution ushered in a movement that has totally reshaped and re-directed ALL of man's knowledge (HERE)..

The Christian Bible (and the Koran!) declare the earth to be motionless. The mathematical Copernican model says the earth rotates on an "axis" (at over 1000 MPH) orbits the sun (at 30 times rifle bullet speed), and is whooshing around a galaxy (at 250 times rifle bullet speed) .....all at the same time.

Over the centuries, superstars in the physical sciences established the Copernican model as an unchallenged fact. This success paved the way for conquest of the biological sciences (Darwin et al). This transvaluation of values and philosophy (Nietzsche et al) then quickly spread to the social and behavioral sciences (Marx, Freud et al), to mathematics (Einstein et al), the Arts (Picasso et al), Education (Dewey et al), and so on through today's media reinforcement of all of the above. ..As the 21st Century gets its feet wet, man's "knowledge" is almost totally secularized and the Bible all but ignored as the source of absolute Truth from God Himself. ..The "sciences" reign supreme, and they do so because of the victory of Copernicanism over the Bible's motionless earth.

from: www.fixedearth.com

marypopinz
12-19-2004, 06:58 PM
blah, blah, blah
yada, yada, yada,

yah, yah, yah, yah....

yawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn.........

XXXX

rushdoony
12-19-2004, 08:33 PM
Once it sinks in that ALL the phenomena pertaining to the cosmos is totally explainable by using a non-moving (geocentric) earth model, certain realities of the most profound sort begin to crowd one's mind and spirit irrepressibly. Among these realities are:

The realization that if a deception of this magnitude has been perpetrated upon the entire literate world, then an intellectual and spiritual re-examination of ALL of modern man's "knowledge" must be undertaken by all who prefer truths to lies. Such a re-examination would in fact be a counter-revolution against all facets of modern man's" knowledge" which are dependent upon Copernicanism for their very existence (HERE). The root and the branches, you might say. . . . Hence:
Evolutionism, the modern-day foundational premise of the Biological Sciences, must be re-examined. These "sciences" declare that all life forms (plant, animal, human) have arrived at their present state of ineffably complex design and function as a result of pre-existent matter acting randomly upon itself. In other words, the secular evolutionist's explanation for the origin of all life forms--the explanation taught everywhere as "science" with public funds--is said to be the result of lifeless, senseless "matter" ACCIDENTALLY acting upon itself-and producing all that exists--over millions and billions of years. After reflecting upon this "scientific" explanation of origins, all who come to realize that they have been badly deceived by this inexpressibly GOOFY "theory" (as I once was!), will want to ask themselves some serious questions, such as: 1) Could such an utterly squirrely MYTH have ever succeeded as it has without posing as true Science? (Answer: No way!) 2) Where am I to stand in such a counter-revolution against the false science establishment which has imposed its criteria of values, morals, and truth upon modern man's "knowledge" at all levels? (again: HERE)
Let it also sink in that those other subject "disciplines" that make up modern man's "knowledge", are "disciplines" that are DEMONSTRABLY rooted and grounded upon the evolutionary explanation of origins (which itself remains symbiotically dependent upon the continued acceptance of the Copernican moving earth model. (Ex. HERE). These subject area headings are: 1) Marxist/Leninism/Humanism in the Social Sciences; 2) Freudianism in the Behavioral Sciences; 3) Einsteinian Relativity in Mathematics; 4) Philosophic existentialism, nihilism, paganism; 5) Psychological morbidity in the Arts; 6) The extra-Biblical, contra-Biblical, and non-Biblical doctrines that stultify, corrupt, and confuse the New Testament Christian message. . . . (Hinduism and Buddhism, of course, fit in with the evolutionary paradigm and account for their resurgence in the modern world.)
The impact upon Truth seeking Christians of all the above should be even more poignant than the impact upon non-Christian Truth seekers (multiplied millions in both cases!). Both of these groups have in common the fact that they have been deceived equally by the Copernican lie (and many by the Darwinian lie)! The way out is the same for both populations: Find out, walk out and SPEAK OUT! (As formerly one of you, I hope atheists will seriously consider THIS....)
The special message for both groups of Truth seekers when they realize the deceptiveness of the moving earth explanation and its impact on all "knowledge" is this: Those non-moving earth passages in the Bible (HERE) are Truth from God. (Moslems too should note that the Koran has TEN references to the earth being stationary! (HERE) For the Christian (and the Muslim on this subject) these passages must not be labeled "language of appearance" or "phenomenological language". All such pussyfooting is tantamount to unnecessary capitulation to the false-science establishment! You don't have to do that anymore, so don't do it! Our non-moving earth is a totally sustainable position SCIENTIFICALLY (HERE - HERE - HERE - HERE.) Stand up for it! You cannot be proven wrong!
This web page has spotlighted a heretofore ignored major revelation about the fact that today's textbook cosmological paradigm (Relativity/Big Bangism/ Expanding Universe) is the fulfillment of "creation scenario" from Rabbinical writings in the anti-Christ Kabbala since the 1st century A.D. All necessary details can be found in a seven part series entitled "Kabbala" which begins HERE.
Given these verifiable Six Points, is it not time for the "called, chosen, and faithful" of God (i.e., basically Truth lovers everywhere) to boldly unite and do something BIG, something capable of pulling the rug out from under the whole Kabbalist edifice of deceptions masquerading as secular Theoretical Science?? Is it not time to join together to expose the Copernican Lie upon which rests every other Bible-bashing lie now being employed by the god of this world (II Cor.4:4)?? Is it not time for seekers of Truth everywhere--regardless of their present beliefs--to learn of the great heliocentric deception and its fruit(!), and then attack it with every weapon God makes available. . .including most especially the global internet??!

From: www.fixedearth.com

Ahmad
12-20-2004, 07:11 AM
In the name of God, The Gracious, The Merciful


Peace Rushdoony,


Since you have brought Quran to your thread i have to clarify somethings,

1- You said: "Moslems too should note that the Koran has TEN references to the earth being stationary"

What we have of knowledge from Quran (which is God's final proven testament) is a verse that confirms the movement of the earth, however i am still studying if this movement is only around its axis or around the sun or both!. I don't think we should dismiss any theory just because it's not popular, God willing i am going to study this subject in more detail.

However the Quran states clearly that the earth rotates,

1-Earth's Movement: A Scientific Miracle

[27:88] When you look at the mountains, you think that they are standing still. But they are moving, like the clouds. Such is the manufacture of GOD, who perfected everything. He is fully Cognizant of everything you do.


What kind of movement, i am not that sure right now though. Indeed we should question EVERYTHING, who knows what Satan has done to our world after corrupting religion, medicine, politics, and perhaps "common" knowledge too.

However i can't rush into a conclusion, so please if you know these references in Quran, present them when you make such a conclusive assertion that Quran says that the earth is stationary.
---------------------------------

As for the matter of evolution, please read the following which was clarified by the messenger of the covenant Rashad Khalifa in the (authorized english translation of Quran, appendix 31):




Evolution: Divinely Controlled

We learn from the Quran that evolution is a divinely designed fact:


Life began in water:
"From water
we initiated all living things."
(21:30, 24:45)

Humans not descendants of monkeys:
"He started the creation of man from mud."
(32:7)
Man created from "aged" mud:
"I am creating the human being from `aged' clay."
(15:28)

Evolution is possible only within a given species. For example, the navel orange evolved from seeded oranges, not from apples. The laws of probablity preclude the possibility of haphazard evolution between species.
A fish cannot evolve into a bird; a monkey can never evolve into a human.

Probability Laws Preclude Darwin's Evolution

In this computer age, we have mathematical laws that tell us whether a certain event is probable or not. If we throw five numbered cubes up in the air and let them fall into a guided straight line, the probability laws tell us the number of possible combinations we can get: 1x2x3x4x5=120 combinations.
Thus, the probability of obtaining any combination is 1 in 120, or 1/120, or 0.0086.
This probability diminishes fast when we increase the number of cubes.
If we increase them by one, the number of combinations becomes 1x2x3x4x5x6=720, and the robability of getting any combination diminishes to 1/720, 0.0014.
Mathematicians, who are very exacting scientists, have agreed that the probability diminishes to "Zero" when we increase the number of cubes to 84. If we work with 84 cubes, the probability diminishes
to 209x10 (raised to the power of) -50, or

0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00209

Darwin's famous statement that "life began as a `simple' cell" is laughable.

As recently as 50 years ago, Wells, Huxley, and Wells wrote in their classic textbook that "nothing can be seen inside the nucleus but clear fluid." We know now that the cell, is an extremely complex unit, with billions of nucleotides in the gene material inside the nucleus, and millions of biochemical reactions. The probability laws tell us that the probability of the haphazard creation of the exacting sequences of nucleotides into DNA is Zero, many times over. We are not talking about 84 nucleotides; we are talking about billions of nucleotides that must be arranged in a specific sequence.

Some evolutionists have stated that the human gene and the monkey's gene are 90% similar. However, even if the similarity was 99%, we are still talking about 300,000,000 nucleotides that must be haphazardly re-arranged to change the monkey into a human. The probability laws preclude this as an utter impossibility. The human gene contains 30,000,000,000 nucleotides; 1% of that is 300,000,000.

A fitting quote here is that of Professor Edwin Conklin; he stated:

"The probability of life originating from accident is comparable to the probability of the Unabridged Dictionary resulting from an explosion in a printing factory." Rashad Khalifa Ph.D

eventhorizon
12-20-2004, 04:10 PM
This is crazy!.....im in total shock that someone, or a group would actually put all of their stock in such an idea...., god said this, god said that, god god god, and the sun revolves around the earth too....wanna know why!?!?! cause my king james 2 said so......wake up retards, and stop posting this shit

rushdoony
12-20-2004, 04:36 PM
What was the result of Airy's experiment? A resounding success. Just like Arago before him, George Airy proved that the World was stationary and the stars are moving. It does not matter whether you remove the luminiferous aether, as many, including Albert Einstein, have suggested, or not, because the dragging of starlight, as demonstrated initially by Arago, is real, irrespective of how we try to explain it. Both Arago and Airy showed that it is the stars, and not the World, which move (although Airy did not actually go so far as to admit this). In addition, we can say that Michelson-Morley, Trouton-Noble and many, many others have consistently demonstrated no motion of the World.

From: www.midclyth.supanet.com

marypopinz
12-20-2004, 06:15 PM
Would you like to swing on a star?
carry moon beams home in a jar...

And be better off than you are
You could be swinging from a star......

Sunrise, sunset
Sunrise, sunset

Mushdummy.... I laugh whenever I remember that name. It has such a ring to it.

Mushhhhdummmyyyyyyyyyyy.

The experiment... so Mr. Brains...

Why do we see the moon in phases?

You did the experiment?
Good Boy! You get a gold star!

Q: Why do we see the moon in phases?

You know what your talking about so please explain that one question...if you can, Mr. Brains.

We are all waiting patiently for your sublime answer. And don't get nasty with me cuz I'll break out the dictionary and confuse you. Ha ha ha

Please answer that one simple question, if you can.

XXX

rushdoony
12-20-2004, 06:40 PM
In a geocentric universe, the Earth is at the center, everything else revolves around the Earth.

The lunar cycle contains the New Moon, the Waxing Crescent, the 1st Quarter Moon, the Waxing Gibbous, the Full Moon, the Waning Gibbous, the 3rd Quarter Moon, and the Waning Crescent. Half of the Moon is always lit up by the Sun, but as the Moon goes around Earth, our viewing angle changes, and we see different combinations of the lit and the dark parts of the Moon. So we see the different phases over the course of approximately one month, the time of one lunar orbit around the Earth.

rushdoony
12-21-2004, 10:30 AM
New space agency


Routers reports –

The Earth is excited (and rightly so) at the formation of a new centre for scientific excellence:

The North A’Scotland Space Agency

or NA'SSA



Despite being created on a typically frugal budget of under £25.00, this group is already proving to be a key player in the furtherance of man’s knowledge of the universe.

This is verified by the following staggering achievements, as quoted by Dr. Jones, the agency’s chief scientist, mathematician, spokesman, astronaut, fund raiser, bottle-washer and general dogsbody:

Just like NASA, we’ve never landed anyone or anything on the Moon.
Just like NASA, we’ve never even gotten close to Mars, let alone landed anything upon its surface.
Just like NASA, we’ve never sent probes to Venus, Jupiter, Saturn or Mars.
Just like NASA, we’ve somehow managed to photograph a comet close up.
Just like NASA, we can claim that artists' impressions are actually generated via some sort of 'space telescope'.
Just like Neil Armstrong, we never talk to anyone about what we’ve done (or not done).

From: www.midclyth.supanet.com

rushdoony
12-21-2004, 04:05 PM
Note this well: a) If moving Earth Copernicanism is shown to be a colossal deception, the Bible is automatically proven to be right on this major aspect of Creation. The Earth is either moving or it isn't! b) Anyone jolted into recognizing that the whole world could be utterly fooled by the Copernican deception will have little trouble seeing Darwinism as fruit off of the same tree. c) Recognizing that the physical and biological sciences have been used to make these mega- deceptions as successful as they are, no strain will be required to see how the teachings of Marxism, Freudianism, Einsteinism, Zionism, NASA's Saganism and Goldinism, Zionist-supporting Christian Fundamentalism, AND KABBALISM have been used to bring that Bible-bashing mystic religion to the verge of pulling it all off and establishing the long-planned New World Order which is already programmed to quickly rid the world of Bible-based Christianity.

From: www.fixedearth.com

rushdoony
12-22-2004, 02:14 PM
NASA Virtual Reality Fraud

Whether small or huge, mirrors are the heart of a telescope. The image one sees is determined by the mirrors that reflect it. Look at the caveat on the rear-view mirror on the passenger side of your car. It has this warning: "Objects In Mirror Are Closer Than They Appear". Think what can be done with this simple principle in making close stars appear far away! But that is child's play compared to distortions of reality that NASA is using in its space telescopes! The new NASA computerized telescopes embody "conical foil X-ray mirrors...affixed in a Broad Band X-Ray Telescope" and "spherical mirrors and a field flattening lens" and "pyramidal mirrors" and "parabolic mirror's effects" and "aluminized mylar thermal covers...over the mirror aperture" and "reflectivity tests on sample foils" and "tests on small mirror segments" and "back scattering from adjacent reflectors".... "Constructive Solid Geometry (CSG)...allows us to simulate perfect mirrors".... "reflective and refractive materials are used for the mirrors and lens...to make a real world simulation".... "CSG...computer code...CONSTRUCTS 3D worlds"....

These kinds of contrivances (and an alphabet soup of other telescope features) are designed and computer programmed to produce simulations. They are employed on the Virtual Newton Telescope, the William Herschel Telescope, the Hubble Space Telescope, etc. (Hubble repairs in Dec. '99 included "the installation of a new 'brain'...swapping its old computer for a new one." Now we can oooh and aaah at the simulated images programmed into it to prepare us for the pre-planned super dazzling virtual reality "discoveries" of evolving life forms from "out there". Reports of Hubble discoveries "as distant as galaxies 10 billion light years away' (Give us a break, please!) are products of pre-programmed Saganesque hallucinations, i.e., lies. Viewing computer prepared objects produced by funny mirrors and spectroscopic ultra violet tricks may be cool, but it ain't real.

From: www.fixedearth.com

rushdoony
12-23-2004, 02:40 PM
There is a revolution just beginning in astronomy/cosmology that will rival the one set off by Copernicus and Galileo. This revolution is based on the growing realization that the cosmos is highly electrical in nature. It is becoming clear that 99% of the universe is made up not of "invisible matter", but rather, of matter in the plasma state. Electrodynamic forces in electric plasmas are much stronger than the gravitational force.
Mainstream astrophysicists are continually “surprised” by new data sent back by space probes and orbiting telescopes. New information always sends theoretical astrophysicists "back to the drawing board". In light of this, it is curious that they have such "cock-sure" attitudes about the infallibility of their present models. Those models seem to require major "patching up" every time a new space probe sends back data.

Astrophysicists and astronomers do not study experimental plasma dynamics in graduate school. They rarely take any courses in electrodynamic field theory, and thus they try to explain every new discovery via gravity, magnetism, and fluid dynamics which is all they understand. It is no wonder they cannot understand that 99% of all cosmic phenomena are due to plasma dynamics and not to gravity alone.

When confronted by observations that cast doubt on the validity of their theories, astrophysicistss have conjured up pseudo-scientific invisible entities such as neutron stars, weakly interacting massive particles, strange energy, and black holes. When confronted by solid evidence such as Halton Arp's photographs that contradict the Big Bang Theory, their response is to refuse him access to any major telescope in the U.S.

More: http://www.electric-cosmos.org/

rushdoony
12-25-2004, 04:04 PM
Since a stationary Earth is THE foundational Creation fact in the Bible (HERE), it is also the taproot of Bible Credibility! Along with the Creation of all biological life and mankind which followed, God’s creation of an immovable, stationary Earth constitutes the basis--the taproot--for His "tree of knowledge" with its trunk (the creation of mankind) and all its limbs and branches. Satan knew that killing this taproot--this foundational knowledge--with pseudo-science would cause the whole tree to wither and die in time. That’s why he started there first! While Creationists are chopping at the evolutionary trunk of the tree with their girl scout hatchets, Satan with his huge following in academia and the media, etc., are all sitting in lawn chairs drinking beer and watching God’s tree die from the presumed dead taproot...

They laid the ax to the taproot of God’s creation--a stationary Earth--a long time ago and now see the bark falling off the trunk, and leaves curling up and dying on drooping limbs. It won’t be long now, they are saying....


But wait! They didn’t sever that taproot completely! Some of the leaves are getting greener! People all over the world have begun to wake up to the fact that there is no real evidence that the earth is moving, that evolutionism is a black lie, and deceptions of every sort are surfacing on radio, in newsletters, on the NET! It’s the kind of thing that can spread very fast once folks get past the shock of even daring to think that a very great deal of what they believe to be is true is demonstrably a pack of lies, and that the whole pack is held together by the unrelenting brainwashing that emanates from the Theoretical Science Establishment...a practice that began in earnest with the launching of the Copernican Heliocentricity Lie almost 500 years ago. In this prayer by Copernicus, placed under his portrait in Poland, one senses the horrible guilt Copernicus felt as he realized the magnitude of what he was turning loose on the world:

More: http://www.fixedearth.com/theoretical_science_IV.htm

sablefish
12-25-2004, 07:08 PM
rushdoony.. You are great at defending the indefenceable.. The problem is that I suspect that this thread is a put on.. From reading what you write it is my conclusion that you are a very talented writer.. Possibly with great intellectual powers.. and you have proved it with this thread. I figure you must be a lawyer, and a good one.

You could have had O.J. Simpson's trial over in a week.

I believe that what you are doing is demonstrating the power of your argumentative abilities.. I believe you could argue either side of any position with equal glee.

You are very good at it.. congratulations.. You deserve some kind of merit badge..

I have enjoyed your almost monologue to the Max.. If you have picked up any believers good for you.. There is a sucker born every minute.. I guess you have noticed.

However, on the other hand, If you really think this is what is happening.. It's O.K. with me. Believe what you want.

No hard feelin's.

nohope187
12-25-2004, 07:20 PM
The earth moves when I sneeze. I can feel it. No shit! :-P

marypopinz
12-25-2004, 07:32 PM
Have you been mush-dummied today?

heheheheheh!

XXX

rushdoony
12-26-2004, 10:43 AM
If you can do so for a few minutes, just lay aside the Copernican indoctrination that accompanies such pictures and take a good hard look at these photographs of something that really, really happens every single night.


Do you see what I see? I see all the visible stars in the northern skies going around the North Star in perfect circles. In other words, I see all the stars which these time exposures have recorded actually going around that navigational star that is there for we Earthlings in the Northern Hemisphere. Remember: the first two pictures are eight hour exposures. Again, look closely and you can see the third of a circle in the center and in the next star trail or so. This means that each star circles in one 24 hour day (i.e., 23 hours and 56 minutes). (The same thing is captured in circumpolar photos taken in the Southern Hemisphere....)

More:
http://www.fixedearth.com/Size_and_Structure%20Part%20IV.htm

rushdoony
12-26-2004, 03:26 PM
"I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." (Christ's words, as recorded in John 14:6, KJV.)

This is a website dedicated to the glory of God, and seeks to confirm scientifically the instruction and authority of the Holy Bible. In particular, we aim to destroy the heliocentric cosmology and evolutionary cosmogony that now pervades not only all of western educational establishments, but also throughout much of the Earth.

Many who view this site will only be interested in juvenile scoffing (as the apostle Peter informs us in 2 Pet. 3:3-7), so they need to be told plainly what their senses (if any) will confirm: The World is firmly established, it cannot be moved. The World does not rotate on an 'axis'. It does not orbit the Sun. The universe is not 12-20 billion years old, nor is it infinitely large. It is approximately 6,000 years old. The Noachian Flood took place about 4,500 years ago. There is no other world but this one. There is no life on Mars, or Titan, or anywhere else. Nothing has ever evolved in the organic sense. Every atom, every subatomic particle was created by God. Nothing would exist if not for Him.

In trying to scientifically understand and describe the world around us, our ideas and hypotheses must be firmly anchored to Biblical fact, and not bound to whatever is the popular scientific belief of the day. Physics, in particular, needs to be freed from the absurdities of theoretical mathematics, a mental mirage which has produced nothing of any value. For, "in the language of mathematics we can tell lies as well as truths, and within the scope of mathematics itself there is no possible way of telling one from the other" - Prof. H. Dingle, 1972, "Science at the Crossroads," p. 33.

The Bible deals with absolute truths. It cannot be superseded or corrected by any work of man. Hence, the commonly mooted claim that the Bible is not a science book is completely meaningless.
More: www.midclyth.supanet.com

marypopinz
12-26-2004, 08:36 PM
OOps, wrong thread

XXX

Ranx
12-26-2004, 08:37 PM
Brother Ahmed

why does the Quran use "we"? There's only one creator so why the pluralism?

nohope187
12-26-2004, 09:49 PM
Fuckin' A, dude, the earth was damned sure movin' today over in Indonesia. What was that, an 8.9 on the rhickter scale and 22 ft. tsunami? It sucks to be them. :-o

rushdoony
12-27-2004, 09:55 AM
Yes, Lynns_Shadow you are so right. It is a shame that a blabbermouth, THE SEAHAG FROM NOVA SCOTIA,
has hijacked this board. Most likely the Administrator of this website is very aware and aghast at the tripe she posts, like thinking every man is a child molestor. Ruining this clubconspiracy website by scaring away educated and intelligent people like yourself Lynn who have worthwhile things to say and not just putdowns, crude remarks and emotional sentimentalism. Nothing of substance to say except "bruv" and "peace" - except no peace from her. Well soon she will have her 5 stars which is why you see such a quantity of posts but no quality. I echo your feelings Lynn:
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT

Well Mary, this, above, is you..

That's fine.

As I said forgiveness does not mean we are to so much like a person or be interested in their friendship or what they have to say, or like their way of being.

Though I do forgive your crude and unkind talk and behavior towards me here Mary, henceforth I have no interest whatsoever in talking to you or about you anymore, in anyway.

I won't go on with my insights or opinions about you or how I find you to be or not.


I will simply say, I find you, your words, your spirit, and your conduct in general, and about me specifically here, as well as your comments about we Christians, calavier, callous, and only set to make yourself the center of attention, for better or worse, and I've seen no "better".

I don't have to explain my time here, my hours or my life to you. Nor anyone here.

For the future, your comments to or about me, will remain sufficient for all the world to see, in this forum, as the bitter, unkind things they are. Again, no more no less.

I wish no more dialogue with the "like" of YOU.

As I said before, your words here talk more about you than a million I could ever produce.

You will no longer be a source of my attention or dialogue here, Mary.

I suppose you'll have to find someone else to spitefully dump on and pick on and make a target of your silly, senseless, and cruel, bitter diatribes.

My apology, for any of those original words that hurt, stands.

I don't expct one from you, and I should think it would only be a synthetic one to make you feel better about yourself in a crowd. For me it was and is sincere. But you can add this post to it, to be fair to all.

I won't have any part of you anymore on here Mary.

I do not like your style, or way of speaking.

I find you to be harping on a thing all night long and milking an issue just to try to keep a semblence of "dignity" here.

Take your dog-like behavior to some other place or person marypopinz.

I am a woman and a human being. Not your lamppost or firehydrant, where you may freely "poop" out all your sordid ..longwindied and unkind egosim on me.
_________________

marypopinz
12-27-2004, 10:47 AM
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

They've made friends. Loonie and Lynn. Isn't that lovely. I thought you weren't gonna right any more slander... the pair of you?

Thank you both for entertaining me so greatly. You are most amusing and make a wonderful pair.

wah wah wah
blah
blah
blah

Chow!

XXX

rushdoony
12-27-2004, 02:26 PM
But here is where the proverbial red flag goes up and compatibility ends! How can it be that Theoretical Science--which is declared to be totally secular and non-religious--be tailor-made to fit the "religion" of all those who oppose the Creator God Origins Scenario of the Bible (and the Koran)?? Is it just a coincidence that the Space Program’s evolution-based Big Bang agenda matches the Origins Scenario given in the mystic Kabbala and effectively destroys the credibility of the Bible?? If so, it is a "coincidence" that goes beyond the reach of probability statistics!!


Put another way: If the Origins Scenario presented to the world as non-religious, purely secular "science" turns out to be derived from a "holy book" revered in certain Rabbinical circles (and is unrelentingly opposed to the Creator God concept found in the Biblical and Koranic Origins Scenarios) wouldn’t anyone with a brain left be forced to conclude that such "science" was neither science nor secular at all?? Wouldn’t it be obvious that the devotees of the religion derived from this mystical and secretive "holy book" are merely using the Theoretical Science Establishment as a modus operandi for implanting their "holy book’s" Origins Scenario in men’s minds and calling it "science"?? And wouldn’t it be equally obvious that scores and maybe hundreds of millions have been deceived into believing that objective secular science was supplying the foundation for their beliefs about God, when all the time they were just duped into being members of a cult bent on destroying the Bible and its apotheosis which is reached in Jesus Christ
More: www.fixedearth.com

Agent_Orange
12-28-2004, 12:44 AM
The person who wrote this needs to get out more, preferable to a councillor. It was also poorly reseach with no factual arguement.

rushdoony
12-28-2004, 08:20 AM
Okay, let's recap. The heliocentric idea was known of at the time of Christ's first coming, but was not considered to contain any substance. Jesus never even mentioned it in passing and his half-brother, James, tells us that it is the heavenly bodies which cause day and night (etc.) by their movement, rather than the spinning of the World about an imaginary axis. (James 1:17)

The publication of a multi-volume book, in 1543, by a Sun-worshipping astrologer who knew nothing about physics, then sowed the seed of the present-day misconception that we are taught as being "fact." One after another, physicists placed meat on Kopernik's bare bones, with many contorted and ad hoc components of motion, that look to me more like cancerous growths, grafted on to account for what we daily, and seasonally, observe. In particular, the World was assigned a period of 23h 56m 4.091s, to explain away the rotation of the firmament.

Unfortunately, there is such an amalgamation of alleged movements now, albeit not a single one we are to believe can be detected with our senses, that it is difficult to find a phenomenon that will be demonstrably different in a heliocentric model to how it is in the geostatic reality.

The acentric scheme allows us to have the World as the centre of the universe. Figure 4 depicts this situation. A little later, in this model, and we get the configuration shown in Fig. 5, where the background celestial sphere has rotated east to west, as well as the Sun and Moon rotating east to west. The stars go full circle in 23h 56m 4.091s (the sidereal day), but the Moon only goes around once every 24h 50m 28.5s. Therefore the Moon seems to travel west to east, with respect to the background stars.
More: www.midclyth.supanet.com

rushdoony
12-28-2004, 02:25 PM
Flower Pattern Discovery

In Geocentric Universe 2.1 it is now possible to track a particular object such that it theoretically becomes the centre of the universe. All motion drawn in the model then becomes relative to the object being tracked. Thus, I have started examining the apparent paths of other objects (including the World) when centred on a particular planet.

At the bottom of this page are two pictures. The first of which is the flower pattern of Mars, Jupiter and Saturn as viewed from the World, and the second of which is the apparent motion of Jupiter, Saturn and the World as viewed from Mars. The latter has probably never been seen before, because it is unlikely that there is another model available capable of this, especially since few people even know about the flower pattern.

The conclusion therefore is amazing, since only the flower pattern around the World is unique and uniform. This is contrary to the late Prof. Sir Fred Hoyle, who was quoted as saying that anywhere in the universe can be viewed with equal justification as being the centre.

Firstly it should be noted that when tracking a particular object, the apparent path of the World is always that of the apparent path of the particular object being tracked when viewed from the World.

Secondly, all objects other than the World do not draw a uniform pattern similar to as seen from the World. Essentially, everything else is chaos. The significance of this is profound, because only on the World are all the paths uniform and beautiful. Hence, only from the viewpoint of the World could one realistically claim to be located at the actual centre of the cosmos.
More: www.midclyth.supanet.com

Ahmad
12-28-2004, 04:47 PM
Peace brother,

"why does the Quran use "we"? There's only one creator so why the pluralism?"


Appendix 10 of the "Authorized english translation of Quran" by the messenger of the covenant Rashad Khalifa:

God's Usage of the Plural Tense

In the English speaking world, where the trinity doctrine is prevalent, some people are intrigued by God's usage of the plural tense in the Quran. The overwhelming message of the Quran, where there is absolutely no compromise is that "GOD IS ONE" (2:133, 163; 4:171 5:73; 6:19; 9:31; 12:39; 13:16; 14:48, 52; 16:22, 51; 18:110; 21:108; 22:34; 37:4; 38:65; 39:4; 40:16; 41:6; 112:1).

Whenever the first person plural form is used by the Almighty, it invariably indicates participation of other entities, such as the angels. For example, the revelation of this Quran involved participation of the angel Gabriel and the prophet Muhammad. Hence the use of the plural form in 15:9:
"We revealed this scripture, and we will preserve it." The plural form here simply reflects the fact that the angel Gabriel and the prophet Muhammad participated in the processof delivering the Quran.

Another example has to do with blowing the breath of life into Adam and Jesus. The creation of Adam took place in heaven and God directly blew into him the breath of life. Thus, the first person singular form is consistently used: "I blew into Adam from My spirit" (15:29, 38:72).
The creation of Jesus, on the other hand, took place on earth,and Gabriel carried God's "word" to Mary. The plural form is consistently used when referring to the creation of Jesus (21:91, 66:12).

When God spoke to Moses directly, without the mediation of angels, we see that God is speaking exclusively in the singular tense:
"I am God. There is no other god besides Me. You shall worship Me alone, and
observe the regular contact prayers (Salat) to commemorate Me." (20:12-14).

Whenever the worship of God is mentioned, the singular tense is used (51:56). Rashad Khalifa Ph.D

rushdoony
12-28-2004, 05:25 PM
The relevant passages and page numbers I found in the translation of the Koran cited above are as follows:


The Merciful -p.19 - “The sun and the moon pursue their ordered course.”

The Cave - p.91 - “You might have seen the rising sun decline to the right of their cavern, and, as it set, go past them on the left, while they stayed within...”

Abraham - p.101 - “He has created rivers for your benefit, and the sun and the moon, which steadfastly pursue their courses....”

Thunder - p.140 - “Allah...forced the sun and the moon into His service, each pursuing an appointed course....”

Ya Sin - p.172 #1 - “The sun hastens to its resting place: its course is laid for it by the Mighty One, the All-knowing.”

Ya Sin - p.172 #2 - “The sun is not allowed to overtake the moon.... Each in its own orbit runs.”

The Creator - p.176 - “He has forced the sun and the moon into His service, each running for an appointed term.”

Luqman - p.187 - “He has forced the sun and the moon into His service, each running for an appointed term.” (Same as written in The Creator, p.176.)

The Hordes - p.273 - “He made the sun and the moon obedient to Him, each running for an appointed term.”

The Prophets - p.292 - “It was He who created the night and the day, the sun and the moon: each moves swiftly in an orbit of its own.”

The Cow - p.352 - “Allah brings the sun up from the east....”

The Cessation - (implied) p.17 - “I swear by the turning planets and by the stars that rise and set.”



From beginning to end, the Bible also presents what all known science confirms, viz., that the Earth is stationary with the sun going around it every 24 hours.
More:http://www.fixedearth.com/koran.html

billiard
12-28-2004, 05:40 PM
this thread is now 9 pages long and over half is dedicated to rushdoony trying to sell his pet theory . he unfairly and inaccurately says mary is hijacking the website . you gotta be kiddin me ! who is trying to take it over ? you are rushie . also , if you think that just because recorded history (biblically) only goes back 6000 yrs that the earth is 6000 yrs old , you are just what i thought , a religious novice with a pride problem . there has never been a time when God wasn't . what do you think ,that he sat twiddling his thumbs since eternity past and then had an idea to create ???? there is no telling how old the earth is . do you believe in dinosaurs? were they on noah's ark ? they were here and noah never saw them . why are they not mentioned in the bible ? because we don't need to know . some things we need to know and they are included . some things we will find out in heaven when we can ask face to face . between gen 1.1 and 1.2 there are unknown ages unaccounted for . God did not create a mess .(without form and void)many think that the earth became that way as a result of satan's judgement.(with the earth tilting 7 degrees in the process) personally , i have no problem believing in creation on an orbiting earth . an orbiting earth makes God's making the sun stand still for joshua an even bigger miracle .(look that one up) do you believe in atomic structure ?(a pattern of solar system) how about electro-magnetic theory or gravity ? these things work together to hold the heavenly bodies in their places . the bible says god's word keeps them in their place . his word created all things , so he uses gravity and e-m theory . the earth revoles around the sun . deal with it and stop annoying everyone by trying to dominate the forum .i'm beginning to think you're just a troublemaker .

rushdoony
12-28-2004, 06:06 PM
The relevant passages and page numbers I found in the translation of the Koran cited above are as follows:


The Merciful -p.19 - “The sun and the moon pursue their ordered course.”

The Cave - p.91 - “You might have seen the rising sun decline to the right of their cavern, and, as it set, go past them on the left, while they stayed within...”

Abraham - p.101 - “He has created rivers for your benefit, and the sun and the moon, which steadfastly pursue their courses....”

Thunder - p.140 - “Allah...forced the sun and the moon into His service, each pursuing an appointed course....”

Ya Sin - p.172 #1 - “The sun hastens to its resting place: its course is laid for it by the Mighty One, the All-knowing.”

Ya Sin - p.172 #2 - “The sun is not allowed to overtake the moon.... Each in its own orbit runs.”

The Creator - p.176 - “He has forced the sun and the moon into His service, each running for an appointed term.”

Luqman - p.187 - “He has forced the sun and the moon into His service, each running for an appointed term.” (Same as written in The Creator, p.176.)

The Hordes - p.273 - “He made the sun and the moon obedient to Him, each running for an appointed term.”

The Prophets - p.292 - “It was He who created the night and the day, the sun and the moon: each moves swiftly in an orbit of its own.”

The Cow - p.352 - “Allah brings the sun up from the east....”

The Cessation - (implied) p.17 - “I swear by the turning planets and by the stars that rise and set.”

From beginning to end, the Bible also presents what all known science confirms, viz., that the Earth is stationary with the sun going around it every 24 hours.
More:http://www.fixedearth.com/koran.html

rushdoony
12-28-2004, 08:32 PM
In simple terms, as part of the world-wide indoctrination into heliocentrism, there had to be a mechanism to explain the motions of the heavenly bodies, what keeps them in their places, and so on. That explanation, that mechanism is called "The Law of Universal Gravitation". It is credited to Newton but was first formulated by Kepler, as we’ve seen. This "Universal Law of Gravitation" is taught and believed by one and all but is, nevertheless, an absolutely insane concept which violates and contradicts its essential magnetic principle every second of every day, year in and year out.

Even if one can momentarily lock one’s brain into conceiving of a delicate balance between say the Earth and the Moon’s gravitational forces, a balance that would be achieved by the most precise, exact and unvarying distance between the two bodies, then that same brain is boggled when it is confronted with the fact that no such stable distance exists between these two bodies (or any other two!). Indeed, the undeniable reality is that the moon regularly varies its distance from the Earth by over 31,000 miles! When it comes closer and closer it gets in the stronger and stronger pull of Earth’s gravity. How can it then resist that pull and start going against that attraction? Contrariwise, as it goes out to the apogee and is moment by moment breaking loose from Earth’s gravitational pull at tremendous speed, how can it stop the outward movement and start back??

Gravity doesn’t explain this. Gravity can’t explain it. Gravity doesn’t explain the tides. Gravity can’t explain them. The same is true of the Earth’s supposed annual orbit around the sun. The simple fact is that we are closer by three million miles to the sun at certain times than we are at other times.

The gravitation explanation for heavenly bodies doing what they do has no scientific evidence whatsoever behind it. It is pure nonsense from A to Z, a contradictory, illogical, impossible notion perpetrated upon the world by You Know Who to discredit the Bible.

Indeed, universal gravitation is a bankrupt and stupid hypothesis just the same as Darwin’s "natural selection" mechanism is now being recognized as a bankrupt and stupid hypothesis that is incapable of explaining evolutionism. These bankrupt hypotheses both have the same author, Satan the Deceiver. They both have the same purpose; undermining the credibility of Scripture. They both have the same destiny; exposure as lies to be adhered to only by those who "cannot receive a love of the Truth" (II Thessalonians 2:10), those who "willfully" embrace these lies when they know better (II Peter 3:5), by those, in short, whose real god is the Father of Lies (John 8:44).
More:http://www.fixedearth.com/tides.htm

marypopinz
12-28-2004, 11:55 PM
Gravity and the tides?

Doesn't the moon and gravity have something to do with the tides? Unless I am mistaken...

Boo xxx

rushdoony
12-29-2004, 09:47 AM
No one would quarrel with the fact that there is a relationship between what the Moon does and what the Tides do. The Bible, after all, says that the Moon was designed to serve mankind through "signs" (which could certainly include Tidal phenomena), and through "seasons", and by giving light.

However, to say there is a relationship or connection between the Moon and Tides is one thing; to say that the Moon causes and controls Earth’s tides (as the whole world has been taught is a scientific fact) is quite another thing.

In the first instance--since God has said that one of His purposes for making the Moon and having it behave as it does is precisely for man’s aid in such things as gauging tides, planting, harvesting, etc.--we see the relationship as supernatural. These are "signs" and they have always worked and they work now for those who read them. Thus, there is a relationship or connection between the Moon’s behavior and supplying useful and necessary knowledge for man.

In the second instance, however--since "science" has said it will explain everything in natural terms without God and will designate all supernatural explanations as superstitions held by unenlightened people--we find that the obvious connections between the Moon’s behavior and certain phenomena such as Tides must be explained naturalistically by the science establishment.

So, God gave His supernatural explanation for Tides, which man has rejected. In its stead, man has come up with a purely naturalistic explanation for the tidal phenomena. In short, man’s "science" declared that the Moon’s gravitational pull (assisted by the sun’s pull) causes the Tides. This declaration is now counted as a "fact" of science.

Vern, one of these explanations is the Truth and one is a lie. Let’s see if we can find out which is which....
More:http://www.fixedearth.com/tides.htm

rushdoony
12-30-2004, 09:47 AM
The Heliocentric Model

The ruling, anywhere-centred (acentric) paradigm allows people to assume that the Sun is at the centre of the universe (star streaming and so forth has shown that this cannot be the case, but never mind). This is Canon Kopernik's obscene and blasphemous idea of 1543.

Our supposed diurnal rotation about an axis is the interpretation given to explain the circles traced out by the stars. In other words, the World's alleged rotation is sufficient to give the 'illusion' that Polaris completes a perfect circle each sidereal day. Why, then, do we not see Polaris complete a far, far larger circle during the course of twelve months, when our movement through space, with respect to the 'fixed' background star, Polaris, enormously exceeds that which would be due to our rotation about an axis? It cannot be that Polaris is so far away that we would not observe such an effect, for, if that were so, then we definitely would not get any small circle appearing as a result of the World's alleged spin.

As always with the heliocentric myth, some additional, spurious component of motion is attached to the World, in order to satisfy the requirement of accounting for what we actually see. In this case, the extra component is a precessional motion of the World's axis (i.e., analogous to the wobble of a child's spinning top), such that the World's north pole always, rather miraculously, aligns itself with the north celestial pole.
More: www.midclyth.supanet.com

rushdoony
12-30-2004, 04:13 PM
However, Genesis and Exodus clearly state that God completed the Creation by the end of the sixth day: "For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy." (Ex. 20:11, NIV.)

A potential infinity exists, but an actual infinity does not; it is merely a mathematical abstraction and has no basis in physics. Do away with the actual infinity and all the so-called paradoxes (contradictions, as I prefer to call them) disappear. Mathematics is only a tool that physicists use, though too many of them think that we are somehow governed by it (even the Nobel laureate, Prof. Paul Dirac, held that view). Besides, an infinite universe denies that God finished creating it. There is no way around this, no recourse to any form of compromise, number 2 denies a finished creation, denies God’s written word and ultimately, of course, attempts to push God infinitely far away from us. His laws and requirements are then considered to be of no significance and we can all please our selfish selves as to how we live our life.

This is the legacy of Kopernik, Galelei and Kepler; three men who laid the foundations upon which "Babylon the great" (Rev. 17:5, KJV) has been carefully and lovingly constructed. A Sun-worshipping myth, whose origins can be traced all the way back to the original Tower of Babel culture.
More: www.midclyth.supanet.com

marypopinz
12-30-2004, 05:01 PM
Loonie....

Why must you keep on, on this ongoing post? You keep noticably responding to yourself, to slap this subject back on the front home page. Aren't u getting bored debating with yourself?

Can u please start another thread, anything but the world revolves around rushie's theory. We'd love to chat and get to know your mind and it seems to be stuck in one spot with your motionless world.

Give it a rest and let's debate something interesting please?

You can obviously choose to ignore me and carry on... I wish you well and I'll stop by every now and again to see if you have anything new to say.

For me personally, the same old song and dance does get boring though, chum.

Boo XXX

rushdoony
12-30-2004, 05:38 PM
Mary:
You would have prevented 500+ people from knowing about this information if I had followed your advice.I am sure some of them are very grateful to learn about this important alternative view.
I have one thread, why does that bother you?
You are very unstable and unselfdisciplined because you swore to stay away and then very soon come back.

Here I quote and agree with lynns_shadow:


Mary

I can speak for myself, and for Christians, and about being a Christian, and Jesus,
but

you can’t speak for me.

What you’ve said about yourself says volumes, unfortunately, by saying not a word about yourself, but me. Me, who you do not know and know nothing about. I, on the other hand, can share from the perspective of who (Jesus Christ) and what (Christians and myself ) I do know.

You Mary, are looking to talk on and on and on, quite erroneously, about who (me) and what (me and Christians) you, clearly, don’t know about.

When you come out of your state mary, perhaps we can talk. ‘Til then, and in the meantime, when it comes to these topics, respectfully, you know nothing.

Why? Because, you don’t know about me, and you don’t know about we Christians, you’re not one.

P.S. I mean it about “state” Mary, you sound a bit stressed there hon.

And as for all your personal insults of me, that’s all they are, catty female insults.

A lot of women talk this way out of envy, and/or when they really have not much knowledge on a topic. Often it is a byproduct of ego frustration or hormones.

Seems if you can’t be the gal in focus in the room you’ve got to cut down the one who is at that moment, huh mary? How sad..

Stick to what you may know of mary, if you do, stick to that and be kind and positive. That seems to be your strength and forte',in looking to see your best.. You know nothing of me or this topic. It is clear.

And please don’t address me anymore, mary.

I’ve found your approach, and your comments to me, only replies that are out-of-turn, as I am always addressing OTHERS when you reply.

Also, your replies to me have been nothing BUT putdowns of me personally, or Christians in general. Catty is never a pretty piece in a woman’s wardrobe Mary. You ought to buy a new one.It is never attractive ;- )


One more thing Mary.

Ignorance is not “hate” but ignorance, and “hate” is not ignorance it is “hate”.

Since you seem to display both in such liberal amounts towards both me and Christians, I am surprised you don’t know the meanings better.

I am, here, as I understand, free to defend my faith, and mention who I think or feel is not defining my faith.

The faith I define is not "mutually exclusive", but how the vast majority of Christians see things.

That's just a fact :)

The fact that you must personally attack me for that, speaks more about you personally and your ways Mary, than anything else.

I think you ought to find another to bully Mary. All your words about “judging” to me only end up judging you.

rushdoony
12-31-2004, 11:09 AM
Archives Debunk UFO’s


The Historical Archives have finally been opened and studied relating to the Evolution-based UFO Saga in Roswell, New Mexico. This development threatens to jerk a bit of a knot in the agendas of ongoing media-fueled promotions, all focused on big talk about technologically advanced extraterrestrial aliens.


The tie-in of the UFO issue to this web page is, of course, that the whole concept of evolutionism which now infuses not only all of modern man’s "knowledge" (HERE)--but also a whole range of deep-seated beliefs--is a concept that is entirely dependent on maintaining an unshakable faith in the Copernican Model of a rotating and orbiting earth.


That this Model is what upholds and makes possible the anti-Bible Origins Scenario of the Kabbalist Religion--masquerading as theoretical science (HERE - HERE)--is no longer in doubt. This openly anti-Christ, anti-Bible religion has established the Big Bang Evolutionary Paradigm of the Universe, Earth, and Mankind, as can be seen (HERE - HERE - HERE). This Paradigm has made possible ALL extra-terrestrial-based beliefs in "aliens", a belief that is the accepted theme of a great percentage of all films, TV programs, books, and other media.


In other words, so-called "entertainment" is a major vehicle for indoctrinating unwary people into accepting evolutionism without the slightest idea of what is going on. This indoctrination is pumped relentlessly into tens and hundreds of millions of minds every day and night. The ongoing UFO concept has played its role in this indoctrination for over a half century.


But now some important information has come out that could cause people to awaken to the reality of this whole indoctrination process:


The History Channel program on UFO’s (aired 11/20/04 locally) was made possible after 1998 by the opening of a dozen big boxes containing thousands of pages of files which made up the Government’s Archives relating to the alleged half century of cover-up of alleged "proof" of the existence of UFO’s around the Roswell, New Mexico Air Base.


After meticulous inspection of all these pages by a team of researchers--some of whom leaned toward a belief in a Government cover-up of actual UFO landings and sightings of "aliens", etc.--the conclusion was unanimous: No such evidence exists.


That there have been actual military experiments that were lied about and kept secret, the documents confirmed. That those secrets in any way involved aliens from outer space, the documents denied.


The testing of the effect of parachuting from special weather balloons at 100,000 ft. altitude was found in the records but not reported. This explained some "UFO sightings".


The secret use of chimps dressed in "space suits"...whose bodies were taken from their crashed capsules in the desert and unintentionally witnessed by some civilians, added fuel to the alien mythology. So also did badly burned bodies taken from an on-base plane crash and worked on by a lying doctor and a nurse he invented to enhance his phony claim that these were bodies of "aliens".


A real experimental "flying saucer" with a 40 ft. diameter had been secretly tested by the military at that base...which further helped to explain a lot about the reported UFO sightings.


Thus, the long and short of all the UFO hype from that base (for almost 60 years now) is that the recently opened and studied Archives of this Mother of all UFO mythology--i.e., the alleged military cover-up of UFO’s and Aliens seen at the Roswell, NM base--proved two things conclusively: One: The military conducted top secret experiments at that base which it denied and lied about. Two: There was absolutely no evidence of any UFO’s or Aliens that had been covered up. Furthermore, the real experiments that were conducted on various projects were of such a nature so as to create visual apparitions that would account for the claims made by people who testified that they had seen UFO’s and even "aliens".


Interestingly, the researchers concluded also that there were deeply-committed believers in UFO’s whose minds would not be persuaded by the Archival evidence about the Roswell claims... any more than the evidence from dozens of other investigations that had arrived at the same conclusion, namely, the conclusion that it is all a media-fueled hoax spun off of otherwise explainable phenomena. Their report also pointed out that the once sleepy town of Roswell itself has grown to a city of 50,000 and now accommodates tens of thousands of tourists who go there to partake of the UFO reputation the site has.


What folks now need to recognize in light of these researcher’s conclusions is that, historically, there has been an increasingly sophisticated evolutionary propaganda effort that began in earnest over 4-1/2 centuries ago with the aptly named "Copernican Revolution" (HERE - HERE). This unceasing and ever- escalating implantation of an evolutionary mind-set in people everywhere has successfully blanketed academia and literature and all other media since that time.


Since the early 1980’s particularly, this indoctrination effort has gone to all-out "blitz mode". Now, unlimited opportunities for fraudulent use of computerized Space Telescopes and Cameras and Redshift and Infrared technologies, etc., to "certify" the requirements of extraterrestrial evolutionism are routinely exploited to the hilt (HERE - HERE - HERE - HERE).

Add to this unrestrained abuse of otherwise marvelous technology (e.g., HERE) the admitted evolutionary agenda of the NASA-led Space Program - HERE - HERE) and you will begin to understand just how deep and far-reaching this deception has become.


Once that sinks in, another leap of understanding is available to those who want to see for themselves the no-longer-secret identity of the RELIGION that is the driving force behind all of this fantastic deception which claims that evolution is a "scientific" concept (HERE - HERE - HERE - HERE, etc.).


"Virtual Reality" instead of "Real Reality" is the entire focus of The Theoretical Science Establishment today. Take a few minutes to savor the rhapsodic descriptions on this one page link about the Virtual Reality universe that computer cyberpunks have created out of absolutely nothing real; i.e., no facts whatsoever (HERE).


These things--when taken together with the recent opening of the archival evidence pooh-poohing all the Roswell-generated UFO mythology--should provide a welcome big chunk of Truth for those who are interested in being free of all evolution-driven extraterrestrial deception that now undergirds every bit of modern man’s academia-approved "knowledge" (HERE)....
From: www.fixedearth.com


***

rushdoony
01-02-2005, 08:03 AM
Remember: The Bible is a book about a God of Miracles. Rational belief in those miracles and the God Who performs them stands or falls on the truth or falsity of the Genesis Creation Account of everything that exists--mankind included. If that Creation Account is true, then it is totally rational to believe that the Bible and all the miracles in it from Creation to Heaven are also true because obviously! a God Who could create everything could easily bring to pass the eternal Plan that is in the Bible by performing and recording every miracle told in those pages.


If, however, that Creation Account is false--as the controlling theoretical science establishment teaches--then the Bible can not be the Word of a God Who cannot lie. If He could lie about the Origin of everything, then he certainly could lie about Jesus being His Son born of a Virgin...and all the rest. So, once it is accepted and believed that the Biblical Creation Account--upheld over a hundred times throughout the Bible--has been proven to be false by "science", then it is logical to conclude that there is no compelling reason to accept anything else in the Bible as Truth from a trustworthy and sovereign God with omnipotent power to do precisely what He has caused to be written in His Word..."which Word He has magnified even above His name" (Ps. 138:2).


Christians may think they can choose to believe the Red Sea was parted, that Jesus was Virgin Born, that He was resurrected and is waiting in heaven for us to join Him, etc., and still believe that billions of years of evolutionism which "science" has taught the world is the true Origins scenario and not the Biblical Genesis Account of six literal days of Creation. Many who do this are honest folk who genuinely want to love and praise God the Father and Jesus, but it just seems impossible not to believe the evolutionary claims that totally monopolize all talk of Origins. These Christians (et al) have been tricked into being "double minded", a condition which the Bible addresses this way:
More: www.fixedearth.com

marypopinz
01-02-2005, 08:19 AM
He just keeps re-posting, even when no one responds. It's comical! It's quite farcical.

Is the record stuck Rushie? As the world spins, or so it doesn't.

You always amuse and entertain me.

Thank you Rushie!

Hugs and Kisses

Boo
XXX

marypopinz
01-02-2005, 08:20 AM
?

marypopinz
01-02-2005, 08:21 AM
?

marypopinz
01-02-2005, 08:22 AM
?

marypopinz
01-02-2005, 08:22 AM
?

Get the point or the picture?

Yours is a game of cat and mouse.

You seek me out on another thread, talk some shit, and come back here to hide and throw your insults to back up your theories...

I think that many will clearly see what you are all about.

You have served your purpose well here, Rushie. We all need to learn to recognize the truth, wouldn't you agree?

Boo XXX

rushdoony
01-02-2005, 08:29 AM
Remember: The Bible is a book about a God of Miracles. Rational belief in those miracles and the God Who performs them stands or falls on the truth or falsity of the Genesis Creation Account of everything that exists--mankind included. If that Creation Account is true, then it is totally rational to believe that the Bible and all the miracles in it from Creation to Heaven are also true because obviously! a God Who could create everything could easily bring to pass the eternal Plan that is in the Bible by performing and recording every miracle told in those pages.


If, however, that Creation Account is false--as the controlling theoretical science establishment teaches--then the Bible can not be the Word of a God Who cannot lie. If He could lie about the Origin of everything, then he certainly could lie about Jesus being His Son born of a Virgin...and all the rest. So, once it is accepted and believed that the Biblical Creation Account--upheld over a hundred times throughout the Bible--has been proven to be false by "science", then it is logical to conclude that there is no compelling reason to accept anything else in the Bible as Truth from a trustworthy and sovereign God with omnipotent power to do precisely what He has caused to be written in His Word..."which Word He has magnified even above His name" (Ps. 138:2).


Christians may think they can choose to believe the Red Sea was parted, that Jesus was Virgin Born, that He was resurrected and is waiting in heaven for us to join Him, etc., and still believe that billions of years of evolutionism which "science" has taught the world is the true Origins scenario and not the Biblical Genesis Account of six literal days of Creation. Many who do this are honest folk who genuinely want to love and praise God the Father and Jesus, but it just seems impossible not to believe the evolutionary claims that totally monopolize all talk of Origins. These Christians (et al) have been tricked into being "double minded", a condition which the Bible addresses this way:
More: www.fixedearth.com

marypopinz
01-02-2005, 08:30 AM
?

rushdoony
01-02-2005, 08:59 AM
Mary,

I have just registered a formal complaint
to Henry Makow about your behavior here.
If Henry had the time to go through ALL the
comments you have made to me then he could see what type of character you have.

Rushdoony

rushdoony
01-02-2005, 09:04 AM
Mary:
You would have prevented 500+ people from knowing about this information if I had followed your advice.I am sure some of them are very grateful to learn about this important alternative view.
I have one thread, why does that bother you?
You are very unstable and unselfdisciplined because you swore to stay away and then very soon come back.

Here I quote and agree with lynns_shadow:


Mary

I can speak for myself, and for Christians, and about being a Christian, and Jesus,
but

you can’t speak for me.

What you’ve said about yourself says volumes, unfortunately, by saying not a word about yourself, but me. Me, who you do not know and know nothing about. I, on the other hand, can share from the perspective of who (Jesus Christ) and what (Christians and myself ) I do know.

You Mary, are looking to talk on and on and on, quite erroneously, about who (me) and what (me and Christians) you, clearly, don’t know about.

When you come out of your state mary, perhaps we can talk. ‘Til then, and in the meantime, when it comes to these topics, respectfully, you know nothing.

Why? Because, you don’t know about me, and you don’t know about we Christians, you’re not one.

P.S. I mean it about “state” Mary, you sound a bit stressed there hon.

And as for all your personal insults of me, that’s all they are, catty female insults.

A lot of women talk this way out of envy, and/or when they really have not much knowledge on a topic. Often it is a byproduct of ego frustration or hormones.

Seems if you can’t be the gal in focus in the room you’ve got to cut down the one who is at that moment, huh mary? How sad..

Stick to what you may know of mary, if you do, stick to that and be kind and positive. That seems to be your strength and forte',in looking to see your best.. You know nothing of me or this topic. It is clear.

And please don’t address me anymore, mary.

I’ve found your approach, and your comments to me, only replies that are out-of-turn, as I am always addressing OTHERS when you reply.

Also, your replies to me have been nothing BUT putdowns of me personally, or Christians in general. Catty is never a pretty piece in a woman’s wardrobe Mary. You ought to buy a new one.It is never attractive ;- )


One more thing Mary.

Ignorance is not “hate” but ignorance, and “hate” is not ignorance it is “hate”.

Since you seem to display both in such liberal amounts towards both me and Christians, I am surprised you don’t know the meanings better.

I am, here, as I understand, free to defend my faith, and mention who I think or feel is not defining my faith.

The faith I define is not "mutually exclusive", but how the vast majority of Christians see things.

That's just a fact :)

The fact that you must personally attack me for that, speaks more about you personally and your ways Mary, than anything else.

I think you ought to find another to bully Mary. All your words about “judging” to me only end up judging you.

rushdoony
01-02-2005, 09:05 AM
Mary,

I have just registered a formal complaint
to Henry Makow about your behavior here.
If Henry had the time to go through ALL the
comments you have made to me then he could see what type of character you have.

Rushdoony

marypopinz
01-02-2005, 09:13 AM
Well done Rush. let's have this done and over with, once and for all.

You can dish it out and you can't take it.

Well done. You are the man.

I eagerly await a sensible reply from whomever you ratted to.

Wah, wah, wah

XXX

I have learnt in life that if people want to punish me fortelling the truth, so be it. Speak it, I will. I have a right to my opinions just as well as you do, duckie. As sour and malignant as we both may be.

Bonne chance sweetie. Are the odds in your favour? Time will tell. In the mean time, carry on with your most enlightening thread. I thought I would help to get you over the 1000 mark. That would be a real achievement for you. I will be happy to help.

Seems you don't like me around though. Never mind. Seems you also question what time I am on line, in type, when I'm leaving you alone and typing on another thread.

Lots of people read all the posts here, Rush. Each and every concept can goes into the understanding of some of the minds here, which is no mean feat to say the least.

I hope you can appreciate the relevance of what I am saying.

XXX

Last time I checked, this is a free forum. Please carry on with your pet theory, don't let me interrupt you. You are doing so well, so you think...

P.s. Can we have some original typing and thoughts and not pastes of comments you've slung in the past? You can do better than that. I have confidence in you!

rushdoony
01-02-2005, 12:26 PM
Very little thought is required to see that the Evolutionary Origins Account and the Biblical Origins Account are mutually exclusive. If one tries to put them together--choosing to believe that both are true. i.e., that God is still real but he just created through a "scientific" 15 billion year evolutionary process rather than the Biblical six day process--they are forced to be double-minded for two reasons:

1) They are trying to believe in an evolution based "scientific concept" that claims to be totally secular and independent of any need for "god" while at the same time they must believe in a "Biblical concept" which rejects all evolutionism and which calls on all believers to be totally dependent on God for all their needs and for eternal life.

2) They are trying--most without knowing what they are really doing--to be followers of an anti-Bible, anti-Christ religion which advocates the factless 15 billion year Big Bang evolutionary model (with or without "g’d", as you prefer). This religion is Talmud/ Kabbala-based Phariseeism, today’s version of the Pharisees who killed Jesus (HERE)...[contrary to what this Pope has said.]... You can find a summation of today’s anti-Christ Kabbalist Kosmology (HERE - HERE).
More: www.fixedearth.com

rushdoony
01-02-2005, 05:55 PM
Hate Crime Laws

"Hate Crime" is a new name for an old game.


The object of the game is to stop all investigation and reporting of real hate crimes, and to prevent the exposure of the criminals behind them.


The "Hate Crime" game as actually played is a "Hate Truth" game. It’s the Orwellian "doublespeak" in practice. It’s Nietzsche’s "transvaluation of values". It’s Einstein’s "relativity". It’s Dewey’s "new logic". And, behind all this, it is Satan’s "angel of light deception".


"Truth", in this game, is the thing that is really hated. The enemy in the game--"The Truth seeker"--must be thwarted, slandered, libeled, eradicated. All values and Truths must be perverted and made "relative" and everyone must become "tolerant" of the perversions. "Absolute Truths" are the most hateful of all to the lovers of lies who devote themselves to this game. They declare in every university classroom: There is no such thing as "Absolute Truth"! (And that’s the absolute truth....)


So, at bottom, the suppression and elimination of certain powerful Truths is what "Hate Crime" laws are all about. If these few loaded Truths were to get out of the bag world wide, the whole game of defeating Truth would be over and the real criminals would be exposed. Thus, suppression and elimination--and spreading endless lies and confusion about what Truth is--are priorities for the real criminals. They must never relax their vigil, and they must be ever active with "democratic" sounding strategies that will protect "the evil they call `good’" (Is. 5:20).


Thus, oozing "tolerance" and "altruism" at first, of course, the scope of "Hate Crime Laws" steadily broadens. Increasingly stiff fines and prison sentences are pronounced on those known to be "politically incorrect" or even guilty of "thought crimes". Lenin and Stalin instituted Hate Crime laws early on in the officially atheistic Soviet Union...one of the first being to outlaw any anti-Jewish speech or writings. Many countries are moving steadily toward following the Soviet Communist pattern by enacting similar laws today. In the USA there is an unmistakable crescendo from the Jewish controlled ADL, WJC, ACLU, etc., for the passage of ever more broad and harsh Hate Crime laws with the same goals.
More:http://www.fixedearth.com/hate_crime_laws.htm

marypopinz
01-03-2005, 12:18 AM
Hate crimes and the world is not moving.

There is a bit of einstein's relativity for you folks.

thokhanCep
01-03-2005, 12:30 AM
Hey when I die .... and I see the tunnel with the "light" at the end of it??
Should I run for my after life?

" For such false apostles are deceitful workmen, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no wonder: for Satan himself transformeth himself into an angel of light."

- 2 Corinthians 11:13-14

Is this a God fearing question or what?

marypopinz
01-03-2005, 12:57 AM
That's deep.

XXX :-o :-o

rushdoony
01-03-2005, 01:19 AM
This evolution-grounded nihilistic mindset has been prevalent in and out of academia for several generations. It's not surprising that Sagan embraced it, nor that few if any dissenters toward that mindset would be found in NASAdom. By the time Sagan (and lots of us) went to the University, eight or ten generations of increasingly sophisticated indoctrination had seemingly closed and locked the door against any challenge to the Copernican Model which made the Earth go around the Sun instead of the Sun going around the Earth, as the Bible taught. The ever-increasing spread of Darwinism after the 1850's demanded millions and then billions of years for evolution to take place. Clearly, the Sun, Moon, and Stars had to be billions of years old too for they could not be younger than the Earth. Indeed, a universe billions of years old was the only way Evolutionism could lay hold on the billions of years it needs to lend even superficial credibility to its fantastic claims.

So, let it be set in factual concrete: Copernicanism and Darwinism (i.e., Heliocentricity and Evolutionism) are Siamese Twins. Appearing first, Copernicanism paved the way for Darwinism's success by using invented mathematical models in the physical science "disciplines" of Astronomy and Physics, and by contradicting the Bible's teaching about an immovable Earth at the center of Creation with the Sun going around daily. Darwinism then reinforced Copernicanism by requiring billions of years for everything to evolve. Now the Biological Sciences had joined with the Physical Sciences in contradicting the Biblical Creation with its young Earth and Man as the special Creation of God, made in His Own Image and with an option for eternal life on a heavenly New Earth. All that was needed by the time of Sagan's University days was a way to get rid of the stubborn, lingering belief in God's Creation of Mankind in six literal ("evening and morning") days. This belief had to be put on a level with the almost totally defeated and forgotten belief in a very special unmovable Earth at the center of God's plans. Nobody argued for that anymore, but hundreds of millions of people were still clinging to a conviction that evolution theory was total nonsense and that Mankind is the special creation of an Almighty God with a great purpose and plan for His Creation. How could this resistance to evolution be ended once and for all??
More:www.fixedearth.com

marypopinz
01-03-2005, 02:24 AM
Nine hundred and EIGHTY six bottles of beer on the wall
nine hundred and EIGHTY six bottles of beer
write them posts down and pass them around
the truth he's found
none hundred and EIGHTY six bottles of beer on the wall.

Just a few more posts and you'll be over the thousand mark, Loony.

YIPPEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

xxx

rushdoony
01-03-2005, 08:38 AM
Mary,
There will be no debate between myself and Phillip. I presented to him some information that I think he will be interested in and if he wants to know more he can go to the two websites of the experts - www.fixedearth.com and www.midclyth.supanet.com .
Notwithstanding the fact that his IQ is probably twice mine and four times yours.
I probably won't come to this thread/topic for a while again other than to view a thank-you response he might send.
I am also, very shortly here, probably going to leave the entire clubconspiracy website for a good long period because I am exhausted with your non-serious, busybody nature. I don't need your harrassment in my life, I don't need to deal with a sycophant ( a servile self-seeking flatterer )
with Histrionic Personality Disorder
( http://www.mentalhealth.com/dis1/p21-pe06.html )
So take some Paxil and not some popcorn and good riddance.

rushdoony
01-03-2005, 09:58 AM
Title : 1000 Beautiful Things

Every day I write the list
Of reasons why I still believe they do exist
(a thousand beautiful things)
And even though it's hard to see
The glass is full and not half empty
(a thousand beautiful things)
So... light me up like the sun
To cool down with your rain
I never want to close my eyes again
Never close my eyes
Never close my eyes

I thank you for the air to breathe
The heart to beat
The eyes to see again
(a thousand beautiful things)
And all the things that's been and done
The battle's won
The good and bad in everyone
(this is mine to remember)
So ...
Here I go again
Singin' by your window
Pickin' up the pieces of what's left to find

The world was meant for you and me
To figure out our destiny
(a thousand beautiful things)
To live
To die
To breathe
To sleep
To try to make your life complete
(yes yes)
So ...
Light me up like the sun
To cool down with your rain
I never want to close my eyes again
Never close my eyes
never close my eyes ...
That is everything I have to say

marypopinz
01-03-2005, 11:07 AM
Sincerely,

Congratulations Loonie. Your thread was the first to make it past the one thousand viewer mark!

My I.Q. is 158 - mensa mind. And yours? (Seeing you brought up the topic.) I can post the certificate, if you like. And as previously posted, the last grade I actually completed in lamestream education was grade 9. I bet you graduated, huh?!?!



Boo XX

P.S. Don't leave Rushie. You never cease to amuse me! How is that complaint going for you?

No debate?

:cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:


wah, wah, wah, wahpost # 133 - was that an original work of your own?

rushdoony
02-03-2005, 05:44 PM
CHRISTIANITY & ISLAM:

Why Islam Will Go Down When Babylon Falls


When the extraordinary number of sects and denominations within the half-dozen leading world religions are added to the "mainline" beliefs, a conclusion that there is no one true God and no one true Holy Book can be--and has been--reached by many an honest -hearted seeker after Truth.


Out of all this confusion there has arisen one completely obvious and unarguable fact, namely: The Jews--though tiny in number compared to Islam and Christianity--and though fragmented as bad or worse than either of those religions (HERE), are not only in the Religious Olympics with the big boys, they are--by virtue of their long-held secret control of the evolution-instilling Theoretical Science Establishment--within reach of taking the Gold in all categories of those Olympics.


Indeed, both the Bible-based and the Koran-based religions are effectively being eliminated from the competition by the Talmud/Kabbala-based religion. This remarkable achievement has been accomplished by gaining virtual control of the foundation of all "knowledge" by their success in making evolutionism the "mechanism" that explains the Origin of all that exists (HERE).


This conclusion is documented throughout this web page and is indisputably accurate. Simply put: The acceptance of any religion’s "creation scenario" becomes the cornerstone of that religion upon which all else is built. Specifically, the nature of the "deities" or the "godhead" of that religion will be seen to be formulated and established by its explanation of the Origin of all that exists, i.e., what we can call its "creation scenario"


This unavoidable conclusion--once understood and admitted--should settle any lingering arguments about which religion is three lengths ahead and pulling away in this religious horse race (being held near the metaphorical Olympics).


Today’s textbook "truths" about the Origin of all that exists (the "creation scenario") declare worldwide that a "Big Bang" 15 billion years ago "created" the sun, earth, moon, stars, you and me and the trees, through an evolutionary process.


If that is a true statement, mutter "yes" under thy breath....

Thank you.


Now we notice that each essential component of this evolutionary foundation which makes up this "origins/creation scenario" (Relativity, Big Bang, Expanding Universe) is derived directly from the Kabbala of the Pharisees (HERE, pp.5,6 - HERE, pp. 3,4 - HERE). It is this "origins scenario" that underpins all of modern man’s allegedly secular "knowledge" (HERE). It is this "origins scenario" that has knocked the props out from under both the Biblical and the Koranic "creation scenarios". It is this "origins scenario" that has enthroned "Theoretical Science" as the new g’d of truth to be idolized as the provider of an alternative "explanation" for the origin of all that exists without any belief in the Biblical or the Koranic Creator God.


The fact that this new "creator", this "science idol", turns out to be merely the instrument used by another religion to establish its "origins scenario" is a world-changing fact that is just now entering the media bloodstream.
More:http://www.fixedearth.com/Christianity%20&%20Islam.htm

marypopinz
02-03-2005, 06:09 PM
Rush, what do Islam and Christianity and poetry have to do with this thread? I fail to see the link. Was post #113 your own origianl work?



Boo

rushdoony
02-06-2005, 05:52 PM
Marypopinz or Mary Spencer,

Even a retarded person, a moron, somebody
with a low IQ, or a beginner internet user who is 10 years of age could simply go to Google
or Yahoo, and do a search for the title of a song
by simply typing in "lyrics title". Then in about
10 seconds they could find out who wrote it.

By the way I agree with Mr. or Mrs. Anonymous
that the very profane title you
posted( Fee Fi Fo Fum... I smell me some shitty
bum) needs to be removed, even if it gets off the first page because it could still pollute
someones mind in the back pages.

rushdoony
02-06-2005, 05:55 PM
CHRISTIANITY & ISLAM:

Why Islam Will Go Down When Babylon Falls


When the extraordinary number of sects and denominations within the half-dozen leading world religions are added to the "mainline" beliefs, a conclusion that there is no one true God and no one true Holy Book can be--and has been--reached by many an honest -hearted seeker after Truth.


Out of all this confusion there has arisen one completely obvious and unarguable fact, namely: The Jews--though tiny in number compared to Islam and Christianity--and though fragmented as bad or worse than either of those religions (HERE), are not only in the Religious Olympics with the big boys, they are--by virtue of their long-held secret control of the evolution-instilling Theoretical Science Establishment--within reach of taking the Gold in all categories of those Olympics.


Indeed, both the Bible-based and the Koran-based religions are effectively being eliminated from the competition by the Talmud/Kabbala-based religion. This remarkable achievement has been accomplished by gaining virtual control of the foundation of all "knowledge" by their success in making evolutionism the "mechanism" that explains the Origin of all that exists (HERE).


This conclusion is documented throughout this web page and is indisputably accurate. Simply put: The acceptance of any religion’s "creation scenario" becomes the cornerstone of that religion upon which all else is built. Specifically, the nature of the "deities" or the "godhead" of that religion will be seen to be formulated and established by its explanation of the Origin of all that exists, i.e., what we can call its "creation scenario"


This unavoidable conclusion--once understood and admitted--should settle any lingering arguments about which religion is three lengths ahead and pulling away in this religious horse race (being held near the metaphorical Olympics).


Today’s textbook "truths" about the Origin of all that exists (the "creation scenario") declare worldwide that a "Big Bang" 15 billion years ago "created" the sun, earth, moon, stars, you and me and the trees, through an evolutionary process.


If that is a true statement, mutter "yes" under thy breath....

Thank you.


Now we notice that each essential component of this evolutionary foundation which makes up this "origins/creation scenario" (Relativity, Big Bang, Expanding Universe) is derived directly from the Kabbala of the Pharisees (HERE, pp.5,6 - HERE, pp. 3,4 - HERE). It is this "origins scenario" that underpins all of modern man’s allegedly secular "knowledge" (HERE). It is this "origins scenario" that has knocked the props out from under both the Biblical and the Koranic "creation scenarios". It is this "origins scenario" that has enthroned "Theoretical Science" as the new g’d of truth to be idolized as the provider of an alternative "explanation" for the origin of all that exists without any belief in the Biblical or the Koranic Creator God.


The fact that this new "creator", this "science idol", turns out to be merely the instrument used by another religion to establish its "origins scenario" is a world-changing fact that is just now entering the media bloodstream.
More:http://www.fixedearth.com/Christianity%20&%20Islam.htm

marypopinz
02-06-2005, 06:20 PM
You know what rush???

Fcuk you and the horse you rode in. At least I don't hide my real name. And you and your smokescreen? You pathetic sack of shit. I've said everything I wanted to say here except telling you to fcuk off and now I've done that.

Kiss my ass


P.S. Please tell henry I told you to Fcuk off and kiss my ass.

I am sick of your incessant bullshit.

Jimbo
02-06-2005, 06:36 PM
Observation: :-o :-o :-o

“Then Neither Are The Brains Of Those That Won’t Consider It Otherwise”... & let me explain,

If the earth was not moving, then the universe would instead be rotating around the earth every 24 hours. How much energy would that require? Is that “physically” or “conceptually” possible? Or would that “reality” defy everything we know, right & wrong? Is that fact something we know & can actually prove to be “true?” So, if so logically improbable, why would anyone try to not consider it otherwise?
8-)
C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Documents\Xfer\Photos\animation_00_dance_ano nymous_coward.gif

rushdoony
02-06-2005, 06:41 PM
"The Rapidly Approaching Triumph of the Biblical God and His Plan From A to Z" demonstrates how and why the Bible is scheduled to emerge from the Fall of Babylon--brought about by the fall of Copernicanism--as the one true Holy Book from the One True Holy God while all else is exposed as deception from the father of deception. (HERE).


In keeping with these essays (HERE - HERE - HERE)--which are designed to reach out to the Moslem World with certain truths that can not be avoided when Babylon Falls--go (HERE) :"Christianity & Islam:Why Islam Will Go Down When Babylon Falls"


I counted 20 references to a rotating earth in five short paragraphs of one report about the tragic South Asian Tsunami. Peculiar, isn’t it, how 4 1/2 centuries of indoctrination into factless Copernicanism (HERE) continues to insert the "rotating earth" mantra into the most unlikely news stories 24/7? Peculiar too, isn’t it, that the powers behind this lie are so confident of their academia and media enforced control over people’s minds that "scientists" can come out within hours of this tragedy and claim that this quake has speeded up the earth’s rotation by three millionths of a second (!) and as caused the earth to "wobble" off its "axis" by one inch (out of 506,880,000 inches!)?? This insult to people’s intelligence was backed by NASA "scientist" Richard Gross and a dozen other "heavies" (Aren’t you just a little bit tired of being taken for a sap by these mind-control clowns who would stoop to using this unspeakable tragedy to reinforce their evolutionary agenda in the unsuspecting minds of millions via the world media? Shameful... ) [Forget the alleged "wobble" fiction. "The world is stablished that it cannot be moved." Psalm 93:1 False science--with all its "profane and vain babblings" [I Tim.6:20]--has never disproved that fact.]
More: www.fixedearth.com

rushdoony
02-06-2005, 07:04 PM
The Size and Structure of the Universe

According to the Bible and Non-Theoretical Science


Part V


The Mother of All Space Science Fraud Is At Work

In The Measurement of Star Distances


Considering that it must be clear by now that the whole matter of the structure and size of the universe is a contest between two religious teachings about the Origin of the universe and all that is in it, we must try to sort out which religious teaching we are going to accept when all the evidence is factored in.


Uppermost in one’s mind in this decision should be these seven points which have been shown to be demonstrable facts in previous discourses in this series and in the seven essays on "The Kabbala" particularly:

1) The indispensable foundation of all modern cosmology is the Copernican Model of a rotating, orbiting Earth and a stationary sun.

2) This foundational heliocentric model is built solely on seven interdependent assumptions which deny observational and experimental evidence.

3) The observationally verifiable transit of the stars around the Earth nightly is said by modern cosmology to be forever disproved because some of the stars are 15 billion light years distant and the speed they would have to go to get around nightly is so great as to be incomprehensible and foolish to consider; ergo, the Earth is rotating, causing it to appear that the stars are revolving nightly.
More:http://www.fixedearth.com/Size%20&%20Structure%20Part%20V.htm

Vlad
02-07-2005, 06:26 AM
It is also flat.

rushdoony
02-07-2005, 10:33 AM
"What would be the effect of exposing Copernicanism as the Keystone holding up all evolutionary ‘science’?"

So that there will be something for both Bible-bashers and Bible-lovers alike to weigh in with the dozen top effects that will be listed by this exposure, I mention only that (speaking of the Devil’s confidence that his deception-based empire [Babylon] is too deeply rooted to ever be overturned) the verse that sums up both that confidence and God’s view of that doomed author of all confusion (I Cor.14:33) in the world today:


"...How much she [Babylon=confusion] hath glorified herself,

and lived deliciously,

so much torment and sorrow give her:

for she saith in her heart,

I sit a queen, and am no widow,

and shall see no sorrow...."

(Revelation 18:7)


Effect #1: As is appropriate, God’s "Judgment begins at the house of God" (HERE). Christian Churches exist solely to guard, uphold, and preach the Bible from the first page in Genesis to the last page in Revelation. There should be (and will be) one Christian Church because there is one true doctrine on every subject in the Bible. ALL of the churches in Christendom are doctrinally trapped in Satanic doctrinal deception to a greater or lesser degree. We know this is true because God plainly calls them out of Satan’s Kingdom of Babylon. "Come out of her [Babylon] MY PEOPLE", He says (Rev. 18:4). The one false doctrine that ALL churches have accepted in the one that God knew before the foundation of the world (Acts 15:18) would--when exposed--set off a domino effect on all Satan-installed (I Tim. 4:1), anti-Bible doctrines.


Effect #2: The Theoretical Science Establishment will be revealed to be the chief tool utilized by an anti-Bible, anti-Christ Pharisaic Religion to make false-science modern man’s Idol. This modern day Idol rests upon and cannot stand without continued belief that the Earth rotates on a axis and orbits the sun (HERE - HERE, etc.) When belief in that contra-scientific myth is shattered (Rev. 17:14; HERE, etc.), Babylon (Satan’s empire built on deception) will Fall. True science, i.e., observationally and experimentally confirmed science, will be venerated and embraced by all who love truth and the God of Truth, and vilified and hated by all who love lies and the g’d of lies. The technological feats of true science--all of them--present no problem to truth lovers. However, God is poised to put a supernatural can of whoop-ass on every lying use of technology that has been used to create a Kabbalic Universe (HERE - HERE - HERE - HERE) and advance the agenda of the doomed little g’d with no truth in him (John 8:44)...(which little g’d was fabricated by the Ultimate Technician to do just what he/it has done (HERE - HERE)....
More:http://www.fixedearth.com/what_would_be_the_effect_of_expo.htm

billiard
02-07-2005, 10:58 PM
rushdoony somehow thinks that a non-moving earth(giggle)means that God exists and that there has been a giant conspiracy to discredit God and the Bible ,by all the world's scientists ,to pretend (giggle,giggle)the earth turns on its axis and moves in orbit around the sun. he also apparently believes that with these endless hyperlink posts we will all believe him. oh wait ,dinosaurs never existed either ... i almost forgot ... that's also a plot by all the world's scientists to prove the Bible isn't true. is it just me or does this seem ridiculous to anyone else ? i believe in freedom of speech .rushdoony has the freedom to put this stuff in here and i have freedom of speech also. rushdoony simply annoys me and is either a total idiot or a very immature person displaying attention-seeking behavior .

Mawashi
02-08-2005, 01:32 AM
This would have to be the dumbest thread ever. Either our honourable OP is a troll supreme, or unbelievably ignorant.

Fact: the Earth and the other planets revolve around the Sun.

Fact: This has been going on for quite a while.

Fact: The Earth's surface is covered with a layer of velcro to keep the atmosphere from slipping off. That's what mountains are for: they grip the air.

END OF THREAD

Ahmad
02-08-2005, 04:28 AM
Pecae Mawashi,

I just hope you don't offend the poster, even if he or she is utterly wrong.

As for me, Quran confirms the movement of the earth. By the way, what is the relation between the mountains and the atmosphere? first time i hear that, could you elaborate please.

rushdoony
02-08-2005, 07:33 PM
Here is Proof of Heliocentric Incorrectness:
From: www.midclyth.supanet.com
You have to go to site to get diagrams.
------------------------------------------
Proof of heliocentric incorrectness 2 - Mach's Principle

Dr. Neville Thomas Jones, Ph.D., D.I.C., M.Sc.(Phys), M.Sc.(Comp), B.Sc.(Hons), M.Inst.P.,

formerly of the Clarendon Laboratory, Oxford University, England.

Dedication

This work is dedicated to the glory of the God of Abraham.

When I first began questioning the heliocentric myth a couple of years ago, I spent a lot of time reading and rethinking what I "knew." Upon reaching the conclusion that we are being taught rubbish, I eagerly related this revelation to my wife. Her reply? "[She] knew it all along. Ever since [she] was five!"

Anyway, the source of most confusion is rooted in the following:

The ruling, Bible-based cosmology of a centrally-located, non-moving World was effectively done away with by Mikolaj Kopernik (usually given the Latin name, "Nicolas Copernicus"), who wrote in his infamous book, "Die Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium," that the Sun was "the Visible God" and that it should be placed "upon a royal throne, [to] truly guide the circling family of planets, earth included." (Book 1, Chapter 10.) Others had tried to propound this Sun-centred model well before Kopernik (for example, Aristarchus of Samos, in the 3rd century B.C.), so it was known of at the first coming of Christ, though rightly dismissed as unscriptural, unfounded and illogical.
Kopernik’s "revelation/revolution," published in 1543, proclaimed that the Sun was at the centre of the universe, and this idea later gained the fervent support of Johannes Kepler, Galileo Galilei, etc., despite these men still having no evidence to justify Kopernik's original, outlandish claim.
Indeed, the textbooks persist in wrongly instructing people that Galilei demonstrated the geocentric model to be flawed in 1610, when he observed the phases of Venus through a telescope. By 1610, Ptolemy's system had reigned supreme for almost 1,500 years and the exceptionally detailed observational work of the Danish astronomer, Tycho Brahe (1546-1601), further verified it (with only slight, proposed changes). It is inconceivable, therefore, that Galilei was ignorant of either the Ptolemaic or Tychonic models, which implies, then, that Galilei's original claim was designed by him to be deceitful.
This widespread misapprehension regarding the phases of Venus is frequently cited as being 'scientific evidence' for heliocentrism. It is the astronomical equivalent of the Peppered Moth 'evidence' used to support the ludicrous idea of organic evolution and, like its counterpart, is still commonly bandied about as being a fact.
In the 19th and 20th centuries, observational data showed that the Sun is not positioned at the centre of the universe, and numerous experiments had failed to demonstrate any motion of the World through the luminiferous aether. In respect of the latter, Albert Einstein came to the rescue by developing the theory of special relativity, which 'saved' James Clerk Maxwell's brilliant electromagnetic theory by doing away with the very thing that Maxwell's theory is built upon - the luminiferous aether. (No one, to the best of my knowledge, has ever explained just how Einstein saved Maxwell's theory by removing its foundations.)
However, this still was not enough and, in order to preserve the humanistic, atheistic philosophy and edifice that had been lovingly built upon Kopernik's suggested cosmology, the acentric paradigm was born. This is the ultimate victory for the intelligentsia, because God, even if some poor misguided idiot (to use Richard Dawkins' favourite word) still believed in Him, would be conveniently relegated out to infinity, leaving man to go about his business, answerable only to himself.
What is lost in all this is the fact that geostatic and heliocentric cosmologies are not equivalent. The common claim that we cannot tell the difference between a heliocentric and a geocentric theory of the universe, and that they are both manifestations of the same, acentric cosmology, is obscuring a deeper reality.


One thing that we need to be clear about is that the Bible is not explicitly geocentric. It certainly implies that the World is at or very near the centre of the cosmos, but does not actually say so. Rather, the Bible is geostatic. It states that the World cannot be moved. It states that the Sun travels daily about the World. It states that the starry heavens turn.

The World does not rotate according to Scripture. If the World is not rotating, then the heavens are. The movement of the heavens is then real, not apparent, and the direction is east to west (by simple observation), not west to east (as they are by necessity in the heliocentric case).



There are, then, three cosmologies to consider: heliocentric, geocentric and geostatic. The Bible tells us in plain, simple terms that the real one is the geostatic case (see, for instance, 1 Ch. 16:30, Ps. 93:1, Ps. 96:10).

In each of these systems, various celestial bodies are moving. Actually moving, by definition (this is what the whole particular scenario is built upon). Relative motion has little or nothing to do with the initial construction of the model. Let us consider these three models.



Case 1: Heliocentric



The Sun is located at the centre of the cosmos.
The Moon goes around the World in a W to E direction (anticlockwise, when viewed from within the northern celestial hemisphere).
The World rotates on an axis in a W to E manner.
The World/Moon subsystem goes around the Sun in an anticlockwise direction, taking one year to complete one revolution.


Case 2: Geocentric



The World is located at the centre of the cosmos.
The Moon goes around the World in a W to E direction (anticlockwise, when viewed from within the northern celestial hemisphere).
The World rotates on an axis in a W to E manner.
The Sun goes around the World in an anticlockwise direction, taking one year to complete one revolution.


Case 3: Geostatic



The World is located at the centre of the cosmos.
The Moon goes around the World in an E to W direction (clockwise).
The World does not rotate.
The Sun goes around the World in a clockwise direction, averaging a solar day to complete one revolution.


Whether you think the last one is crazy or not is of no importance at this stage. The geostatic model is a legitimate scheme, because :

It is the one and only one state specified and alluded to in Holy Scripture (this alone makes it the primary reference system to which all others must conform) ;
It must, by its very nature, completely describe and account for everything we can observe from the World. Motion under this scenario can always be attributed to the thing which appears to move ;
Either the cosmos has the World at its centre, or it just appears to have the World at its centre. The very same acentric premise, that informs us that the latter is 'reality', must also, by its definition, support the former contention ;
No experiment or observation has ever disproved it.
Hence, the heliocentric scenario must agree in all observational respects with the geostatic case, and not the other way around.

The next step is to start thinking about what is really happening in each of these models. We will begin with the geostatic (Bible) case. This is an example of what is termed, in the computer industry, WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get). The World does not move. Everything else moves. Hence, if you observe the Sun rising in the east, travelling across the sky and setting in the west, then that is because the Sun rises in the east, travels across the sky and sets in the west. Just like the "Ronseal" varnish advertisement ("it does exactly what it says on the tin").

Since the Moon does the same sort of thing, but more slowly, the Sun gains on the Moon, catches it (at which time we can sometimes obtain a solar eclipse) and overtakes it. Of all possible models of celestial motion, the geostatic scenario (where everything else does the moving) definitely has to be allowed. Indeed, it is a requirement of all other configurations that they agree with the predictions of the geostatic system. In particular, the heliocentric system must agree with the geostatic system. Any fundamental difference appearing between the two would disprove heliocentrism, because geostaticism is supported by experiment, observation and our senses.

Now, conventional 'wisdom' claims that the heliocentric (Fig. 1) and geocentric (Fig. 2) systems are just special instances of the acentric 'reality'. That the motions involved are equivalent. (These figures are typical of such sketches shown throughout the relevant literature - for example, Smart [1].) There is, however, one tacit assumption in this that is not at all obvious, either from the diagrams, or from the body of such texts.



Figure 1: A heliocentric view of the Sun-World system, looking 'down' from the north celestial pole. (Not drawn to scale.)

Of course, the World also rotates on an axis in the heliocentric scenario, in order to account for diurnal observations, although this rotational component of the World's motion is not shown in Fig. 1.

Figure 2 depicts the geocentric situation, with the orientation of the Sun's direction of motion being in the same sense as its heliocentric counterpart. In this way, the two models can be regarded as being equivalent, since they predict the same effects, when viewed from either body. If we could stand outside the universe and look in, we could tell which was right and which was wrong, but from our terrestrial abode we cannot. Furthermore, Einstein's General Relativity shows that there is no place within the physical universe from which we could distinguish absolutely between these two systems.

What isn't quite so obvious is that Fig. 2 also requires of necessity a spinning World, such that the daily view of the heavens to someone on the World will be in accord with reality.





Figure 2: The supposedly equivalent geocentric version of Fig. 1. Notice that to allow for the Sun's orbital direction to be in the same sense as the World's in Fig. 1, the World has to be spinning on an axis in this model, too.

Some people undoubtedly regard the geocentric label as implicitly indicating both a central and non-rotating World. Strictly speaking, this latter implication is more properly described by the term geostatic or geostationary. In a geostatic model of the cosmos, Fig. 2 is wrong, because it predicts that the Sun would rise in the west and set in the east, in contradiction to what we know to be true. To correct Fig. 2, we would need to simply reverse the arrows in this second diagram (there would also be changes required to the motion of other celestial bodies, too).

Although the heliocentric and geocentric descriptions of the so-called 'solar system' are probably dynamically equivalent, as long as the World is rotating about an axis in each one of them, the geostatic scenario can only be satisfied by adopting a clockwise orbital motion of the Sun and Moon (when viewed from the north). Heliocentric and geostatic models are therefore not dynamically equivalent, since they vary considerably in their predictions of orbital speed and direction. This is because, in the geocentric case, as distorted through time in the manner briefly indicated above, the World has gone from non-rotating to rotating, seemingly without many people noticing, or bothering about it.

Hence, to say that the heliocentric scenario must be correct, because observations that can assume a geostatic perspective support reality, is wrong. The equivalence between the two breaks down, as a consequence of the fact that one system has a movement that the other does not have (namely a rotating World), and that the sense of actual rotation is different between them.

That a physical system must be independent of the geometrical reference frame by which one mathematically attempts to describe its behaviour, was covered in depth by the German physicist, Ernst Mach (of speed of sound fame). It is thus given the name of ‘Mach’s Principle’ and was heavily influential in the work of Poincaré, Lorentz and Einstein, around the turn of the nineteenth century.

The classic example usually quoted, to illustrate to a general audience the significance of Mach's Principle, is that of a small boy in a school playground, bouncing a tennis ball up and down on the ground and catching it again. Clearly it does not matter if we create a system of rectangular coordinates that will allow us to specify at any instant where, in three-dimensional space, the boy, the tennis ball, the ground, etc., are positioned. Furthermore, the coordinate system, or ‘reference frame’, that we construct is not unique, the only thing that is unique is that the positions we derive from it are valid only for that particular coordinate system. If we fix the frame to another centre, or we use spherical polar coordinates, for example, we simply get different equations of motion, but the boy continues to bounce the ball up and down, totally oblivious to our abstract geometrical frame of reference. We also notice that, although the point of contact has various means of being represented in a mathematical way, the physical spot on the surface of the World does not change. In other words, and this is the important point to grasp, there exists a physical location within the system from which one can observe a reality, in this particular case, the ball is either touching the ground at regular intervals of time, or it isn't.

The same is true, though it is perhaps not quite so obvious to see, if we use a rotating frame of reference. In this case, although the boy looks different, depending upon the angle we are viewing him at, he is still behaving in exactly the same way. To see this, imagine that we have painted tennis court lines on the playground. The ball is hitting a point on the tennis court which is completely definable in terms of the fixed positions of the lines. We can specify it as, say, 2 metres in from the base line and 1 metre in from the inner tram line on the right hand, far side court as we look at it (this is where the dubious concept of an ‘observer’ comes from in special relativity). No matter how we adjust our vantage point, the ball hits the ground at the same physical location (albeit different coordinates, depending on the geometry used). The physical place of contact between the ball and the ground is a consequence of the mechanical system being observed and is irrespective of the reference frame used to describe the observation and behaviour of the system. This is Mach's Principle and it is used to declare that geocentric and heliocentric frameworks are dynamically equivalent (i.e., that from the perspective of the World we can not distinguish between them).



To see the fallacy inherent when applying this argument to a geostatic and heliocentric comparison, we can imagine the following four cases:

Case A: The boy starts going around in a circle, but ‘on the spot’, still bouncing the ball.
Case B: The boy levitates an inch or so in the air, but otherwise stands still, as he was before, while the World rotates underneath him at the same angular speed though opposite sense to A.
Case C: The boy stands still upon the surface of the playground, with the soles of his shoes super-glued to the ground, and the World rotates.
Case D: As in case C, but the boy rotates.


Cases A and B are dynamically equivalent. Any reference frame so far conceived will give the same results for A as it does for B.

Cases C and D are dynamically equivalent. Any reference frame so far conceived will give the same results for C as it does for D.

So I will ask you a question. Taking either case A or case B, I don’t care which, is that case dynamically equivalent to case C ? If not, then why not ?

Take a look again at cases 1, 2 and 3. Consider how they fit in (or not) with cases A, B, C and D. Is the picture and its obscuration becoming clearer?

Hopefully you will now see that the whole point is that we are not dealing just with relative motions of three bodies. We are dealing with two different physical systems, each one of which will, of course, contain consequences of their actions that can be tested observationally. Namely, in this particular example, where does the ball strike the playground?

A physical system will behave in a certain way. We are not talking here about quantum mechanical effects, nor relativistic effects. We are talking about the behaviour of celestial bodies, as viewed from any vantage point within the physical universe. If you assemble a toy train set on the floor and send some current through the motor, the train will travel in a particular direction. Whenever you switch on the power, the train will always travel in the same manner. However, if you reverse the polarity across the motor, the train will go the other way. The set has the same components, but behaves differently. After any time, t1, the front of the engine will be at (x1,y1,z1) in the first configuration, but at (x2,y2,z1) in the second. For any t1, with the exception of those values of t1 which correspond to n half-circuits around the track, (x1,y1,z1) will not equal (x2,y2,z1). They are different points on the surface of the World. Mach’s Principle is irrelevant. They are two differently behaving physical systems, albeit with the same components. We can see the difference between them, because we stand on the floor and look down on the system, but if we were shrunk down in size and were travelling on the train, then we could not tell, as long as all we can see are the components of the train set. If we could see a fixed point upon which to attach the coordinates of our observations, then we could still tell.

How does this fit in with the heliocentric/geostatic problem? Well, first of all we note that there are again two physical systems. This must be true, by definition, but if further proof is required, consider the motion of the Moon about the World. In one scenario it is actually travelling clockwise, whereas in the other it is actually travelling anticlockwise. They are different configurations of the same three objects (World, Sun and Moon). In addition, one system has an extra component of movement than the other (see Fig. 3). It is thus a perfectly legitimate question to ask, "can I stand anywhere at all within the universe and observe a discernible difference between the heliocentric model and the geostatic reference system?" Mach’s Principle has nothing to do with it. If we can find just one undeniable anomaly, then the heliocentric model can be ruled out.



Figure 3: The heliocentric hypothesis is not dynamically equivalent to a geostatic cosmos. In the former, viewed from within the northern celestial hemisphere, there are two relevant components of motion, and the World goes around the Sun anticlockwise. In the geostatic case, there is only one movement to be considered - that of the Sun going clockwise around the World. (Illustrated by Jack Lewis.)



The problem now becomes one of proving scientifically that there is indeed a way to discriminate between the reference system and the heliocentric model. (I had to qualify this statement, because there has always been a way to tell. Believers in God have always known that the World does not orbit the Sun - for the Bible tells us so!) The heliocentric scenario is propped up by ever-deeper philosophical ad hocs, under the guise of 'science' and my objective is therefore to use science itself to bring heliocentrism down, rather than take the simple, though perfectly legitimate, stance of saying that God's written word disallows it.

In this sea of relativism, what is needed is an immovable rock on which to anchor ourselves. The spiritual rock is the Bible and the spiritual anchor is Christ. We are the ship and are connected to the anchor via the unbreakable 'rope' that Christ supplies, i.e., the Holy Spirit. The sea is mankind, which acts to toss us about all over the place. The rock was placed in the sea by God, specifically for our benefit. If we ignore the rock, or do not search for Who put it there, we will either drown in the sea, or be dashed to pieces on the rock, whilst the anchor lies unused at our disposal.

To disprove heliocentrism similarly requires us to latch onto a small entity in a universe in which we are told that everything is mere relative motion and purposeless chance. We need something that is not relative, but behaves in a discernibly different way in a heliocentric (or geocentric) scheme to how it behaves in a geostatic scheme.

The luminiferous aether? The plenum aether? No, these may rotate. The World's gravitational field? No, its behaviour away from the World is not known, only assumed. The World's magnetic field? This may be stationary as far as the World is concerned, but would it rotate with the structure of the firmament? Also, would we be justified in extending laboratory experiments with bar magnets to a World where the cause of the field is only modelled on a huge bar magnet, especially when even the laboratory experiments give inconclusive results? No, there has to be something else.

I have previously investigated the direction that the Moon's shadow travels across the face of the World during a solar eclipse, and for a while thought this to be promising, but have now abandoned that idea after conducting further analysis upon it. I remain totally convinced, though, that there must be something, because the two systems are fundamentally different.

Okay, let's recap. The heliocentric idea was known of at the time of Christ's first coming, but was not considered to contain any substance. Jesus never even mentioned it in passing and his half-brother, James, tells us that it is the heavenly bodies which cause day and night (etc.) by their movement, rather than the spinning of the World about an imaginary axis. (James 1:17)

The publication of a multi-volume book, in 1543, by a Sun-worshipping astrologer who knew nothing about physics, then sowed the seed of the present-day misconception that we are taught as being "fact." One after another, physicists placed meat on Kopernik's bare bones, with many contorted and ad hoc components of motion, that look to me more like cancerous growths, grafted on to account for what we daily, and seasonally, observe. In particular, the World was assigned a period of 23h 56m 4.091s, to explain away the rotation of the firmament.

Unfortunately, there is such an amalgamation of alleged movements now, albeit not a single one we are to believe can be detected with our senses, that it is difficult to find a phenomenon that will be demonstrably different in a heliocentric model to how it is in the geostatic reality.

The acentric scheme allows us to have the World as the centre of the universe. Figure 4 depicts this situation. A little later, in this model, and we get the configuration shown in Fig. 5, where the background celestial sphere has rotated east to west, as well as the Sun and Moon rotating east to west. The stars go full circle in 23h 56m 4.091s (the sidereal day), but the Moon only goes around once every 24h 50m 28.5s. Therefore the Moon seems to travel west to east, with respect to the background stars.





Figure 4: Motion of the Moon, Sun and 'background' stars in a geostatic (i.e., non-moving World) framework, looking 'down' from the north ecliptic pole.





Figure 5: As with Fig. 4, but a few hours later. All motion is real, not apparent.



To account for the diurnal motions of a geostatic scenario, the heliocentric model, depicted in Fig. 6, must impose two components of motion on the World - it must rotate on an axis and revolve annually about the Sun.





Figure 6: In the heliocentric idea, the centre of the universe coincides with the centre of the Sun, and the Moon traverses an epicycle, that is centred on a deferent, centred on the Sun.



I believe that the solution which will enable us to demonstrate that the heliocentric and geostatic scenarios are not equivalent to each other, lies with this (non) rotation of the World. The heliocentric system requires of necessity a spinning globe, in order to satisfy nightly, observational facts. But if there exists a motion-related phenomenon that would be the same, irrespective of whether the World spins or not, then the correct model will be the one that functions properly with this extra circumstance, whereas the counterfeit model will almost certainly fail. Hence, we will now turn our attention to something which does not depend upon the World's supposed rotation; namely, the phases of Venus. To explain this whole area, however, we will, for simplicity, first consider the phases of the Moon.

The Moon is illuminated by the Sun, such that one hemisphere of the Moon is brightly lit and the other is in almost complete darkness. What we perceive of as being the Moon's phase is therefore determined by the geometry shown in Fig. 7, below, where A represents the Moon and B represents the Sun.





Figure 7: A solid sphere, whose centre is at A, is illuminated by a spatially extended light source, centred on B, and observed by someone standing on the surface of the World, the centre of which is at C.



In the absence of background reflections, or other light sources, the illumination of a solid sphere depends primarily upon the angle, a , since we can vary angle g almost at will, by sliding the light source along AB, without in any appreciable way affecting what is lit up, whereas fixing g and altering a , by sliding the light source up and down BC, will drastically change the illuminated hemisphere. (In a similar fashion, by sliding the observer up and down AC, we deduce that angle b has very little influence, too, on what we observe, given the distances involved.)

Again, from Fig. 7 and the law of cosines, we get

a2 = b2 + c2 - 2bc cos a ,

which enables us to calculate a (or g , by use of a similar expression) for any given position of the centres of the World, Sun and Moon. The centre of the World is at (0,0) in the geostatic system, and the centre of the Sun is at (0,0) in the heliocentric system. The distances a and b are constant in each model, and within our forthcoming simulations are assumed to be those that are considered well-established. The rotation rates, calculated to six decimal places, facilitate the determination of the position of the relevant objects in each system. Thus, a high-level computer program was developed to compare the two cosmological models. The graphical user interface for this program is shown as Fig. 8.





Figure 8: GUI for the phase analysis program, showing angle a for the Moon, one mean solar hour at a time, over twelve months. (Times of dichotomy are shown by dotted lines.)



Now the phases of Venus are very interesting, because of "a well observed and measurable effect known as Schröter's Effect." (Geoff Kirby, as contained in Chapter 6 of his online biography, emphasis mine.) "In fact the observed phase [of Venus] is usually slightly less than the predicted phase. The size of this anomaly varies. So for example the time when the Venus disk is seen to be 50% illuminated is sometimes several earth-days different from the predicted time. Explanations of this anomaly generally propose that [it] is caused by the atmosphere of Venus." (Simon Edgeworth.)

The following quotations should provide the reader with the essence of the puzzlement of this phenomenon: "The curiosity is that the apparent phase is always less than the theoretical phase. If we define the phase as the fraction of the apparent planetary diameter illuminated, then the observed fraction (or phase) is about 0.03 to 0.05 less. This is quite dramatic around the time of dichotomy which is the time when the planet should be exactly half phase, i.e. the phase is 0.5 and the angle Sun-Venus-Earth is 900. The apparent phase appears to be about 0.45 so that Venus is very slightly a crescent." (Geoff Kirby.)

"The so-called phase anomaly is another interesting topic for the observer of Venus. It has long been known that the time when Venus shows a half phase in the telescope frequently occurs later than the predicted time when Venus is west of the sun; and half phase is earlier than expected when Venus is east of the Sun. The half phase is called dichotomy. The results of two observers are shown [in a graph on the website] for autumn 1999. Both observers agree in timing dichotomy at 2nd November 1999, approximately three days 'late'." (The British Astronomical Association.)

"The observed phase may differ slightly from the predicted value, the phenomenon being known as the Schröter effect. Dichotomy is seen to occur a few days early at eastern elongation and likewise late at western elongation." (David Graham, et al.)

"Another old mystery regarding Venus is the Phase Anomaly. This is most noticeable at dichotomy when the planet's terminator (the line dividing day and night) should be a straight line. At that time the planet is so placed with respect to the Earth that it should look exactly like a half-moon with the terminator running straight down the middle of the planet. Astronomers have long been aware that for some unknown reason this never happens at the predicted time. Theoretically we know Venus' orbit with such accuracy that the exact time of dichotomy can be predicted to within hours. But in practise it can be out by a week or more. The problem is that there is nothing wrong with Venus' position in its orbit - so what can be causing this problem?

"A further aspect of the Phase Anomaly problem is that astronomers have commented at various times on the difficulty of determining Venus' exact phase. Sometimes it seems to be ahead of its predicted phase and at other times behind. The British Astronomical Association has looked into this for the better part of [the 20th] century." (Unknown author.)

In his website, Geoff Kirby makes a good case for daylight masking being the cause of about 40% of Schröter's effect. Certainly, I consider that his experimental method and associated reasoning are sound. This, however, still leaves the remaining 60% unaccounted for, with perhaps the most viable explanation so far offered being the possible scattering characteristics of the Venusian atmosphere (Giuseppe Marino and Fabio Salvaggio, for instance). There is, though, another possibility - one that correlates with previous, experimental results.

Figure 9 shows a run of the program which plotted out the angle a for two years and indicates the points of dichotomy for the heliocentric model. The second dichotomy line is the one relating to eastern elongation (this simply depends upon the initial configuration of the three bodies - World, Sun and Venus - in the program code).





Figure 9: Variations in the phase angle a for the heliocentric system over a two year period from the starting (all aligned) position.



What is hugely significant here is that the time of dichotomy in the geostatic model (637 days) is 2 days before what it 'should' be according to the heliocentric model (639 days) and, since theoretical calculations assume a heliocentric 'solar system' (that can be worked out from a geocentric perspective, if the World rotates), the geocentric, geostatic scenario correctly agrees with observation, whereas the almost universally taught paradigm (heliocentrism, or acentrism, to be more precise) does not.

As a test of the program code, we should expect there to be very little difference in the angle g over most of this two-year period, simply because the heliocentric scenario is specially formulated to account for the angular velocities of celestial bodies (this is the main reason why the Moon shadow direction during a solar eclipse corresponds with what we know to be true). Figure 10 confirms that, between days 110 and 644 at least, there is indeed hardly any difference between the heliocentric and geostatic values of this Sun-World-Venus angle.





Figure 10: Testing the mathematical models by plotting the differences in g .



(The jumps that can be seen to occur at each year-end, in Fig. 10, have still to be resolved.)



Preliminary Conclusions

Differences, such as the actual times of dichotomy in each model, can be expected to show up because the geostatic and heliocentric(/geocentric) systems work in a different way. In particular, extra components of motion must be assigned to the World, in order for the heliocentric model to tally with reality. Here, though, we have deliberately sought a phenomenon that does not depend upon one such ad hoc motion (namely, the supposed rotation of the World about an 'axis'), and investigated the behaviour of the two conflicting models.

The correct model will agree with all observations. The phase 'anomaly' of Venus is an undeniable, observational fact, that has been known of for at least two hundred years (from the time of its description by Schröter). The heliocentric idea does not predict what actual observations consistently show. The heliocentric idea must therefore be wrong (as was demonstrated by Arago, Airy, Michelson & Morley, Michelson & Gale, Trouton & Noble, et al.). On the other hand, the geocentric, geostatic model, insofar as it has been tested, correctly matches the data.

These investigations remain on-going, but appear extremely promising. In particular, I remain confident that God's written word will once again prove to be totally vindicated and, if so, in a way that could not be more fitting, or ironic, for the observed phases of Venus is the exact same phenomenon that Galilei originally (and fraudulently) claimed disproved a geostatic cosmos!





Copyright © 2004 Dr. Neville Jones. All rights reserved.



References

Kirby, G., "The Phase Anomaly of Mercury and Venus," J. Brit. Astron. Assn., 80 (4), 293-295.
Smart, W.M., 1977, "Textbook on Spherical Astronomy," 6th ed., revised by R.M. Green, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, ch. 2, p. 38.


Home

rushdoony
02-16-2005, 10:20 PM
A Small, Young Universe After All!

Scoffers take a number and sit over there, please.... While you are waiting and mumbling expletives under your breath at such an outrageous claim, work the facts that follow in with what has gone before under the titles:

NASA's Agenda: Promoting Evolutionism

NASA's Hanky-Panky: Virtual Reality Technology

The Spiritual Roots of NASA's Big Bang Premise

Now consider:

A non-moving earth at the center of our universe--with the sun and a stellatum of stars going round every day--is still a model that explains all the important phenomena in the known (i.e., the REAL, non VR) universe. Calculations requiring the utmost precision, i.e., calculations about moon phases, air and sea navigation, satellite deployment and relocation, solar and lunar eclipses, etc., are all based on a non-moving earth (HERE). All sorts of arcane math symbols calling themselves heliocentric may be used but when these "fumididdles" (as one physicist called them) or "pseudomathematical decorations" (as Andreski called them) are set aside, the math is geocentric. Given the explanations in the seven part series on the Kabbala (begin HERE) and the seven part series on "The Size and Structure of the Universe According to the Bible and Non-Theoretical Science" (begin HERE), the Model of Apollonius is demonstrably both more Scriptural and more scientifically satisfying than the modified Brahe Model (HERE). (Physicist Dr. Neville T. Jones in Scotland has a marvelous CD with moving graphics of the Apollonian Model which you can read about and order by going to the May 2004 Bulletin (HERE).)

Thus, in spite of a world persuaded otherwise, Biblical cosmology stands just as impregnable in the 21st century as it did in 1600 AD. The Apollonian Model particularly shows the Earth at the center of the universe with a band of stars all around. Inside the misnamed "solar" system all the planets and the sun and the moon and the stars orbit the Earth, (The Earth is not a planet...which word means "wanderer" and--like "solar" system and capitalizing the planet's names and using the small "e" for Earth--are all just clever little indoctrination tools).

In short, the sun, moon, and stars are actually doing precisely what everyone throughout all history has seen them do. We do not believe what our eyes tell us because we have been taught a counterfeit system which demands that we believe what has never been confirmed by observation or experiment. That counterfeit system demands that the Earth rotate on an "axis" every 24 hours...at a speed of over 1000 MPH at the equator. No one has ever, ever, ever seen or felt such movement (nor seen or felt the 67000MPH speed of the Earth's alleged orbit around the sun...or its 500,000 MPH alleged speed around a galaxy...or its retreat from an alleged "Big Bang" at over 670,000,000 MPH! ).

Remember, no experiment has ever shown the earth to be moving. Indeed, these experiments have all reported the same thing, i.e., no movement. Add to that the fact that the alleged rotational speed we've all been taught as scientific fact MUST decrease every inch or mile one goes north or south of the equator, and it becomes readily apparent that such things as accurate aerial bombing in WWII (down a chimney from 25000 feet with a plane going any direction at high speed) would have been impossible if calculated on an earth moving below at several hundred MPH and changing constantly with the latitude. (You can see several such logical impossibilities treated in THE EARTH IS NOT MOVING.)

Note this well: a) If moving Earth Copernicanism is shown to be a colossal deception, the Bible is automatically proven to be right on this major aspect of Creation. The Earth is either moving or it isn't! b) Anyone jolted into recognizing that the whole world could be utterly fooled by the Copernican deception will have little trouble seeing Darwinism as fruit off of the same tree. c) Recognizing that the physical and biological sciences have been used to make these mega- deceptions as successful as they are, no strain will be required to see how the teachings of Marxism, Freudianism, Einsteinism, Zionism, NASA's Saganism and Goldinism, Zionist-supporting Christian Fundamentalism, AND KABBALISM have been used to bring that Bible-bashing mystic religion to the verge of pulling it all off and establishing the long-planned New World Order which is already programmed to quickly rid the world of Bible-based Christianity.

Because of Big Bangism's and Einstein's demands--based on "thought experiments", Kabbalistic mysticism, and flat-out VR fraud--we've all been led to believe that there are galaxies of stars so far away that even God could not get them around the Earth every day! Take away those demands--including Dr. Albert's scientifically unsupportable speed of light limitations--and it is downright easy to understand stars in a stellatum with about a 1/2 light day radius (twinkling and reflecting endlessly in the Bible's watery outer firmament (Gen 1:15) and going around the Earth daily just as we see them go and just as the Bible says they go. (Go HERE for first of seven part series describing a 1/2 light day thick universe. )

Though the physicists and electrical engineers involved in the steadily emerging ELECTRIC UNIVERSE concept do not make Biblical geocentrism connections, their model shrinks the universe enormously. More, it gets rid of Relativity, the Big Bang, and an Expanding Universe. In addition to all this, the concept and the evidence behind it make sense! A "small" universe with a young Earth is a model whose time is drawing very near. All that has to be done to make the Electric Universe model fit with Biblical Geocentrism is to get rid of the extraterrestrial evolutionary mind-set baggage of its proponents. This link (HERE) should go far toward getting rid of that baggage, and this link (HERE) will provide an overview of The Electric Universe Concept and its great potential for gutting modern theoretical cosmology and starting over.

Any reader still racked by waves of disbelief that such mind-boggling deceptions could have been pulled off (even by Satan, the master of deceit!) needs to possess only two things: 1) A heart that "can receive A LOVE OF TRUTH" (II Thess.2:10); and 2) A willingness to look at the various kinds of evidence which prove that these masterpieces of cosmological deception have indeed occurred, and, more, that they are terminally pregnant with technology's Virtual Reality Lies (HERE) calculated to finish off Christianity and crown Kabbalism and Talmudism ruler over all the Earth in a Zionist-ruled One World Government.

As for #1, it is undeniable that people can be forced to see a Truth and not Love It. These prefer lies to Truths, and though forced to see and know a Truth, will hate it and hate its author, God. Their father is Satan who was created "in the beginning with no Truth in him" to be the father of all who hate Truth...(John 8:44; etc. Go (HERE) to order a book entitled: Satan: What Makes Him Tick?

And for #2 (having looked at some of the scientific and logical evidence), all who will then look at the Historical development of Copernicanism (HERE and elsewhere) will see very plainly how this mega-deception has been able to overcome and replace indisputable observational and experimental evidence. All can see for themselves how Copernicanism gradually took over in the physical sciences at the universities (and has trickled down now to become a "fact" that is learned in kindergartens). All will see how liberalism took over in the churches and let the Copernican lie beat back the Bible with its scores of Scriptures declaring a non-moving and immovable Earth with the sun and stars going around daily (HERE) The real roles of Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, Newton, Einstein, Sagan, etc., in advancing this colossal Bible-bashing fraud will become obvious. The fact that these men have been put in man's Hall of Fame as great world-changing "scientists" attests again to Bible infallibility for we are told that God has allowed Satan to be "god of this world" (II Cor.4:4) until the time appointed when he is briefly taken out of the way (II Thess.2:7; Rev.11:15;12;12; 20:3), then restored for "a little season" (Rev.20:3,7) and then terminated permanently (Rev.20:10;Is.14:16; Is.66:24; etc.).

Furthermore, the hidden but real and unbreakable connection between Copernicanism and Darwinism will become totally plain and understandable to any who will look with an open mind and a heart capable of loving Truth. (Click HERE to see this symbiotic connection....) And the connections don't stop there! With the physical and biological sciences captive to Copernicanism and Darwinism being spewed from every bastion of "higher learning", the social "sciences" and the behavioral "sciences" and the arts, and ultimately Bible-based Christianity have all been driven into Satan's corral of Babylonish confusion.

Much sanity still remains in the world, however, do largely to the fact that Creationism-- while down for the count several times--is still in the ring and getting in a good punch here and there. Besides that, there are plenty of people who don't have the information with which to challenge evolutionism on scientific grounds, whose common sense nevertheless tells them it's a nutty idea and that it is a root cause of rudderless kids and adults everywhere.

Unfortunately, neither these folks nor knowledgeable creationists seem to have a clue that NASA is the agent being used to put Creationism on the mat for the full count. Consequently neither group can see that the Devil is on the verge of winning this critical match with his use of fraudulent VR simulation technology (HERE - HERE) propelled by and undergird by the multi-faceted religion of mystical Kabbalism, which, along with Talmudism, are the sworn enemies of Christianity (HERE - HERE). Thru NASA (and a host of other powerful evolution fronts: See: Time, 1/17/00,p.76), Satan intends to place man's new god for the 21st century--namely, anti-Bible Kabbalist Humanist-Paganism (HERE -HERE)--firmly in the driver's seat of a One World Government.

(The fact that a OWG is coming to pass and is imminent is no longer a moot point. Nationalism is dying on the vine as computerized telecommunications make the world a global village. World leaders openly envision a OWG as the utopia that man's wisdom will have finally put together. These will ignore the fact that Bible prophesies over 1900 years old tell us that such a global government will indeed come to pass...that it will look good at first, but will be empowered by Satan...that it will have "a war with the Lamb" which it will lose (Rev.17:14)...that this will result in a separation (not the Rapture!) of God's people (Rev.18:4) from those who then are committed to what has become an overtly Satan-led, Satan-worshipping, God-hating, drug-dispensing, global government...and that its formation will signal the very beginning of the end of this earth's history, etc. (Go (HERE) to order a book entitled: The Preterit View: Straining At A Gnat And Swallowing A Camel...a subject that fits into all "End Tim" considertions.

The dominos of man's "wisdom" ("foolishness to God": I Cor. 3:19) are all lined up. They cover every academic discipline and many of the false doctrines in all religions. Together they make up the deceptions upholding Satan's kingdoms on Earth, namely, "Babylon the Great", i.e., where Confusion and its author reign. (I Cor. 14:33; II Cor. 4:4; & I Tim. 4:1...which says that demons mess up doctrines....) [Go (HERE) to see how modern man's "knowledge" is rooted and grounded in deception which flows in a straight historical line from the success of the Copernican Revolution....

But, not to worry; a Sovereign, Omniscient, and Omnipotent God planned all this before the foundation of the world (Acts 15:18). He has declared that Babylon (i.e., confusion) will Fall (Rev. 14:8; 17:12-18; 18:1-24; etc.), and Fall it will!

Copernicanism is the first domino. Darwinism is the second.... These are the chief lies that have fooled not only the world but all the Christian churches and all other religions.. Not incidentally, that is why God's Judgment "...begins at the house of God" (I Pet. 4:17,18). HE will call His people out of Babylon once the OWG is formed and its true Satan-worshipping nature is revealed in the "war with the Lamb". HE has declared that "the gates of hell will not prevail [succeed] against His Church" (Matt.16:18). Believe it! Those gates are guarding the deceptions that rule the world and are seeking to destroy Jesus, the Lamb of God and the Church He established. That sacrificial Lamb, however, is also "The Lion of Judah"! With His "called, chosen, and faithful" (Rev.17:14) He will expose those deceptions (I Jn.3:8) and their author, and then He will finish God the Father's Plan for the end of this old earth and the beginning of the new heavens and the New Earth.

Few if any readers who have come this far could be more duped by the lies of the false science establishment than I have been. I believed it to be beyond challenge that all that modern science alleges about the cosmos, evolution, and all the rest was scientific fact, and that only red-necked ignorami in bib-overalls still believed the Biblical account of creation and on thru the New Testament of Jesus Christ. It was inconceivable to me that all the smartest people in the Universities with their training and books, etc., could be fooled or--worse--lying. Every book I read confirmed these convictions, and I read thousands of them.

But then an odd set of circumstances over thirty years ago caused me to investigate the claims of evolution thoroughly. I discovered that--beyond any question--evolutionism is a contra-scientific lie without the first piece of evidential proof to support its preposterous claims. More, I discovered that a belief in evolutionism was at the core not only of my disbelief in God and the Bible, but that this belief has also basically determined my socialist political and economic philosophy and my approach to sexuality and marriage and family and all that is connected with those things and all of which unconsciously combine to make up a person's total understanding of what life is all about. (To order the book which resulted from that about face - The Truth About Evolution - go HERE.)

Other developments led me to question the seemingly unchallengeable teaching that the earth revolves on an axis and orbits the sun. Though plainly contradicted by numerous Scriptures in the Bible, the Copernican Model was not only universally accepted as fact in the secular world...but (barring a few brave souls) was even accepted as fact by evolution-fighting Creationists and other hard core Bible people. Surely it couldn't be a contra-scientific deception like evolutionism!! Nonetheless, as any who want to know can find out, it is indeed pure deception. More, it is the mother of the success of evolutionism and the other pernicious isms built on both lies.

Having written The Earth Is Not Moving to demonstrate how Copernicanism has succeeded in spite of having no evidence and violating all we can see, I have only very recently been led to discover some of the additional facts related in these four short essays. The Kabbalistic connection is very important, as all can surely appreciate.

Its importance lies not only in the fact that it explains and amplifies the religious zeal driving NASA's leadership in its no-holds-barred goal of demonstrating anti-Bible evolutionism, but also that it explains and amplifies how thoroughly the Zionist Ashkenazis have tricked Fundamentalist Protestant Evangelicals into supporting their every move, and do so on the alleged grounds that they are still God's chosen people fulfilling Biblical prophecies by returning to the "holy land", etc.

In ways too involved to explain here (HERE) these Christian leaders have been tricked into ignoring or twisting scores of New Testament texts which declare that all the chosen people status and perks for the Jews were abrogated by Jesus so that God's grace could go to "whosoever will", whether "Jew or Greek", with "no respect of persons" whereby "If ye be Christ's, THEN are ye Abraham's seed and heirs according to the promise", etc., etc. Sheesh....

So, just as surely as the Space Program is driven by the Kabbalist-based Relativity-Big Bang-Expanding Universe cosmology, just so surely is the mis-characterization of Biblical End Time events by the most visible Christian evangelicals today (HERE - HERE) really a fulfilling of the anti-Bible, anti-Christian teaching of the Kabbala.

One of the long list of major ironies that leaps out from the Kabbalist origins of Big Bangism and Zionism was the selection of Einstein from a long list of notables to be "Man of the 20th Century". Big Al's crucial role in saving Copernicanism from the non-moving Earth results of the Michelson-Morley experiments with his Relativity nonsense (HERE) and his promotion of the key element of Big Bangism (energy produces matter) made him an unrivaled hero to one and all who were eager and determined to see Bible-based Christianity bite the dust.

Documented but not widely broadcast is the fact that Einstein was also a ZZ (Zealous Zionist), who was, in fact, offered the presidency of Israel when that state was formed in 1948. Did Einstein know that what he really was...was a Kabbalist superstar?! Did those who brought him out of obscurity and made him an international celebrity for the whole 20th Century and then crowned him "The Man of the Century" know it?! Surely, few will want to say that Einstein in particular and those others in general were too dumb to know that what they did was in the service of anti-Bible, anti-Christian Kabbalism.... Can the smartest of the smart have been that dumb?? And is it not obvious that--whether duped or not--synthetic Zionist Christians have been a major factor in bringing this Bible-bashing plot to its present stage of virtual completion?! (HERE, HERE)

All who are not afraid to look into this will see that the evidence to back it up is irrefutable, and they will see that it is a spiritual rather than a scientific need to portray a 15 billion year old and virtually endless universe that drives modern cosmology today. (HERE)

Einstein and those who crowned him knew exactly what his role was, and--in spite of the opposition of Genesis-believing Jews--are still doing their utmost to bring to pass a global government with the highest priority being the fulfillment of the Kabbalist goal of getting rid of New Testament Christianity by ultimately making it a Hate Crime deserving the death penalty if not renounced. What do we think the Mark of the Beast is anyway?! (See: Hate Crimes.)

Ah, but there's that "war the Lamb wins"! (Rev.17:14) The soon coming One World Government with all its big plans only lasts "one hour" (v.12) before its Satanic goals are exposed and foiled so that it has to show who its real god is. Then look for several years of very rough stuff spelled out in The Revelation. (Scriptural details in these books: HERE - HERE.)

The Question again is: What does a small universe have to do with all this?

Answer: Everything. The Big Bang's limitlessly expanding universe gets rid of a uniquely created geocentric Earth on the one hand and, on the other, it provides the billions of years needed for the triumph of the evolution myth which is the fatal wound, the coup de grace, the denouement, the final resolution of the centuries-old plot to destroy Bible credibility. With the credibility of its Creation foundation destroyed, all of the Bible is suspect. If the Biblical Creation accounts of the cosmos and of all life are disproved by "science" as claimed, then the Biblical Jesus has no credibility and can take His place alongside Buddha, Confucius, and Zoroaster.

That's what the facts add up to, like it or not.

Big Bang Kabbalism fueled by NASA's high-tech Virtual Reality simulations may have the world convinced that goofy billions of light year distances to their latest star discoveries are "scientific" and that Star-Trekian evolutionism has produced washboard-browed and pointy-eared life all over the place "out there", but science fiction and simulations are not real. They are imaginations and counterfeits of something not known, not scientific, and not real (1 p. sum: HERE) The known facts, i.e., the real scientific facts, add up to an Earth-centered "small" universe with the Sun, Moon, and Stars going around the Earth every day just the way we see them go (HERE). That is both the scientific and the Biblical model and no Kabbalistic plans, old or new, are going to change it.
From: www.fixedearth.com

rushdoony
02-17-2005, 05:45 PM
From: "Amnon Goldberg" Add to Address Book
Subject: Scientific Mafiosi



An interesting article "Persecution in the name of science" from the
Orthodox Jewish newspaper "Yated Ne'eman"
http://chareidi.shemayisrael.com/TZV65vid.htm
The handling of Richard Sternberg by the scientific establishment
has been mild compared to some of his predecessors.



There exists an academic and media mafiosi which attempts to
discourage, suppress, ostracise, threaten, and demote individuals
who even start to show an interest in "heterodox ideas".



Organised pressure groups, chicanery, sharp practice, and jealous
histrionics abound in the "altruistic" Scientific Establishment,
all
geared to prevent and discredit any research and experimentation
that threatens the establishment "status quo" or is against
"informed opinion", especially in the area of today's three "sacred
cows" of Evolution, Relativity and Heliocentricity.



Any doubters or nay-sayers are lambasted with epithets like "dupe",
"heresy", "shameful", "disgraceful", "pseudo-scientific
fanaticism",
"fog of nonsense", "red herrings", "shallow", "starry-eyed
fundamentalism", "extreme", "lack of balance, "dogmatic",
"bigoted",
"hysterical", "far fetched", "ignorant", "of no help to anyone",
"height of presumption".



When even President Reagan in 1984 dared to express his doubts in
the theory of evolution, public questions were raised as to his
sanity!



Researchers like Immanuel Velikovsky (catastrophist), Halton Arp
(anti-Big Bang), Stefan Marinov (anti-Relativist), Pons and
Fleischmann (cold fusion), Robert Gentry (pleochroic haloes),
Richard Milton (anti-evolution), Barry Setterfield (decrease in
speed of light), Eric Braithwate (free energy), Walter van der Kamp
(geocentrist) etc., have been shown to have strong cases, or even
to
be substantially correct. Yet they were all initially greeted with
epithets like "stupid", "drivel", "loony", "harmless fruitcake",
"in
need of psychiatric help" etc., and conspiratorial attempts at the
highest levels were made to silence them, ban their publications,
restrict their access to laboratories, deny them telescope time
etc.
in blatant disrespect of the pursuit of novel human knowledge.

55132
02-17-2005, 08:47 PM
Rush,



I agree with you that the only absolute knowlege available to us is the BIble and that all other information is up for grabs.

i also agree with the notion that all we know about almost everything is told to us by people whom we take their word for granted.

but selling the idea that the earth is not in orbit around the sun is pretty difficult at best.

However i will keep my eyes open if anything comes my way that might prove me wrong, till then i am enjoying the ride despite the bad company around us.

rushdoony
02-23-2005, 05:22 PM
The Earth Is Not Moving
by Marshall Hall
(328 pages, illustrations, bibliography & index)
Second Printing

Order from:
FEF, Inc.
Box 866
Cornelia, GA 30531


$20 in U.S. (P & H incl.)

Outside U.S. $30 (P & H incl.)
(Check, Cash, or M.O. only.)

(FEF, Inc. is The Fair Education Foundation - est. 1973)

get_real
02-23-2005, 05:55 PM
"you spin me round, round, baby, round, round"

rushdoony
02-23-2005, 06:41 PM
Contemporary Geocentrists:

Neville T. Jones, Ph.D. Physicist....

With his son, Steve, Dr. Jones has produced a CD with depicts a "small" Earth-centered Universe Model which no Truth-lover--Christian or otherwise--should fail to see and hear! This model has beautiful graphics and clear explanations which demonstrate how true science confirms the Biblical Model of a non-moving Earth around which the sun and all of the stars go every day and night. (To order the "Geocentric Universe 2.1" CD those with access to U.S. currency should simply send a $10 bill along with a return address to: Dr. Neville T. Jones - Old Bruan Schoolhouse - Mid Clyth - Nr. Lybster - Caithness - Scotland. This will cover S & H.

Gerardus D. Bouw, Ph.D. Astronomer.. His books are available at: 4527 Wetzel Avenue, Cleveland, Ohio, 44109. Dr. Bouw also edits the quarterly publication: The Biblical Astronomer.

Walter van der Kamp, Educator (Deceased early '98). His book De LABORE SOLIS (The Labor of the Sun)--now out of print--has been a seminal work in the modern challenge to Copernican heliocentricity.

R.G. Elmendorf, Mechanical Engineer. His book HELIOCENTRIC HUMBUG ..(A Critical Investigation of the Foucault ..Pendulum) is ..available from: Elmendorf Engineering, ..Bairdford, PA 15006 ($7)

Jonathan F. Henry, Ph.D., Physics. His 51 page ..monograph -- SOLAR SYSTEM MODELS -- is ..available from Dr. Henry at Clearwater Christian ..College, 3400 Gulf-to-Bay, Clearwater, FL 34619 ($5)

Martin Gwynne, Essayist, London, England ..(different titles...Write: Box 554, London W8 6RS)

sablefish
02-23-2005, 07:35 PM
You are nutz.. and yet it is your right to be as crazy as you like.. God Bless

rushdoony
02-23-2005, 09:03 PM
From: "Amnon Goldberg"
Subject: Scientific Mafiosi



An interesting article "Persecution in the name of science" from the
Orthodox Jewish newspaper "Yated Ne'eman"
http://chareidi.shemayisrael.com/TZV65vid.htm
The handling of Richard Sternberg by the scientific establishment
has been mild compared to some of his predecessors.



There exists an academic and media mafiosi which attempts to
discourage, suppress, ostracise, threaten, and demote individuals
who even start to show an interest in "heterodox ideas".



Organised pressure groups, chicanery, sharp practice, and jealous
histrionics abound in the "altruistic" Scientific Establishment,
all
geared to prevent and discredit any research and experimentation
that threatens the establishment "status quo" or is against
"informed opinion", especially in the area of today's three "sacred
cows" of Evolution, Relativity and Heliocentricity.



Any doubters or nay-sayers are lambasted with epithets like "dupe",
"heresy", "shameful", "disgraceful", "pseudo-scientific
fanaticism",
"fog of nonsense", "red herrings", "shallow", "starry-eyed
fundamentalism", "extreme", "lack of balance, "dogmatic",
"bigoted",
"hysterical", "far fetched", "ignorant", "of no help to anyone",
"height of presumption".



When even President Reagan in 1984 dared to express his doubts in
the theory of evolution, public questions were raised as to his
sanity!



Researchers like Immanuel Velikovsky (catastrophist), Halton Arp
(anti-Big Bang), Stefan Marinov (anti-Relativist), Pons and
Fleischmann (cold fusion), Robert Gentry (pleochroic haloes),
Richard Milton (anti-evolution), Barry Setterfield (decrease in
speed of light), Eric Braithwate (free energy), Walter van der Kamp
(geocentrist) etc., have been shown to have strong cases, or even
to
be substantially correct. Yet they were all initially greeted with
epithets like "stupid", "drivel", "loony", "harmless fruitcake",
"in
need of psychiatric help" etc., and conspiratorial attempts at the
highest levels were made to silence them, ban their publications,
restrict their access to laboratories, deny them telescope time
etc.
in blatant disrespect of the pursuit of novel human knowledge.

infowarrior
02-23-2005, 10:02 PM
Rushdoony, Thank you for posting this fascinating information. I scoffed at the idea that "The Earth is not Moving" when I first read it because the idea was completely paradoxical to everything I learned at public (government) school. Needless to say I was put into a state of cognitive dissonance. Luckly I learned to break through this sophisticated paradoxical conditioning two years ago when I woke up to the the new world order (another idea I scoffed at). Through breaking my conditioning I learned not to take the path of least resistance when I experience cognitive dissonance. That said, I am not entirely convinced of everything thats been proposed but I have enough wisdom to reserve judgement until I conduct further in-depth research (which I most certainly will).

Thanks again, preach on brother!


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance
"Cognitive dissonance is a state of imbalance between cognitions. For the purpose of this theory, cognitions are defined as being an attitude, emotion, belief or value, or even a mixture of these cognitions. In brief, the theory of cognitive dissonance holds that the human mind tends to adopt thoughts or beliefs so as to minimise the amount of dissonance (conflict) between cognitions."

Jimbo
02-24-2005, 10:45 AM
The Earth is NOT Moving - ??? :-o :-o :-o

Ok, I still “feel” just as “strongly” as I did when I wrote…

Re: The Earth is NOT Moving! – Post #120
http://www.clubconspiracy.com/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=164&start=110

Now from a completely different ”perspective”,... or ”angle of perception”,...

Let’s just say that, knowing for a fact that most of “humanity” & thus, the “masses”, have been ”duped for centuries” on, & so, we were for a very long time “led to believe” that the “earth was flat”, & that the “earth was the center of the Universe”, & therefore, “the earth was not moving” – around the Sun, that is. Then after centuries of focused “visual observation” at the “cosmos”, it started becoming very hard to “continue” w/ the “status quo”, & the “world” Order, at the time, “had to admit”, that yes, the “earth” is moving around the “sun” along w/ all the other “planets”. It became too “obvious” & thus too hard to “continue” w/ the “big lie”.

Again, just for "argument's sake",

How much "energy" do you think it would take for the "Universe" to instead "rotate around the Earth" every "24 hours" ?

If you can answer that, then, I will begin to question my own “sanity”...

Hey,... if I'm wrong, I'm wrong... The good thing about us "Truth Seekers" is that, "We can handle "The Truth" !!!

Let there be "Peace on Earth"...
8-)

rushdoony
02-28-2005, 06:42 PM
Thus: The first false doctrine domino is the foundational deception about Creation, that is, the contra-Scriptural lie that the Earth rotates on a "axis" and orbits the sun. This is the number one false doctrinal domino that causes the rest to fall. For over a century both Protestant and Catholic leaders fought against caving in to the Copernican counterfeit of Biblical geocentrism... which counterfeit was as unproven then as it is now. (These links are of interest in this connection: HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE.)

Make no mistake, Bible Geocentrism, i.e., a non-moving Earth, is a foundational Creation Issue. Furthermore, a non-moving Earth is just as clearly a teaching throughout the Bible as is the creation of man and all else on Earth (HERE, HERE). The main reason even allegedly Bible Fundamentalist Churches go along with the world’s heliocentricity model--and slip into their "theistic Copernicanism mantras" if asked about the conflict--is that they have been tricked into believing that "science" has the truth on this one and not the Scriptures. Wrong! The Biblical model answers all the known facts. You’ve been had! Give it up! Turn it around!

Remember: The Jesus you profess to love and serve is not only the Savior.... Oh no! HE is also The Creator! (Isn’t that what Eph. 3:9; Col. 1:16; John 1:3,10; Heb.1:2,10 all say??) It’s time for those who say they are Bible believers first, last, and always...to quit jerking geocentrism Scriptures around and trying to make them conform to what the world’s Satan-controlled theoretical science establishment demands! This is the one major Biblical doctrine which ALL churches have caused their flocks to abandon in favor of a mathematical model which hasn’t the first piece of sustainable observational or experimental evidence to back it up! Reject the deception! You say you and your church are Bible all the way? There is an easy way for you to prove that you mean it. The Bible teaches that the sun goes around an earth that is not moving. The world teaches the opposite but cannot prove it. You and your church can begin to make a decision on this now...or...you can wait until the Judgment begins....

Just keep in mind: God’s says that His Word does not "return to Him void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it" (Isaiah 55:11). When "the war the Lamb wins" exposes the deceptions upholding Satan’s kingdom of Babylon, God will no longer be taking excuses for accepting the world’s teaching on this uniquely pivotal Creation Doctrine...not from any who want to be on His side, that is! God is a jealous God (Josh.24:19,20; Deut.6:14,15;etc.), and rightly so! He is not going to allow "science falsely so called" to establish as "truth" a belief that the earth goes around the sun, not when He "hung the earth on nothing" (Job.26:7; no "axis", no orbital track) and stated plainly in writing many times that it is the sun that rises and sets and goes around the Earth which "cannot be moved" (Ps.93:1; I Chron.16:30; HERE). It is false "science" that will bow on this absolutely foundational, uniquely black or white issue, this issue which Satan designed to destroy the credibility of the Bible and pave the way for evolutionism. God will not bow, nor will those who trust Him and His Word in all things. Where do you stand on this Bible Absolute?? (Read The Earth Is Not Moving and see how the assumption-powered, factless Copernican deception bashed the Bible and paved the way for the success of the Darwinian Myth and all that is built on it.) [HERE] [HERE]
More:
http://www.fixedearth.com/house%20of%20god.htm

Alexandra
02-28-2005, 07:18 PM
All right, another geocentrist on board! :)

Check out http://www.geocentricity.com for more proof.

The fact that the earth does not move does indeed knock out evolution and all the other stuff.

Also run a Google search on Michelson and Morley. Their experiment in the 1890s proved geocentrism.

this
02-28-2005, 08:47 PM
I don't think that any percieved errors in the bible have to negate the good of the bible. Again, that dialectic Rush, why are you falling for it? Symbolism to tell a story is not the same as a modern scientific treatise. God doesn't have to explain or prove physics to modern day man, especially in a document written by biblical era men.

As for whether the earth is spinning, and assuming that water circling down a drain has alternate explanations, the question perhaps is spinning relative to what? If a cyclist has a cloud of bugs circling his head, his perception of whether the bugs are circling his head has nothing to do with whether his body is circling a track at the same time, or whether he is not moving at all.

rushdoony
02-28-2005, 09:06 PM
Conclusions

The conclusion is that the World does not orbit the Sun and that it does not rotate about an axis, either. This can be reasoned via the following logic:

The stars complete circular paths every 23h 56m 4.091s, apparently as a consequence of the observer having completed a circle of absolute maximum circumference 24,860 miles.
No similar, annual motion of the stars is observed, in consequence of our supposedly hurtling around an (approximate) circle of 584,058,077 mile circumference (i.e., 23,494 times bigger than the equatorial maximum given in point number 1).
Precession of the World's imaginary axis, such that it always points to the same point in the northern sky, will not produce such an alignment in the south, and vice versa.
The World therefore would have to remain aligned with the north-south axis of the celestial sphere, which, in turn, means that it cannot be orbiting the Sun, unless the stars are somehow tied to the World as the World moves.
Such non-fixed 'background' stars would be contrary to the heliocentric scheme.
Heliocentrism is therefore an invalid model.
Acentrism is therefore an invalid model.
Geocentrism (with a rotating World) is therefore an invalid model (see Proof of Heliocentric Incorrectness 1), because it is geometrically equivalent to a heliocentric model. Hence, since the heliocentric one is wrong, the equivalent geocentric one must also be wrong, simply because of its equivalence.
Star circles cannot be due to a rotating World, because they do not vary with latitude (a camera situated at the North Pole will still capture Polaris moving around the same-sized circle).
We are therefore left with a World that must remain on the north-south axis of the celestial sphere, must be central, because of countless other observations (e.g., Y.P. Varshni's paper, briefly mentioned under "Solar System," elsewhere on this website), and which cannot be a World that rotates.
The heliocentric and geocentric (with rotating World) cosmological models are geometrically equivalent, since they can be considered as sharing a common point of rotation. This is Mach's Principle. The heliocentric and geostatic systems, on the other hand, are not equivalent, either dynamically or geometrically. They are totally different, physical systems. There is no common point of rotation between them. Mach's Principle does not therefore apply, although many people get themselves and others completely confused by erroneously claiming that it does. Hence, the geostatic reference system (as discussed in the previous proof, linked to on point number 8) again matches observational facts, whereas the heliocentric/acentric concept does not.
More: www.midclyth.supanet.com

truebeliever
03-01-2005, 01:49 AM
rushdoony wrote:
Conclusions
Mach's Principle does not therefore apply, although many people get themselves and others completely confused by erroneously claiming that it does.

Yes Rush...many people would get confused.

Someone once wrote that sometimes a big cigar is just a big cigar.

Just a wild theory but right now forces are at work trying to lock down and ultimately get rid of a large portion of the Earths population.

It is well documented and requires our immediate attention.

Not that I want to tell you what to write or what to think, but Rush...G-E-T A L-I-F-E.

Although you may well already have one...you have already lowered the bar as low as it can go.

However...should you be correct...I will be suitably humbled and kiss you're ass. I feel however, my lips will remain safe and you're ass uncomprimised.

rushdoony
03-01-2005, 04:53 AM
From: "Amnon Goldberg"
Subject: Scientific Mafiosi



An interesting article "Persecution in the name of science" from the
Orthodox Jewish newspaper "Yated Ne'eman"
http://chareidi.shemayisrael.com/TZV65vid.htm
The handling of Richard Sternberg by the scientific establishment
has been mild compared to some of his predecessors.



There exists an academic and media mafiosi which attempts to
discourage, suppress, ostracise, threaten, and demote individuals
who even start to show an interest in "heterodox ideas".



Organised pressure groups, chicanery, sharp practice, and jealous
histrionics abound in the "altruistic" Scientific Establishment,
all
geared to prevent and discredit any research and experimentation
that threatens the establishment "status quo" or is against
"informed opinion", especially in the area of today's three "sacred
cows" of Evolution, Relativity and Heliocentricity.



Any doubters or nay-sayers are lambasted with epithets like "dupe",
"heresy", "shameful", "disgraceful", "pseudo-scientific
fanaticism",
"fog of nonsense", "red herrings", "shallow", "starry-eyed
fundamentalism", "extreme", "lack of balance, "dogmatic",
"bigoted",
"hysterical", "far fetched", "ignorant", "of no help to anyone",
"height of presumption".



When even President Reagan in 1984 dared to express his doubts in
the theory of evolution, public questions were raised as to his
sanity!



Researchers like Immanuel Velikovsky (catastrophist), Halton Arp
(anti-Big Bang), Stefan Marinov (anti-Relativist), Pons and
Fleischmann (cold fusion), Robert Gentry (pleochroic haloes),
Richard Milton (anti-evolution), Barry Setterfield (decrease in
speed of light), Eric Braithwate (free energy), Walter van der Kamp
(geocentrist) etc., have been shown to have strong cases, or even
to
be substantially correct. Yet they were all initially greeted with
epithets like "stupid", "drivel", "loony", "harmless fruitcake",
"in
need of psychiatric help" etc., and conspiratorial attempts at the
highest levels were made to silence them, ban their publications,
restrict their access to laboratories, deny them telescope time
etc.
in blatant disrespect of the pursuit of novel human knowledge.

marypopinz
03-01-2005, 05:46 AM
Info warrior and Alex,

I'm glad you've arrived to give Rush some support and are co-believers in his theory. It must suck for Rush to have no one to discuss this thread rationally with as a few have expressly stated that they are not sold on the idea.

Rush, preach on bro! You finally have some folks who agree with you. Good on ya mate!

Alexandra
03-01-2005, 07:53 AM
All right, kids, open up your Bibles (preferably King James) to Joshua 10:12-13, where it says:

Then spake Joshua to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon.

And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.


Now we agree the Moon goes around the earth. No problem there. If the earth were actually turning, how hard would it have been for Joshua to stay "Earth, turn not" or something like that?

Some people say the people back in the Old Testament times couldn't understand the earth turning on its axis. That's bull. A kindergartener can understand that--in fact they're indoctrinated with this beginning in elementary school!

rushdoony
03-01-2005, 08:52 AM
The second false doctrine domino--the one next in line after Copernican heliocentricity--is its pseudo-scientific mutation in the Natural Sciences, viz., Darwinism. Aspiring now to "fact" status (like its heliocentrism predecessor!) by virtue of unrelenting proselytizing in all media and educational institutions, this incredible myth which says that an atom of energy exploded and evolved into all that is...could never, ever have gotten to first base if the churches had fought back the way they should! Now--reminiscent of its Copernican forerunner--here comes the Darwinian Myth around third base, heading for another big score against the Bible (and facts and logic)! But not to worry! Along with its heliocentricity prototype, evolutionism will be totally mythified when the "King of Kings and His faithful followers overcome" the Beast’s government (Rev.17:4) by exposing the deceptions on which it is built, and then move irrevocably toward separating folks everywhere into two camps, viz., God’s and Satan’s (Rev. 13:7).

A third false doctrine domino that will fall when Judgment begins at the churches will be the Scripturally impossible and tremendously confusing and counterproductive teachings about a secret pre (or mid or post) tribulation Rapture of the Church. This widely taught deception has thoroughly disarmed scores of millions of Christians for what is ahead. The Rapture is true, of course. It just cannot and does not occur until the very last day of this earth’s history. (Check: HERE for starters.)

A fourth false doctrine domino, which God’s churches could have avoided by sticking to the Scriptures, involves the exposure of the ubiquitous Millennial teaching. This masterful deception has been straining to fulfill the teachings of 13th century anti-Christ mystical Kabbalism by presenting a labyrinthine quasi-Scriptural argument and overlooking these plain Scriptural facts: HERE & HERE & HERE & HERE & HERE....

A fifth false doctrine domino involves the exposure of Satan’s clever substitution of misleading concepts about his own indispensable role in God’s Plan in the place of the Biblical facts about that role. As God’s fabricated antithesis with no Truth in him from the beginning (Jn.8:44; I Jn.3:8), he continues to do what he was created to do until his plug is pulled on the last day of this earth’s history. After that he becomes a lifeless showcase lesson to be studied and marveled at throughout eternity (Is. 14:16; Ezek. 28:17; Is. 66:24). The Scripturally unsupportable church-taught beliefs about Satan have been a great barrier to the Christian’s understanding of God’s Plan for this temporary old earth and the eternal New Earth. You can get a grip on the Truth of the matter HERE and see even more clearly why God’s Judgment must begin in the churches....
http://www.fixedearth.com/house%20of%20god.htm

Alexandra
03-01-2005, 09:22 AM
Are you saying that Christ's thousand-year reign (the Millennium) isn't true?

Look at Revelation chapter 20 and especially note verse 4: And I saw the thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.


I do agree, though, that so many Christians have bought into the heliocentricity lie. My husband thinks I'm nuts for being a geocentrist, but he figures I'll believe what I want. It's just been so ingrained in people, and the number of people I know of who know geocentrism to be true I could count on one hand and have fingers left over!

I do believe the earth is round. There's no doubt about that. Flat-earthers point out the "four corners of the earth," but according to a dictionary a corner can mean one of the four directions--north, south, east, west.

As far as a pre-trib Rapture...jury's still out on that with me. Pre-tribbers quote 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 as proof for a pre-trib Rapture, but I'm not convinced that's what it's referring to. They say Jesus won't touch the ground, that the saints will meet Him in the air, and go back to heaven with Him, and then he'll make His Second Coming, along with the saints. I'm not convinced that's what those verses are referring to.

Edward Hendrie, in his Antichrist Conspiracy site, points out the parable of the wheat and the tares--the tares are gathered FIRST, and put in the fire. The wheat (saints) isn't taken out first.

I know some pre-tribbers aren't worried about major persecution 'cause they'll be taken out first. That's dangerous thinking...persecution hits and we're still here, it can cause people to lose faith!

Right now my thinking is, pre-trib rapture or no, you should ALWAYS be prepared for persecution, come what will! Jesus never promised we'd be free from it--quite the opposite! Here in America we still have it pretty easy--for now.

rushdoony
03-02-2005, 08:58 AM
From: "Cheryl B."
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Step 2 -acentriccosmology

As you say, the key movement is the turning of the earth, not
necessarily the revolution of the earth around the sun. The turning of the
earth on its axis is the movement that is used to explain away why it
appears that we are the center of the universe. Logically, if the earth is
not turning on its axis then that means that the appearance of us being the
center of the universe is not just appearance but reality.

As to the speed of the stars as they go flying around the earth once a day,
they can't be travelling any faster than the acentrists say the stars and
galaxies are travelling as they go flying away from each other in their stupid Big Bang.

As a sidenote, if the universe is as the acentrists/Big Bangers say --
i.e.
an unbounded, infnite universe with no center because everything is the
center (because the universe is infinite) -- then they are ascribing GODLIKE
POWERS to matter. This means they may as well get down on their hands and
knees and kiss the dirt beneath their feet for truly they worship dirt
--
the atom itself which they believe is able to and is in fact creating itself
at this very moment out of nothing, then proceding to assemble itself
(with other atoms) into planets and stars and all manner of living creatures.

Therefore -- with the current acceptance of Copernican theories, evolution,
Big Bang, etcetera -- Romans Chapter 1 explains why our world is so
depraved, with depraved, evil people breaking into people's homes and
stealing children to be raped, tortured and murdered; why unborn babies in
the womb are tolerated to have their heads violently ripped off their bodies
along with their limbs -- on and on, the homosexuality, pedophilia,
brutality of man against man.

Romans 1:18-25 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all
ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in
unrighteousness, Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them;
for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the
CREATION OF THE WORLD are CLEARLY SEEN, being understood by the things that
are made, even his eternal power and Godhead, so that THEY ARE WITHOUT
EXCUSE: Because that WHEN THEY KNEW God, they glorified him not as God,
neither were thankful; but became VAIN IN THEIR IMAGINATIONS, and their
FOOLISH heart was darkened. Professing themseles to be wise, THEY BECAME
FOOLS. And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made
like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creepting
things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of
their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves. Who
CHANGED THE TRUTH OF God into a LIE, and WORSHIPPED AND SERVED THE CREATURE
(i.e. the atom) MORE THAN THE CREATOR, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
from www.midclyth.supanet.com

RUready
03-02-2005, 11:56 AM
rushdoony wrote:
I kid you not.

If you go up in a helicopter in New York and hover for 4 hours and then come back down to earth you should be in Los Angeles, not New York ( if the Earth were really moving ).
Gravity does not account for the copter still being in New York, it would only account for the copter not falling out of the sky back to Earth.

If Copernicanism can be proven wrong, that the universe is geocentric or geostatic and not heliocentric then
Darwinism will fall, then Marxism will fall and then Freudism will fall. All Satans lies will fall like dominoes one afer the other.

Geostatic means the sun and stars go around the Earth each day and folks the only way this could be true is if: The universe is not one ten-trillionth of the size you've been told by Government. Are NASA workers and most high school and university science teachers not paid by the government? Does government lie to us? This is their biggest lie.

This is a religious war. Do we believe the Cabbalist/Pharisaic/Satanist RELIGION of a big bang and out of control exploding universe with bug-eyed aliens or the Christian RELIGION with Earth and Humans as
Special Creations in God's orderly universe.
The Bible says over 60 times that the sun orbits the Earth.
I don't expect anyone to believe this until they check out:
www.fixedearth.com
and www.midclyth.supanet.com

Signed RJ Rushdoony ( real name Bernie )


ooh, oooh, oooh, boy this is something to really get excited about. here we go again-religion.
forget about everything else. you say this is their biggest lie????? this???? is this how you satisfy your concerns for the nwo???? by this???
you are a freak, listen to yourself. if you haven't figured out what the biggest lie has been till this 'earth' thing, then man you are ignorant and self-centered and greedy. you want the world to run on your beliefs which is nothing more than symbolism within the bible. if the nwo is going to sort us all, man you will be the first pick for the shit pile/file

rushdoony
03-02-2005, 01:42 PM
Proof of heliocentric incorrectness 2 - Mach's Principle



Dr. Neville Thomas Jones, Ph.D., D.I.C., M.Sc.(Phys), M.Sc.(Comp), B.Sc.(Hons), M.Inst.P.,

formerly of the Clarendon Laboratory, Oxford University, England.



Dedication

This work is dedicated to the glory of the God of Abraham.



When I first began questioning the heliocentric myth a couple of years ago, I spent a lot of time reading and rethinking what I "knew." Upon reaching the conclusion that we are being taught rubbish, I eagerly related this revelation to my wife. Her reply? "[She] knew it all along. Ever since [she] was five!"

Anyway, the source of most confusion is rooted in the following:

The ruling, Bible-based cosmology of a centrally-located, non-moving World was effectively done away with by Mikolaj Kopernik (usually given the Latin name, "Nicolas Copernicus"), who wrote in his infamous book, "Die Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium," that the Sun was "the Visible God" and that it should be placed "upon a royal throne, [to] truly guide the circling family of planets, earth included." (Book 1, Chapter 10.) Others had tried to propound this Sun-centred model well before Kopernik (for example, Aristarchus of Samos, in the 3rd century B.C.), so it was known of at the first coming of Christ, though rightly dismissed as unscriptural, unfounded and illogical.
Kopernik’s "revelation/revolution," published in 1543, proclaimed that the Sun was at the centre of the universe, and this idea later gained the fervent support of Johannes Kepler, Galileo Galilei, etc., despite these men still having no evidence to justify Kopernik's original, outlandish claim.
Indeed, the textbooks persist in wrongly instructing people that Galilei demonstrated the geocentric model to be flawed in 1610, when he observed the phases of Venus through a telescope. By 1610, Ptolemy's system had reigned supreme for almost 1,500 years and the exceptionally detailed observational work of the Danish astronomer, Tycho Brahe (1546-1601), further verified it (with only slight, proposed changes). It is inconceivable, therefore, that Galilei was ignorant of either the Ptolemaic or Tychonic models, which implies, then, that Galilei's original claim was designed by him to be deceitful.
This widespread misapprehension regarding the phases of Venus is frequently cited as being 'scientific evidence' for heliocentrism. It is the astronomical equivalent of the Peppered Moth 'evidence' used to support the ludicrous idea of organic evolution and, like its counterpart, is still commonly bandied about as being a fact.
In the 19th and 20th centuries, observational data showed that the Sun is not positioned at the centre of the universe, and numerous experiments had failed to demonstrate any motion of the World through the luminiferous aether. In respect of the latter, Albert Einstein came to the rescue by developing the theory of special relativity, which 'saved' James Clerk Maxwell's brilliant electromagnetic theory by doing away with the very thing that Maxwell's theory is built upon - the luminiferous aether. (No one, to the best of my knowledge, has ever explained just how Einstein saved Maxwell's theory by removing its foundations.)
However, this still was not enough and, in order to preserve the humanistic, atheistic philosophy and edifice that had been lovingly built upon Kopernik's suggested cosmology, the acentric paradigm was born. This is the ultimate victory for the intelligentsia, because God, even if some poor misguided idiot (to use Richard Dawkins' favourite word) still believed in Him, would be conveniently relegated out to infinity, leaving man to go about his business, answerable only to himself.
What is lost in all this is the fact that geostatic and heliocentric cosmologies are not equivalent. The common claim that we cannot tell the difference between a heliocentric and a geocentric theory of the universe, and that they are both manifestations of the same, acentric cosmology, is obscuring a deeper reality.


One thing that we need to be clear about is that the Bible is not explicitly geocentric. It certainly implies that the World is at or very near the centre of the cosmos, but does not actually say so. Rather, the Bible is geostatic. It states that the World cannot be moved. It states that the Sun travels daily about the World. It states that the starry heavens turn.

The World does not rotate according to Scripture. If the World is not rotating, then the heavens are. The movement of the heavens is then real, not apparent, and the direction is east to west (by simple observation), not west to east (as they are by necessity in the heliocentric case).



There are, then, three cosmologies to consider: heliocentric, geocentric and geostatic. The Bible tells us in plain, simple terms that the real one is the geostatic case (see, for instance, 1 Ch. 16:30, Ps. 93:1, Ps. 96:10).

In each of these systems, various celestial bodies are moving. Actually moving, by definition (this is what the whole particular scenario is built upon). Relative motion has little or nothing to do with the initial construction of the model. Let us consider these three models.



Case 1: Heliocentric



The Sun is located at the centre of the cosmos.
The Moon goes around the World in a W to E direction (anticlockwise, when viewed from within the northern celestial hemisphere).
The World rotates on an axis in a W to E manner.
The World/Moon subsystem goes around the Sun in an anticlockwise direction, taking one year to complete one revolution.


Case 2: Geocentric



The World is located at the centre of the cosmos.
The Moon goes around the World in a W to E direction (anticlockwise, when viewed from within the northern celestial hemisphere).
The World rotates on an axis in a W to E manner.
The Sun goes around the World in an anticlockwise direction, taking one year to complete one revolution.


Case 3: Geostatic



The World is located at the centre of the cosmos.
The Moon goes around the World in an E to W direction (clockwise).
The World does not rotate.
The Sun goes around the World in a clockwise direction, averaging a solar day to complete one revolution.


Whether you think the last one is crazy or not is of no importance at this stage. The geostatic model is a legitimate scheme, because :

It is the one and only one state specified and alluded to in Holy Scripture (this alone makes it the primary reference system to which all others must conform) ;
It must, by its very nature, completely describe and account for everything we can observe from the World. Motion under this scenario can always be attributed to the thing which appears to move ;
Either the cosmos has the World at its centre, or it just appears to have the World at its centre. The very same acentric premise, that informs us that the latter is 'reality', must also, by its definition, support the former contention ;
No experiment or observation has ever disproved it.
Hence, the heliocentric scenario must agree in all observational respects with the geostatic case, and not the other way around.

The next step is to start thinking about what is really happening in each of these models. We will begin with the geostatic (Bible) case. This is an example of what is termed, in the computer industry, WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get). The World does not move. Everything else moves. Hence, if you observe the Sun rising in the east, travelling across the sky and setting in the west, then that is because the Sun rises in the east, travels across the sky and sets in the west. Just like the "Ronseal" varnish advertisement ("it does exactly what it says on the tin").

Since the Moon does the same sort of thing, but more slowly, the Sun gains on the Moon, catches it (at which time we can sometimes obtain a solar eclipse) and overtakes it. Of all possible models of celestial motion, the geostatic scenario (where everything else does the moving) definitely has to be allowed. Indeed, it is a requirement of all other configurations that they agree with the predictions of the geostatic system. In particular, the heliocentric system must agree with the geostatic system. Any fundamental difference appearing between the two would disprove heliocentrism, because geostaticism is supported by experiment, observation and our senses.

Now, conventional 'wisdom' claims that the heliocentric (Fig. 1) and geocentric (Fig. 2) systems are just special instances of the acentric 'reality'. That the motions involved are equivalent. (These figures are typical of such sketches shown throughout the relevant literature - for example, Smart [1].) There is, however, one tacit assumption in this that is not at all obvious, either from the diagrams, or from the body of such texts.



Figure 1: A heliocentric view of the Sun-World system, looking 'down' from the north celestial pole. (Not drawn to scale.)

Of course, the World also rotates on an axis in the heliocentric scenario, in order to account for diurnal observations, although this rotational component of the World's motion is not shown in Fig. 1.

Figure 2 depicts the geocentric situation, with the orientation of the Sun's direction of motion being in the same sense as its heliocentric counterpart. In this way, the two models can be regarded as being equivalent, since they predict the same effects, when viewed from either body. If we could stand outside the universe and look in, we could tell which was right and which was wrong, but from our terrestrial abode we cannot. Furthermore, Einstein's General Relativity shows that there is no place within the physical universe from which we could distinguish absolutely between these two systems.

What isn't quite so obvious is that Fig. 2 also requires of necessity a spinning World, such that the daily view of the heavens to someone on the World will be in accord with reality.





Figure 2: The supposedly equivalent geocentric version of Fig. 1. Notice that to allow for the Sun's orbital direction to be in the same sense as the World's in Fig. 1, the World has to be spinning on an axis in this model, too.

Some people undoubtedly regard the geocentric label as implicitly indicating both a central and non-rotating World. Strictly speaking, this latter implication is more properly described by the term geostatic or geostationary. In a geostatic model of the cosmos, Fig. 2 is wrong, because it predicts that the Sun would rise in the west and set in the east, in contradiction to what we know to be true. To correct Fig. 2, we would need to simply reverse the arrows in this second diagram (there would also be changes required to the motion of other celestial bodies, too).

Although the heliocentric and geocentric descriptions of the so-called 'solar system' are probably dynamically equivalent, as long as the World is rotating about an axis in each one of them, the geostatic scenario can only be satisfied by adopting a clockwise orbital motion of the Sun and Moon (when viewed from the north). Heliocentric and geostatic models are therefore not dynamically equivalent, since they vary considerably in their predictions of orbital speed and direction. This is because, in the geocentric case, as distorted through time in the manner briefly indicated above, the World has gone from non-rotating to rotating, seemingly without many people noticing, or bothering about it.

Hence, to say that the heliocentric scenario must be correct, because observations that can assume a geostatic perspective support reality, is wrong. The equivalence between the two breaks down, as a consequence of the fact that one system has a movement that the other does not have (namely a rotating World), and that the sense of actual rotation is different between them.

That a physical system must be independent of the geometrical reference frame by which one mathematically attempts to describe its behaviour, was covered in depth by the German physicist, Ernst Mach (of speed of sound fame). It is thus given the name of ‘Mach’s Principle’ and was heavily influential in the work of Poincaré, Lorentz and Einstein, around the turn of the nineteenth century.

The classic example usually quoted, to illustrate to a general audience the significance of Mach's Principle, is that of a small boy in a school playground, bouncing a tennis ball up and down on the ground and catching it again. Clearly it does not matter if we create a system of rectangular coordinates that will allow us to specify at any instant where, in three-dimensional space, the boy, the tennis ball, the ground, etc., are positioned. Furthermore, the coordinate system, or ‘reference frame’, that we construct is not unique, the only thing that is unique is that the positions we derive from it are valid only for that particular coordinate system. If we fix the frame to another centre, or we use spherical polar coordinates, for example, we simply get different equations of motion, but the boy continues to bounce the ball up and down, totally oblivious to our abstract geometrical frame of reference. We also notice that, although the point of contact has various means of being represented in a mathematical way, the physical spot on the surface of the World does not change. In other words, and this is the important point to grasp, there exists a physical location within the system from which one can observe a reality, in this particular case, the ball is either touching the ground at regular intervals of time, or it isn't.

The same is true, though it is perhaps not quite so obvious to see, if we use a rotating frame of reference. In this case, although the boy looks different, depending upon the angle we are viewing him at, he is still behaving in exactly the same way. To see this, imagine that we have painted tennis court lines on the playground. The ball is hitting a point on the tennis court which is completely definable in terms of the fixed positions of the lines. We can specify it as, say, 2 metres in from the base line and 1 metre in from the inner tram line on the right hand, far side court as we look at it (this is where the dubious concept of an ‘observer’ comes from in special relativity). No matter how we adjust our vantage point, the ball hits the ground at the same physical location (albeit different coordinates, depending on the geometry used). The physical place of contact between the ball and the ground is a consequence of the mechanical system being observed and is irrespective of the reference frame used to describe the observation and behaviour of the system. This is Mach's Principle and it is used to declare that geocentric and heliocentric frameworks are dynamically equivalent (i.e., that from the perspective of the World we can not distinguish between them).



To see the fallacy inherent when applying this argument to a geostatic and heliocentric comparison, we can imagine the following four cases:

Case A: The boy starts going around in a circle, but ‘on the spot’, still bouncing the ball.
Case B: The boy levitates an inch or so in the air, but otherwise stands still, as he was before, while the World rotates underneath him at the same angular speed though opposite sense to A.
Case C: The boy stands still upon the surface of the playground, with the soles of his shoes super-glued to the ground, and the World rotates.
Case D: As in case C, but the boy rotates.


Cases A and B are dynamically equivalent. Any reference frame so far conceived will give the same results for A as it does for B.

Cases C and D are dynamically equivalent. Any reference frame so far conceived will give the same results for C as it does for D.

So I will ask you a question. Taking either case A or case B, I don’t care which, is that case dynamically equivalent to case C ? If not, then why not ?

Take a look again at cases 1, 2 and 3. Consider how they fit in (or not) with cases A, B, C and D. Is the picture and its obscuration becoming clearer?

Hopefully you will now see that the whole point is that we are not dealing just with relative motions of three bodies. We are dealing with two different physical systems, each one of which will, of course, contain consequences of their actions that can be tested observationally. Namely, in this particular example, where does the ball strike the playground?

A physical system will behave in a certain way. We are not talking here about quantum mechanical effects, nor relativistic effects. We are talking about the behaviour of celestial bodies, as viewed from any vantage point within the physical universe. If you assemble a toy train set on the floor and send some current through the motor, the train will travel in a particular direction. Whenever you switch on the power, the train will always travel in the same manner. However, if you reverse the polarity across the motor, the train will go the other way. The set has the same components, but behaves differently. After any time, t1, the front of the engine will be at (x1,y1,z1) in the first configuration, but at (x2,y2,z1) in the second. For any t1, with the exception of those values of t1 which correspond to n half-circuits around the track, (x1,y1,z1) will not equal (x2,y2,z1). They are different points on the surface of the World. Mach’s Principle is irrelevant. They are two differently behaving physical systems, albeit with the same components. We can see the difference between them, because we stand on the floor and look down on the system, but if we were shrunk down in size and were travelling on the train, then we could not tell, as long as all we can see are the components of the train set. If we could see a fixed point upon which to attach the coordinates of our observations, then we could still tell.

How does this fit in with the heliocentric/geostatic problem? Well, first of all we note that there are again two physical systems. This must be true, by definition, but if further proof is required, consider the motion of the Moon about the World. In one scenario it is actually travelling clockwise, whereas in the other it is actually travelling anticlockwise. They are different configurations of the same three objects (World, Sun and Moon). In addition, one system has an extra component of movement than the other (see Fig. 3). It is thus a perfectly legitimate question to ask, "can I stand anywhere at all within the universe and observe a discernible difference between the heliocentric model and the geostatic reference system?" Mach’s Principle has nothing to do with it. If we can find just one undeniable anomaly, then the heliocentric model can be ruled out.



Figure 3: The heliocentric hypothesis is not dynamically equivalent to a geostatic cosmos. In the former, viewed from within the northern celestial hemisphere, there are two relevant components of motion, and the World goes around the Sun anticlockwise. In the geostatic case, there is only one movement to be considered - that of the Sun going clockwise around the World. (Illustrated by Jack Lewis.)



The problem now becomes one of proving scientifically that there is indeed a way to discriminate between the reference system and the heliocentric model. (I had to qualify this statement, because there has always been a way to tell. Believers in God have always known that the World does not orbit the Sun - for the Bible tells us so!) The heliocentric scenario is propped up by ever-deeper philosophical ad hocs, under the guise of 'science' and my objective is therefore to use science itself to bring heliocentrism down, rather than take the simple, though perfectly legitimate, stance of saying that God's written word disallows it.

In this sea of relativism, what is needed is an immovable rock on which to anchor ourselves. The spiritual rock is the Bible and the spiritual anchor is Christ. We are the ship and are connected to the anchor via the unbreakable 'rope' that Christ supplies, i.e., the Holy Spirit. The sea is mankind, which acts to toss us about all over the place. The rock was placed in the sea by God, specifically for our benefit. If we ignore the rock, or do not search for Who put it there, we will either drown in the sea, or be dashed to pieces on the rock, whilst the anchor lies unused at our disposal.

To disprove heliocentrism similarly requires us to latch onto a small entity in a universe in which we are told that everything is mere relative motion and purposeless chance. We need something that is not relative, but behaves in a discernibly different way in a heliocentric (or geocentric) scheme to how it behaves in a geostatic scheme.

The luminiferous aether? The plenum aether? No, these may rotate. The World's gravitational field? No, its behaviour away from the World is not known, only assumed. The World's magnetic field? This may be stationary as far as the World is concerned, but would it rotate with the structure of the firmament? Also, would we be justified in extending laboratory experiments with bar magnets to a World where the cause of the field is only modelled on a huge bar magnet, especially when even the laboratory experiments give inconclusive results? No, there has to be something else.

I have previously investigated the direction that the Moon's shadow travels across the face of the World during a solar eclipse, and for a while thought this to be promising, but have now abandoned that idea after conducting further analysis upon it. I remain totally convinced, though, that there must be something, because the two systems are fundamentally different.

Okay, let's recap. The heliocentric idea was known of at the time of Christ's first coming, but was not considered to contain any substance. Jesus never even mentioned it in passing and his half-brother, James, tells us that it is the heavenly bodies which cause day and night (etc.) by their movement, rather than the spinning of the World about an imaginary axis. (James 1:17)

The publication of a multi-volume book, in 1543, by a Sun-worshipping astrologer who knew nothing about physics, then sowed the seed of the present-day misconception that we are taught as being "fact." One after another, physicists placed meat on Kopernik's bare bones, with many contorted and ad hoc components of motion, that look to me more like cancerous growths, grafted on to account for what we daily, and seasonally, observe. In particular, the World was assigned a period of 23h 56m 4.091s, to explain away the rotation of the firmament.

Unfortunately, there is such an amalgamation of alleged movements now, albeit not a single one we are to believe can be detected with our senses, that it is difficult to find a phenomenon that will be demonstrably different in a heliocentric model to how it is in the geostatic reality.

The acentric scheme allows us to have the World as the centre of the universe. Figure 4 depicts this situation. A little later, in this model, and we get the configuration shown in Fig. 5, where the background celestial sphere has rotated east to west, as well as the Sun and Moon rotating east to west. The stars go full circle in 23h 56m 4.091s (the sidereal day), but the Moon only goes around once every 24h 50m 28.5s. Therefore the Moon seems to travel west to east, with respect to the background stars.





Figure 4: Motion of the Moon, Sun and 'background' stars in a geostatic (i.e., non-moving World) framework, looking 'down' from the north ecliptic pole.





Figure 5: As with Fig. 4, but a few hours later. All motion is real, not apparent.



To account for the diurnal motions of a geostatic scenario, the heliocentric model, depicted in Fig. 6, must impose two components of motion on the World - it must rotate on an axis and revolve annually about the Sun.





Figure 6: In the heliocentric idea, the centre of the universe coincides with the centre of the Sun, and the Moon traverses an epicycle, that is centred on a deferent, centred on the Sun.



I believe that the solution which will enable us to demonstrate that the heliocentric and geostatic scenarios are not equivalent to each other, lies with this (non) rotation of the World. The heliocentric system requires of necessity a spinning globe, in order to satisfy nightly, observational facts. But if there exists a motion-related phenomenon that would be the same, irrespective of whether the World spins or not, then the correct model will be the one that functions properly with this extra circumstance, whereas the counterfeit model will almost certainly fail. Hence, we will now turn our attention to something which does not depend upon the World's supposed rotation; namely, the phases of Venus. To explain this whole area, however, we will, for simplicity, first consider the phases of the Moon.

The Moon is illuminated by the Sun, such that one hemisphere of the Moon is brightly lit and the other is in almost complete darkness. What we perceive of as being the Moon's phase is therefore determined by the geometry shown in Fig. 7, below, where A represents the Moon and B represents the Sun.





Figure 7: A solid sphere, whose centre is at A, is illuminated by a spatially extended light source, centred on B, and observed by someone standing on the surface of the World, the centre of which is at C.



In the absence of background reflections, or other light sources, the illumination of a solid sphere depends primarily upon the angle, a , since we can vary angle g almost at will, by sliding the light source along AB, without in any appreciable way affecting what is lit up, whereas fixing g and altering a , by sliding the light source up and down BC, will drastically change the illuminated hemisphere. (In a similar fashion, by sliding the observer up and down AC, we deduce that angle b has very little influence, too, on what we observe, given the distances involved.)

Again, from Fig. 7 and the law of cosines, we get

a2 = b2 + c2 - 2bc cos a ,

which enables us to calculate a (or g , by use of a similar expression) for any given position of the centres of the World, Sun and Moon. The centre of the World is at (0,0) in the geostatic system, and the centre of the Sun is at (0,0) in the heliocentric system. The distances a and b are constant in each model, and within our forthcoming simulations are assumed to be those that are considered well-established. The rotation rates, calculated to six decimal places, facilitate the determination of the position of the relevant objects in each system. Thus, a high-level computer program was developed to compare the two cosmological models. The graphical user interface for this program is shown as Fig. 8.





Figure 8: GUI for the phase analysis program, showing angle a for the Moon, one mean solar hour at a time, over twelve months. (Times of dichotomy are shown by dotted lines.)



Now the phases of Venus are very interesting, because of "a well observed and measurable effect known as Schröter's Effect." (Geoff Kirby, as contained in Chapter 6 of his online biography, emphasis mine.) "In fact the observed phase [of Venus] is usually slightly less than the predicted phase. The size of this anomaly varies. So for example the time when the Venus disk is seen to be 50% illuminated is sometimes several earth-days different from the predicted time. Explanations of this anomaly generally propose that [it] is caused by the atmosphere of Venus." (Simon Edgeworth.)

The following quotations should provide the reader with the essence of the puzzlement of this phenomenon: "The curiosity is that the apparent phase is always less than the theoretical phase. If we define the phase as the fraction of the apparent planetary diameter illuminated, then the observed fraction (or phase) is about 0.03 to 0.05 less. This is quite dramatic around the time of dichotomy which is the time when the planet should be exactly half phase, i.e. the phase is 0.5 and the angle Sun-Venus-Earth is 900. The apparent phase appears to be about 0.45 so that Venus is very slightly a crescent." (Geoff Kirby.)

"The so-called phase anomaly is another interesting topic for the observer of Venus. It has long been known that the time when Venus shows a half phase in the telescope frequently occurs later than the predicted time when Venus is west of the sun; and half phase is earlier than expected when Venus is east of the Sun. The half phase is called dichotomy. The results of two observers are shown [in a graph on the website] for autumn 1999. Both observers agree in timing dichotomy at 2nd November 1999, approximately three days 'late'." (The British Astronomical Association.)

"The observed phase may differ slightly from the predicted value, the phenomenon being known as the Schröter effect. Dichotomy is seen to occur a few days early at eastern elongation and likewise late at western elongation." (David Graham, et al.)

"Another old mystery regarding Venus is the Phase Anomaly. This is most noticeable at dichotomy when the planet's terminator (the line dividing day and night) should be a straight line. At that time the planet is so placed with respect to the Earth that it should look exactly like a half-moon with the terminator running straight down the middle of the planet. Astronomers have long been aware that for some unknown reason this never happens at the predicted time. Theoretically we know Venus' orbit with such accuracy that the exact time of dichotomy can be predicted to within hours. But in practise it can be out by a week or more. The problem is that there is nothing wrong with Venus' position in its orbit - so what can be causing this problem?

"A further aspect of the Phase Anomaly problem is that astronomers have commented at various times on the difficulty of determining Venus' exact phase. Sometimes it seems to be ahead of its predicted phase and at other times behind. The British Astronomical Association has looked into this for the better part of [the 20th] century." (Unknown author.)

In his website, Geoff Kirby makes a good case for daylight masking being the cause of about 40% of Schröter's effect. Certainly, I consider that his experimental method and associated reasoning are sound. This, however, still leaves the remaining 60% unaccounted for, with perhaps the most viable explanation so far offered being the possible scattering characteristics of the Venusian atmosphere (Giuseppe Marino and Fabio Salvaggio, for instance). There is, though, another possibility - one that correlates with previous, experimental results.

Figure 9 shows a run of the program which plotted out the angle a for two years and indicates the points of dichotomy for the heliocentric model. The second dichotomy line is the one relating to eastern elongation (this simply depends upon the initial configuration of the three bodies - World, Sun and Venus - in the program code).





Figure 9: Variations in the phase angle a for the heliocentric system over a two year period from the starting (all aligned) position.



What is hugely significant here is that the time of dichotomy in the geostatic model (637 days) is 2 days before what it 'should' be according to the heliocentric model (639 days) and, since theoretical calculations assume a heliocentric 'solar system' (that can be worked out from a geocentric perspective, if the World rotates), the geocentric, geostatic scenario correctly agrees with observation, whereas the almost universally taught paradigm (heliocentrism, or acentrism, to be more precise) does not.

As a test of the program code, we should expect there to be very little difference in the angle g over most of this two-year period, simply because the heliocentric scenario is specially formulated to account for the angular velocities of celestial bodies (this is the main reason why the Moon shadow direction during a solar eclipse corresponds with what we know to be true). Figure 10 confirms that, between days 110 and 644 at least, there is indeed hardly any difference between the heliocentric and geostatic values of this Sun-World-Venus angle.





Figure 10: Testing the mathematical models by plotting the differences in g .



(The jumps that can be seen to occur at each year-end, in Fig. 10, have still to be resolved.)



Preliminary Conclusions

Differences, such as the actual times of dichotomy in each model, can be expected to show up because the geostatic and heliocentric(/geocentric) systems work in a different way. In particular, extra components of motion must be assigned to the World, in order for the heliocentric model to tally with reality. Here, though, we have deliberately sought a phenomenon that does not depend upon one such ad hoc motion (namely, the supposed rotation of the World about an 'axis'), and investigated the behaviour of the two conflicting models.

The correct model will agree with all observations. The phase 'anomaly' of Venus is an undeniable, observational fact, that has been known of for at least two hundred years (from the time of its description by Schröter). The heliocentric idea does not predict what actual observations consistently show. The heliocentric idea must therefore be wrong (as was demonstrated by Arago, Airy, Michelson & Morley, Michelson & Gale, Trouton & Noble, et al.). On the other hand, the geocentric, geostatic model, insofar as it has been tested, correctly matches the data.

These investigations remain on-going, but appear extremely promising. In particular, I remain confident that God's written word will once again prove to be totally vindicated and, if so, in a way that could not be more fitting, or ironic, for the observed phases of Venus is the exact same phenomenon that Galilei originally (and fraudulently) claimed disproved a geostatic cosmos!

rushdoony
03-05-2005, 01:30 PM
The Copernican heresy so thoroughly reversed man's view of the cosmos, the social order and hierarchy of moral values, that it was as if a new species of being had arisen; no doctrine has had a more pernicious influence on the human spirit. The English, French and American revolutions stemmed from it, and it paved the way for Evolution, Communism, Nietzsche, atheistic existentialism, and Einstein.‡ Many wax lyrical of the `beauty and elegance' of the latter's Theory of Relativity, and all motion is relative, and that there are no absolute terms of reference. But it is now being shown to be inconsistent, contradictory, riddled with anomalies, and as formulated cannot be correct, violating the laws of thermodynamics. The more honest savants admit "the earth is indeed the centre of the universe. The distribution of quasars (powerful radio sources) in vast concentric shells distributed equally about the earth means that the Cosmological Principle (that any point in the universe is the same as any other - acentrism) will have to go. A coordinate system fixed to the earth is the preferred frame of reference in the universe; consequently both the Special and General Theory of Relativity must be abandoned for Cosmological purposes" (Astrophysics and Space Science no.43). But worse, it has led to the doctrine of moral relativism, that there are no moral absolutes, which results in anarchism, hedonism, despair and meaningless, mechanistic impersonal materialism.
COMPLETE ARTICLE BELOW:
----------------------------------------------

"The Earth is established, it cannot be moved" (Tehillim 93)

Amnon Goldberg

(A letter printed in the Jewish Tribune of January 10, 1990 [#].)



"For that is your wisdom and understanding in the eyes of the nations" (Dvorim 4) - "this is the calculation of tekufos and mazolos" (Shabbos 75): celestial mechanics.

Unlike the bloody schism of the Julian-Gregorian calendrical reform or the horrendously errant Muslim calendar, the Jewish calendar has not been taxed with any error, nor required any change whatsoever, equal to every test in the 2000 years since its fixing by the Master astronomers of the Talmud, a masterpiece of harmonising the lunar month with the solar year.

The claim in the recent Papal apology to Galileo that today no one believes in geocentrism is incorrect. There is a worldwide group of top-notch PhD scientists, such as the Tychonian Society† (after the great astronomer Tycho Brahe), who maintain like the ancients, that the earth is at rest and is located at the centre of the universe. This unique earth, central to the Creator's affection and attention was the first object created. The luminaries were created on the Fourth Day to serve an already existing earth - "to be for signs, for seasons, for days, and for years". Eretz comes from the root Rotzeh, because "it wanted to do the will of its Owner" (Breishis Rabbah 5), and also from Ratz, "because of the running of the orbiting spheres which circle it" (Radak). The clear cut prose and exclusively geocentric verses of the Tenach refute the idea that the earth is an insignificant speck of matter, in the corner of an obscure galaxy, set wandering about a minor star selected from assorted trillions.



Now today everybody "just knows" that the earth goes round the sun (heliocentrism). Yet all attempts to show that the earth is moving have failed: "We cannot feel our motion through space, nor has any experiment ever proved that the earth is actually in motion". Invoked `proofs' such as the phenomenon of the earth's oblateness (slight flattening at the poles), the Doppler Effect (the apparent change in frequency of light as it moves towards or away from the observer), the Sagnac Effect, stellar aberration and parallax, nutation, Herschel's star streaming, the Coriolis forces (the cause of water tending to drain clockwise in the northern hemisphere, anticlockwise in the southern), and Foucault's Pendulum (which can be seen in the entrance of the Science Museum, S. Kensington),are in fact more easily explained by the entire universe rotating about the earth once a day. And the toil of thousands of exasperated researchers, in the extremely varied experiments of Arago, De Coudre's induction, Fizeau, Fresnell drag, Hoek, Jaseja's lasers, Jenkins, Klinkerfuess, Michelson-Morley interferometry, Lord Rayleigh's polarimetry, Troughton-Noble torque, and the famous "Airy's Failure" experiment, all conclusively failed to show any rotational or translational movement for the earth, whatsoever. "Unthinkable!" to the bamboozled modern mind, "with undesirable philosophical implications"; evolution is more unthinkable, yet most of mankind hold by it - "proclaim a lie again and again and in due course everyone will believe you" (the late unlamented Goebbels).

All the research confirms the Biblical-Tychonic schema, with the planets of the solar system (except the earth which is not a "planet") in epicycular retinue about the sun, k'gibor lorutz orach, with the whole array, moon and stars, centred on the earth (see the Maharal's Be'er Hagolah 6), and censures all the other phantasms eg the discovery that quasars (powerful radio sources) are distributed in vast concentric shells equally distributed about the earth, with the earth at dead centre, confuting the atheistic Cosmological Principle (that any point in the universe is the same as any other - acentrism), and that the earth does indeed reside at the centre of a spherical universe, bounded universe, bounded by a wall of stars and galaxies - the "stellatum" of the ancients, and surrounding them, the mysterious the Galgal Hatshi'i, the border of this physical universe, Asiyah Hagashmi.

The vertiginous distances attributed to the stars are not, as commonly believed measured directly, but only `inferred, estimated assumed or guessed' by invalid procedures, unwarranted assumptions, and faulty interpretation in line with evolutionary hypotheses. However in geocentric trigonometry, even the furthest turn out to be much, much closer (and smaller) than the Copernican-Galilean-Einsteinian confabulations would have us believe, thousands of light years distant at most, not the oft quoted tens of billions - "across each of the Rakiyas is a journey of 500 years, and between each of them is 500 years" (Chagigah 13). With the space probe Voyager 2 having left the solar system. a major upheaval in cosmological welatanschauung is in the offing.

The backing up of the sun by 10 degrees for Chizkiya (Yeshaya 38) and the halting of the sun and moon for Yehoshua were real worldwide events, as historical records show. Yehoshua commanded them to stop, not the earth. It does not say "and the earth stopped its turning so that the sun and moon seemed to stand still", but "vayidom hashemesh v'yoreach omad". It would not say that they had stopped, if it was actually the earth that had ceased to rotate: Hashem is not a clumsy writer Who doesn't write what He means and mean what He writes. "He hangs the earth on nothing" (Iyov 26), not on the end of any gravitational `rope'. This is only possible if the earth is purely suspended at the centre of mass of the universe, not supported in any sense by any other celestial body: v'ho'oretz tluyoh b'emtza (Rambam, Hilchos Yesodei Hatorah 3). Many statements of Chazal which were impugned over the last 150 years are now being vindicated - emes m'eretz titzmoch. "We must not ascribe strangeness to the views of the Rishonim who were like Heavenly Angels. Their words endure even if they are difficult for us to comprehend; we must not veer from their opinion out of concern of mere rebuttal" (Chazon Ish). Gravity itself is a complete mystery, science being unable to ascertain its nature, source, or propagation. Gravity alone cannot account for the constant centrifugal equilibrium and military precision of the celestial orbs, which by nature should quickly degenerate into awesome instability, were it not for the sustaining word of G-d: l'olam Hashem dvorcho nitzov bashomayim.

The motto of the Kabboloh is `as above so below', and in the supernal Sfiros the sun is a manifestation of Ze'ir Anpin, and the moon of Malchus. The earth, the lowest but most important element of the hishtalshlus chain system has this primacy reflected by being located in a unique preferred central location, with the rest of the universe as a backdrop.

The Copernican heresy so thoroughly reversed man's view of the cosmos, the social order and hierarchy of moral values, that it was as if a new species of being had arisen; no doctrine has had a more pernicious influence on the human spirit. The English, French and American revolutions stemmed from it, and it paved the way for Evolution, Communism, Nietzsche, atheistic existentialism, and Einstein.‡ Many wax lyrical of the `beauty and elegance' of the latter's Theory of Relativity, and all motion is relative, and that there are no absolute terms of reference. But it is now being shown to be inconsistent, contradictory, riddled with anomalies, and as formulated cannot be correct, violating the laws of thermodynamics. The more honest savants admit "the earth is indeed the centre of the universe. The distribution of quasars (powerful radio sources) in vast concentric shells distributed equally about the earth means that the Cosmological Principle (that any point in the universe is the same as any other - acentrism) will have to go. A coordinate system fixed to the earth is the preferred frame of reference in the universe; consequently both the Special and General Theory of Relativity must be abandoned for Cosmological purposes" (Astrophysics and Space Science no.43). But worse, it has led to the doctrine of moral relativism, that there are no moral absolutes, which results in anarchism, hedonism, despair and meaningless, mechanistic impersonal materialism.

Not for naught did the Ma'aseh Tuviyah refer to Nikolaus Copernicus, who was in life a low character, as the bechor soton.Geocentris, like Creationism, arouses much fear and ire, as it means millions of books will have to be rewritten, and most scientists will lose face, let alone the resulting Kulturkampf. This, despite the overwhelming evidence and the fact that Geocentrism is used as the truest possible model in all the applied sciences eg. practical astronomy, navigation, rocketry, oceanography and gyroscopy.

When the cosmographer Rabbi Dovid Gans showed Tycho Brahe the Gemoro in Pesochim in which the sages of Jerusalem yielded to the sages of Alexandria as to whether the galgalim move and the mazolos are stationary, or vice versa, he exclaimed :"Those sages were wrong to submit to the Greeks. They assented too hastily, for the truth is with the Jewish sages!" (Nechmad v'Noyim 25). Until Creation Scientists showed irrefutable evidence for a 6000 year old universe created in six days of 24 hours, even some Orthodox Jewish scientists conceded to theistic evolution. What we see in the sky, the evidence of the senses and common experience of all men, a diurnally rotating starry vault about the earth, is the true state of affairs, not a deplorable illusion. The real world is as it is perceived to be: rak b'einecho tabit.‡

In Time to Come, within the next 249 years, when men will realise how they yielded to monstrous deceptions, then they will say "Surely our fathers have inherited nothing but lies" (Yirmiyah 16), and many may have to eat of the nahamo d'kisufa!





† This was formed by the late Walter van der Kamp and was an excellent forum for intelligent and open debate on the subject of geocentrism. [#]

‡ Emphasis added. [#]



[#] Editorial notes by Neville Jones on 21 January, 2005.

rushdoony
03-06-2005, 11:42 AM
A dozen years of feedback since beginning my active involvement in this issue has left me with no doubt that there are hundreds of millions of people of all religions and no religion--Creationists and non-Creationists alike--who will eagerly accept the exposure of the Kabbalic Universe which not only requires the evolution of everything but also removes a Personal God with an Eternal Plan for those who seek His Truth and abhor Satan’s lies (when they are shown which is which:[2 Thess.2:10]). This multitude will welcome the truth that the Earth is stationary at the precise center of a universe that is a mere 6000 years old and less than one light day thick. Begin (HERE) to understand not only how the non-moving Earth Scriptures are upheld in a way that is rock solid and scientifically defensible, but also how baseless assumptions (HERE) and outright fraud (HERE - HERE - HERE) have established the lie of a 15 billion year old and 15 billion light year thick Big Bang Evolutionary "Origins Scenario" of the religion of mystic Kabbalism disguised as "science".


Mindful of that eagerness for Truth alone that motivates a certain percentage of people everywhere, the Biblical, historical, and technical understanding required to construct such a solid and defensible model finally became clear to me in the year just past. And along with that requirement came an understanding of the nature of the Spiritual Warfare that surrounds this issue and cannot be separated from it.


Indeed, facts long hidden but now available to all, declare that--beginning in earnest with the Copernican Revolution-- there has been a methodical establishment of a Cosmological Model which teaches an Evolved Universe, Earth, and Mankind over some 15 billion years (a figure given by Kabbalist Rabbi HaKana in the 1st century A.D. and reiterated by Kabbalist physicist Schroeder et al currently: HERE - HERE). Now swarming with Kabbalist Sagan’s factless fantasy of evolving extraterrestrials (HERE, pp.3,4 - HERE, pp.14,15 - HERE), this "origins scenario" has become the fulfillment of the Kabbala’s agenda of establishing creation by evolutionism in man’s mind. This fantasy has nearly replaced the Bible’s Personal God with the Christ-hating Talmud/ Kabbalist non-g’d concept. That concept has been promoted over the centuries by a mere handful of Rabbinical writers such as: HaKana, Maimonides, Nachmanides, and Luria (HERE). Scientists Einstein, Friedmann, Le Maitre, Bohr, Gamow, Penzias, Sagan, Wickramasinghe et al have turned the fantasy into "science" (HERE).


Therefore, any effort to challenge the Copernican Model which doesn’t include this acknowledgment and understanding of the role of Pharisaic Talmudism/ Kabbalism’s use of a Theoretical Science Establishment to achieve its anti-Bible, anti-Christ religious goals is a futile effort. Creationists in particular are honor-bound to embrace this Biblically mandated understanding and openly challenge the totally factless, assumption-ridden pseudo-science that has succeeded in implanting an evolution-powered "origins scenario" for all that exists in the world’s "science textbooks"..while nearly destroying Biblical credibility from A to Z.


Christians who read of "science falsely so called" (I Timothy 6:20,21) are warned to "avoid" all such "science" because it is nothing more than "profane and vain babblings and oppositions to true science". What is hard to grasp at first--but must be grasped-- is the incredible extent to which those profane and vain babblings of false science have fooled all of us...whatever our backgrounds have been.


When it is realized that the entire formulation of the Kabbalist Model rests on the quicksand of vulnerable Copernican Heliocentricity, all who desire Truth over lies will know where to focus their attack. Darwinism (and its evolution-based brood: Communism, Freudianism, Einsteinism, Saganism...) would all have been stillborn if the Copernican Revolution hadn’t paved the way for evolution’s success (HERE, pp.52-65 - HERE, pp.1,2,11; HERE - HERE).


The Earth Is Not Moving! Period! The beginning of the end of the evolution mythology underlying all of modern man’s "knowledge" starts with investigating and then accepting and acting upon that demonstrable fact....
More:
http://www.fixedearth.com/Machian%20Model%20Obstacle.htm

rushdoony
03-20-2005, 10:47 AM
Evolution Is A RELIGIOUS Doctrine That Is Taught
In Violation of the Establishment Clause of the U. S. Constitution


In the 1st century A.D., Kabbalist Nechunya ben HaKana wrote "...that if you knew how to use the 42 letter name for God you could decipher the time between the creation of the universe and of man. He estimated the age of the universe at 15.3 billion years...the very age modern astrophysics have just arrived at..." (HERE, p.6)1


In the 12th century A.D. the exalted Kabbalist Rabbam Maimonides described the kind of g’d that would fit with HaKana’s 15 billion year old universe. This g’d is not the God of the Bible. Maimonides "...claimed that only fools and children would believe that God rewarded or punished people; in fact, no such rewards or punishments exist...." (HERE, p. 4). 2 (Maimonides also outlined: a) the Zionist agenda for a Jewish homeland in Palestine; b) a millennial rule by Jews; c) resurrecting the rotating, orbiting earth concept of Aristarchus...) 3


In the 13th century A.D. the venerated Kabbalist Raban Nachmanides concluded from "hidden" knowledge 4 that:

a) The Earth rotated on an axis and orbited the sun 5;

b) That the universe was Relativistic 6 ;

c) That the universe began with an explosion 7;

d) That the universe has been Expanding ever since that explosion "for 15.8 billion years" according to R Yitzchak of Akko, a student of Nachmanides. 8


Those Are the Four Indispensable Components of the Evolution-Based

Big Bang Cosmological Paradigm that Rules Origins Science Today!


Indeed, it is this Paradigm that has established as "scientifically confirmed", an evolved universe, earth, and mankind. This Paradigm with its 15 billion years has become the backbone of the Evolution Paradigm. "Time" is the hero of the Evolution plot. The Big Bang Paradigm of the Kabbalist Religion grants this plot an incomprehensible time frame within which evolutionists have multiplied and established their hypothetical claims. This "theoretical science" is the "science" that now supplies the textbook explanation for the Origin of all that exists. This ever-expanding mountain of factless "theory" has become the cornerstone upon which all that modern man calls "knowledge" has been built 9 (HERE).


So, let it be fully understood: This Big Bang Paradigm spells out a "creation scenario" from the Religion of Pharisaic Judaism that is found in the Kabbala, the most holy book of the Zohar. That "creation scenario" is just as plainly Religious as the "creation scenario" from the Religion of Christianity as spelled out in the Bible. All arguments that have successfully been employed to stop all challenges to the Evolution Monopoly in schools--by claiming that one side is religion and can not be taught as "science"--are arguments that can now be seen as the apex of hypocrisy.


So, both "creation scenarios" are religious. Period. The Kabbalists, however, by surreptitiously controlling their arcane-math-based theoretical science establishment, have already succeeded in getting the evolutionary "creation account" of their Religion taught everywhere with tons of taxpayer’s money!


Of course evolutionists cannot allow true science to be taught! Virtually overnight such teaching would reveal that their "theory" is a contra-scientific myth that does not have the first piece of indisputable evidence to back up its claims. And on the heels of that revelation would come the exposure of the Pharisaic Religion that has used a pseudo-scientific priesthood in the schools and universities to establish that religion’s evolution-based "creation scenario", and thereby fulfill the millennia-long Talmud/Kabbala agenda of destroying the "creation scenario"--and hence the credibility and trustworthiness--of the Bible from the first page to the last .10


If you don’t think all this is true, then demand that a purely scientific challenge to the evolution monopoly in your city, county, and state schools and universities be undertaken within 90 days...no longer! Don’t even mention the Bible; just stick to the factual science. The rest will take care of itself!


For Now, Though, Here Is More Factual Evidence

of How These Four Components of the Evolution-based

Kabbalist flim-flam Developed Over the Centuries:


Moving ahead some 300 years from Nachmanides into the 16th century, we read in McLean’s Kabbalistic Cosmology and its Parallels in the ‘Big Bang’ of Modern Physics" about "the strange parallels between the late 16th century reformation of kabbalist cosmology that arose through the insights of Isaac Luria, and the recent formulation of the ‘big bang’ into the so-called ‘inflationary model’ of cosmic creation...."11


Yakov Leib HaKohain in a "Short Essay on Lurianic Kabbalah" underscores Luria’s role in this strange parallel. He says: "...Divine Rabbi Isaac [Isaac Luria] was, and remains to this day, unarguably the greatest Kabbalist in world history. His doctrines...anticipated virtually word-for-word--or at the very least, concept for concept--the theory of the ‘Big Bang’ origins of the universe in astrophysics.... Put simply, [Luria’s] doctrine of Sheviret HaKelim states (as does also 20th century Big-Bang theory) that the Universe (i.e., the Unity of God) was shattered at the moment of mundane creation. From this cataclysm, ‘Holy Sparks’ flew off in all directions, some returning to their Source, others falling into the world of ‘things’ and ‘beings’...."12


Luria, in short, connected the cosmological fundamentals of the earlier Kabbalist Rabbis about the origin and age of the universe. He then factored in the essential Heliocentricity Model published by the Catholic mathematician Copernicus, which Model was out in the open and beginning to take hold in Luria’s day.


This rotating, orbiting earth Model has been absolutely critical to the step-by-step implementation of the Kabbala’s "Origins Scenario". Its formal introduction by the Catholic functionary Copernicus put this cornerstone in place in the Christian world without calling attention to its pagan origins (Aristarchus) and its secret endorsements at least three centuries earlier in the Kabbala.


Now, with a "Mathematician" as the front man for the coming Revolution against Bible authority, the Kabbalic Kosmos could be erected in the guise of a "secular scientific" enterprise. The Copernican Revolution could now proceed apace to enlarge the universe without revealing its true function as the first essential building block in the construction of an allegedly secular "alternative Origins scenario". This "alternative Origins scenario" was conceived to challenge, defeat, and replace the Biblical "Origins Scenario". To repeat: The victory of such a challenge would ultimately destroy the Bible’s credibility from Creation through Jesus to Heaven.


That "alternative Origins scenario" is now the textbook "science" of Copernicanism, Relativism, Big Bangism, and an Expanding Universe, i.e., the four indispensable features of the Kabbalist religion’s evolutionary "explanation" for all that exists. All four components are now treated as factual science in the media and all levels of academia around the world. The triumph of the Kabbala and the Kabbala’s g’d over the Bible and the Bible’s God on the pivotal matter of Origins is well advanced, as few, if any, would disagree.


Just as the Copernican Model was indispensable to the erection of this Bible destroying, evolution-based Kabbalic Universe, just so does that factless, vulnerable Model (HERE) 13 hang like Damocles’ sword over this Kabbalist Kosmos and its evolution-based Universe with its evolution-based g’d. Contra-scientific, assumption-based Copernicanism is the Achilles Heel of the Kabbalic Universe, the false science Evolution Paradigm, and all that goes with those pagan myths called "science" by the whole world today.


The Plot To End All Plots Further Unravels:


In the 20th century (1905 & 1916) A. D., the Kabbalist mathematician Albert Einstein (Big Al) took the Relativistic component from the Kabbalist play book for an evolved universe and put it into the physics textbooks, becoming thereby the demigod of the theoretical science establishment. His theory stopped 20 years of panic in the world of theoretical science, a panic which grew out of over 200 interferometer experiments in Europe and the USA in the mid 1880’s. These experiments--as have others--showed no movement of the earth around the sun. Still, by mathematically turning the utterly nonsensical Relativity hypothesis into a "scientific fact", Einstein not only saved the Copernican Keystone of the Kabbalic Universe (wherein nothing--such as the Biblical Earth--can be stationary), his mathematics (which Max Born called "a work of art")14 succeeded in incorporating the Relativistic component of the Kabbalist Kosmos into theoretical physics at a level that was believed to forever prevent any return to the non-moving Earth taught in the Scriptures (HERE ).15


Throughout the next six decades, wittingly or unwittingly, Kabbalist-friendly theoreticians (LeMaitre, Bohr, Gamow, Penzias et al, HERE) led the way in establishing throughout academia the other essential components of their ersatz evolutionary "creation scenario", viz., the Big Bang itself, and its necessary compliment, a Universe that has been Expanding for the 15.3 billion years or so (as conjured by Rabbi HaKanna in the 1st century). Kabbalist "scientist" Arno Penzias stepped up to the plate and helped put the finishing touch on the required Big Bang and Expanding Universe components of the Kabbalic Kosmos when, in 1965, he and Wilson claimed to have detected "background radiation" from Rabbis Nachmanides and Luria’s Big Bang in Rabbi HaKanna’s 15 billion year old universe.


Isn’t science wonderful? (And, of course, Penzias and Wilson got the Nobel Prize and a nice cash rewards for their contribution to the cause.)


Thus armed with a "scientifically certified" Kabbalic Universe after 1965, the newly emerging NASA-dominated Space Age--coupled with rapidly improving computer technology--began to make their critical contributions to achieving the final goal of the Kabbalist religion’s agenda.


That agenda has always had one central objective, namely, the destruction of Bible-based Christianity. This was to be done by destroying the Bible’s credibility as the only source of Absolute Truth from a Truth-loving God with an eternal plan for mankind.


Since no knowledge can go back further than the Origin of all things (HERE)16...a victory over the Bible’s account of a literal ("evening and morning") six day creation of all that exists some 6000 years ago would totally wreck not only its credibility--but also the credibility of the God of the Bible--from start to finish. Hence, the establishment of a seemingly secular, anti-religious alternative "Origins Scenario" could do the job.


This is where NASA’s contribution to the establishment of the Kabbalist "creation scenario" becomes so vital to gaining complete victory for the Talmud/Kabbala g’d over the Bible and the Bible’s God. The NASA Agenda has been put into plain words , words incapable of being misunderstood, namely:


"NASA’s Origins Program will search

for clues to help us find our cosmic roots" (HERE).17


"Origins Program"?? "Cosmic Roots?? This is biology and astrology, not physics and astronomy! This "Program" has had one agenda all along. That agenda has been to "discover" life forms beyond Earth which can be counted as the "cosmic" biological roots--i.e., the evolutionary life giving forebears--of mankind on Earth and all the factless swarms of evolving life forms throughout the universe. This is Kabbalic "Kreationism" of the Religion of Pharisaic Judaism right down the line!


But note this well: This whole scheme is obviously beyond the capabilities of the individual Kabbalists involved over the centuries to cook up unaided, and therefore--given its hidden Bible-destroying goal--can only be labeled diabolic to the core (at least by Christians!). The fact that it has been brought to its present level of near triumph by an alleged "scientific" enterprise that is demonstrably fraudulent and factless from start to finish (HERE - HERE - HERE - HERE - HERE), confirms who the real supernatural author is (John 8:44).18


Make no mistake, "Panspermia", not Darwinism, is the ruling Evolutionary Paradigm today. It boldly declares that Darwinism cannot explain life on Earth, but that bacteria has been carried and spread throughout the universe by comets and that this is where our true "cosmic roots" originated (HERE).19 The current hoopla about finding bacteria on Mars and Titan, etc., is where this pagan religious madness masquerading as "science" has brought the world as we speak....(HERE - HERE - HERE).20


A former NASA Director, Kabbalist-friendly Daniel Goldin, named this whole evolution-based Agenda "The Origins Program". NASA--supposedly a purely secular scientific operation--became the cutting edge tool for completing the evolution-based "creation scenario" of the long secret...but now out of the closet...anti-Christ religion of Pharisaic Kabbalism (HERE).21


Wake up everybody! Hello! We’ve all been bamboozled, hoodwinked, mulcted, tricked, snookered, conned, and otherwise swindled and deceived into financing -with Billions upon Billions of taxpayer’s money worldwide--the establishment of the utterly insane evolutionary explanation for the origin of all that exists. It’s not science folks; it is a Religion masquerading as "science". It is a religion that is on the verge of causing the whole world to abandon the unbendable scientific Law of Biogenesis and the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics (also called "The Law of Increasing Entropy). Both of these Laws of science are confirmed by every observational fact known to man, and both emphatically deny the profane and vain babblings of evolutionism.


Almost certainly, a high percentage of those who demand that Religion be kept out of the schools and who work assiduously to prevent any and all challenges to evolutionism, are folks who do not know that evolutionism itself is the "creation" cornerstone of the Religion of Pharisaic Judaism as found in their most holy book, the mystic Kabbala.... The question is: When they find out, what will they do? What will you do?


Will you/they continue to demand that only the Religion of the Pharisees with their evolved Kabbalic Universe can be taught in the schools and universities as "science" with tax money?

Will you/they continue to accept that only the demonstrably false science upholding this evolution-based Religion can be aired on allegedly secular TV programs?

Will you/they remain silent as this Kabbala-built Virtual Reality Universe (HERE) 22--with its hallucinogenic claims anchored in the fraudulent use of technology (HERE ; etc.)23--continues to indoctrinate students and everybody else with its video game cosmos 24/7?


Will you/they who live in the USA continue to allow the religion based on evolutionism to be taught in the tax-supported schools where you live...in violation of the clear Constitutional prohibition of such (HERE)?


Well, the shoe is now on the other foot! It is the Kabbalist religion--not Bible religion--that has sneaked into all levels of academia and planted its "creation scenario" under the guise of being "science"! It is the Kabbalist religion that taxpayers are financing with hundreds of billions of dollars a year in the USA alone, not to mention the same swindle of similar magnitude that is going on all over the world.


So, what can you/they do when all this is confirmed and digested?


Start with this:


By phone, email, snailmail, petition, direct action, smoke-signals, whatever...get together with both adults and students; invite the media, and petition your local school boards to:

a) Disseminate to all public school teachers, administrators, and students this paper with its historical evidence which reveals the religious roots of evolutionism;

b) Further disseminate the accompanying brief which provides the only Constitutionally sanctioned option open to the Courts in this matter;

c) Take note of some highlights from both documents below:


Whereas:


a) Taxpayer money funds all public education in the USA, and whereas...

b) The courts have repeatedly ruled that teaching scientific and logical information which challenges the evolutionary model for the origin of the universe, the earth, and mankind is a Religious strategy for teaching the Biblical "Creation Account", and whereas...

c) The courts have therefore ruled that such teaching would amount to a violation of the "establishment of religion clause" of the 1st Amendment and is therefore unconstitutional, and whereas...

d) This same legal principle must ipso facto apply to the teaching of any other religion’s "Creation Account", and whereas...

e) It is now established beyond contradiction by Kabblists themselves (HERE, pp.5,6 - HERE,pp.2-4 - HERE - HERE, p.2)24, that the universe, the Earth, and mankind have come to be by evolutionary processes that began with a Big Bang some 15 billion years ago, and whereas...

f) This teaching constitutes a "Creation Account" of the religion of Pharisaic Judaism which is taught by "sages" in their holy book, the Kabbala, and whereas...

g) It follows that this Religion’s evolution-based "Creation Scenario"--which incorporates both Earthly and extraterrestrial claims--is in violation of the "Establishment Clause" of the United States Constitution and cannot legally be taught in tax-supported centers of learning as "science" in any of the States in the United States.


Accordingly, Within 90 days of a Court’s Adjudication of This Matter, All Tax-supported

Centers of Learning Shall Begin to Teach These Historical, Religious, and Scientific Facts:


1) The very definition of the word "science" comes from the Latin root "scire" which means "to know". Hypotheses do not know; and theories do not know. Only scientific Laws are known and can, by definition, be labeled "science".

2) All tax-supported schools shall begin--within 90 days of a Court’s enactment of the Constitution’s legal requirement--to teach factual science by stressing how the Law of Biogenesis and the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics deny the claims of evolutionists, whether those claims be terrestrial or extraterrestrial.

3) All tax-supported schools shall begin at once to learn that the word "logical" is one connotation of the word "science", and that since it is illogical (unscientific) to claim that millions of ineffably complex designs in all that exists came to be by chance as the evolution hypothesis teaches, that explanation for the origin of those millions of designs is illogical and contra-scientific. It is therefore indisputably logical and scientific to assert that such designs require an intelligent designer. The universe, earth, and mankind exhibit those ineffably complex designs anywhere one looks. The evolutionary "explanation" for these designs goes beyond "illogical and "contra-scientific" and becomes not only foolish, but anti-intellectual, and thus wholly inadmissible as tax-supported instruction throughout academia.

4) All tax-supported schools will provide a variety of other scientific proofs which expose the falsity of all theoretical science claims upholding evolutionism.

5) All tax-supported schools will provide their social and behavioral science classes with the historical facts showing that Communism and Freudianism in all of their ramifications are totally founded on the evolutionary premise, and without that premise those "isms" in all their ramifications have no factual basis.

6) All tax-supported schools shall encourage all language skill classes: a) To write papers telling what the exposure of the evolution deception means to them; b) To write other papers giving examples of simple and complex design and function around everywhere which convinces the writers personally of the impossibility of random accident creation through evolutionism; c) To write papers focusing on the harm done to people world wide by teaching for real science the evolution-based "creation scenario" of a long-secret religion masquerading as "science".

7) All tax-supported schools shall emphasize in science classes particularly the fact that evolutionism has been revealed to be a religious "Origins" concept that has disguised itself as "science", and, moreover, there can be no connecting of that evolutionary concept to another religion such as the religion of Christianity. In other words, according to Constitutional Law, evolutionism--being a religious concept of the Origin of all that exists--cannot be linked with the Bible’s "Creation Scenario" any more than it can be linked with the Kabbalist’s "Creation Scenario".


***

This Paper is to be read in conjunction with:


"Points of Fact and Law for Conducting Cases

Involving the Teaching of Evolutionism in U.S. Schools"

(HERE)
More:
www.fixedearth.com
***

rushdoony
03-30-2005, 12:55 AM
Biblical Calendar Overview

Carl Felland, Ph.D.



What does our Gregorian Calendar have to do with the Biblical Calendar?






Gregorian Calendar
Biblical Calendar

Days
Midnight to midnight
Evening to evening

Weeks
Continuous
Within months

Months
No relationship with moon
Begin with new moon

Years
Winter to winter
Spring to spring








Absolutely nothing!



"The origin of the calendric system in general use today - the Gregorian calendar - can be traced back to the Roman republican calendar, which is thought to have been introduced by the fifth king of Rome, Tarquinius Priscus (616-579 BCE)... By 46 BCE the calendar had become so hopelessly confused that Julius Caesar was forced to initiate a reform of the entire system. Caesar invited the Alexandrian astronomer Sosigenes to undertake this task. Sosigenes suggested abandoning the lunar system altogether and replacing it with a tropical year of 365.25 days. The New Encyclopedia Britannica.








What does the Jewish Calendar have to do with the Biblical Calendar?




Jewish Calendar
Biblical Calendar

Days
Evening to evening
Evening to evening

Weeks
Continuous
WIthin month

Months
Begin with crescent new moon
Begin with astronomical new moon

Years
Spring to spring
Spring to spring








Some things. However,...


"... each lunar month was divided into four parts, corresponding to the four phases on the moon. The first week of each month began with the new moon, so that, as the lunar month was one or two days more than four periods of seven days, these additional days were not reckoned at all." The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia Vol. 10, p. 482. Article "Week."





This presentation will examine new moons and weeks in the Biblical Calendar.








New Moon: 1) astronomical, conjunction 2) crescent moon

How is the Jewish Calendar different from the Biblical Calendar?

1) Months are determined by crescent sighting rather than conjuntion.

a) Currently, the calculations of the beginning of the Jewish Calendar's months is based on when the crescent new moon would be observed.

b) However, in the Biblical period the New Moon period was one or two days that included the astronomical New Moon.

c) As the above quote states these "days were not reckoned at all."












Average time between moon phases is 7.4 days

How is the Jewish Calendar different from the Biblical Calendar?


2) Weeks are continuous, rather than being "reset" by the new moon.

a) The planetary week we observe today is not the Biblical week.

b) The phases of the moon relate to weeks.






What does the Bible say about the calendar?




Two?
How many types of days are in the Bible


Work days and Sabbaths?


No!
Thus says the Master YHWH; The gate of the inner court that looketh toward the east shall be shut the six working days; but on the sabbath it shall be opened, and in the day of the new moon it shall be opened. Ezekiel 46: 1
In the Bible we have three categories of days.


1. The six working days
2. Sabbath
3. Day of new moon


Condition of gate

Category of day
Shut
Open

Working day
Yes
No

Sabbath
No
Yes

New Moon
No
Yes


The day of the New Moon is a separate category of day.

It is neither a working day nor a weekly Sabbath. It is a period of time, one or two days, outside of the week.

The three categories of days are always mutually exclusive.
The math works for Ezekiel 46: 1. The gate of the temple does not have to be open and shut on the same day, as if a new moon would fall on a working day.



Month 1
1

2
3
4
5
6
7
8

9
10
11
12
13
14
15

16
17
18
19
20
21
22

23
24
25
26
27
28
29


30

Month 2 1

2
3
4
5
6
7
8

9
10
11
12
13
14
15

16
17
18
19
20
21
22

23
24
25
26
27
28
29



Working days, Sabbaths, New Moon Given the lunar cycle of 29.5 days can we make a calendar that allows for these three categories of days?


Yes, we can.


This calendar shows a 30 day month followed by a 29 day month. This is quite foreign to most of us, but a double day of the new moon (thirtieth and first) follows the twenty ninth, or the last sabbath, of the first month.


This two day intermission does not cause one to violate the fourth commandment of working six days and resting the seventh day, because the commandment does not specify when the six working days begin.


After a 29 day month the day of the new moon is the first of the month, a one day intermission. Biblical months evidently alternated between 29 and 30 days as do Jewish months. Some have suggested that all months were originally 30 days long.

Selected New Moon Passages

And they assembled all the congregation together on the first [day] of the second month, Num 1:18a
Also in the day of your gladness, and in your solemn days, and in the beginnings of your months, ye shall blow with the trumpets over your burnt offerings, and over the sacrifices of your peace offerings; ... Num 10:10
Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, In the seventh month, in the first [day] of the month, shall ye have a sabbath, a memorial of blowing of trumpets, an holy convocation. Lev 23:24
And David said unto Jonathan, Behold, to morrow [is] the new moon, and I should not fail to sit with the king at meat: but let me go, that I may hide myself in the field unto the third [day] at even 1Sa 20:6
If thy father at all miss me, then say, David earnestly asked [leave] of me that he might run to Bethlehem his city: for [there is] a yearly sacrifice there for all the family. 1Sa 20:6
And it came to pass on the morrow, [which was] the second [day] of the month***, that David's place was empty: and Saul said unto Jonathan his son, Wherefore cometh not the son of Jesse to meat, neither yesterday, nor to day? 1Sa 20:27
And he said, Wherefore wilt thou go to him to day? [it is] neither new moon, nor sabbath. And she said, [It shall be] well. 2Ki 4:23
Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath [days]: Col 2:16

Does the Bible bear this out this calendar?
Yes, it does. The new moon is often mentioned in the Bible and has certain activities associated with it.


The new moon was a worship day, a day to visit the prophet, a day for annual sacrifices, and the day that commemorated creation, Yom Teruah, the first of the seventh month.


The account of David and Jonathan in 1 Samuel 20 is the most detailed account of a new moon in the Bible. We see that the new moon was known in advance. Saul presided over the two day feast. David and Jonathan spoke together on the day prior, which would have been the 29th, and vowed to get back together on the third day. David's excuse for not coming was an annual family sacrifice, an activity that would have been usual for a new moon.


The reference to the second day of the month in 1 Samuel 20 verses 27 and 34 is probably more accurately translated as second day of the new moon. In this chapter the words new moon and month are the same Hebrew word Chodesh. This instance of a certain day of the month being mentioned outside of the context of a specific month is unique and leads one to understand that the author is referring back to the same new moon introduced at the beginning of the account.


A second verse other than Ezekiel 46: 1 and 3 to show all three categories of days is found in 2 Kings 4: 23. The Shunammite woman's son had died and she went to her husband to send for the Prophet. The husband was working in the field and wondered why his wife would want to visit the Prophet on a work day, rather than the customary time of new moon or sabbath.


We see that the New Moon was known in advance. It is neither a work day nor a weekly Sabbath day, but rather a monthly intermission from routine work. Paul's reference in Colossians to the new moon indicates that it was observed among the early believers.





***month here is the same Hebrew word as new moon and because a specific month is not mentioned refers to the second day of the two day new moon









What does the New Moon have to do with the Sabbath?





Biblical Month







1

2
3
4
5
6
7
8

9
10
11
12
13
14
15

16
17
18
19
20
21
22

23
24
25
26
27
28
29




Sabbaths Fall on Specific Days


In the Biblical Calendar the Sabbaths always fall on the eighth, fifteenth, twenty second and twenty ninth day of the month. The sabbaths in both the Old and New Testaments fall on these dates exclusively. Below are three examples.
Exo 16:1 And they took their journey from Elim, and all the congregation of the children of Israel came unto the wilderness of Sin, which [is] between Elim and Sinai, on the fifteenth day of the second month after their departing out of the land of Egypt.
Exo 16:4 Then said YHWH unto Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law, or no.
Exo 16:5 And it shall come to pass, that on the sixth day they shall prepare [that] which they bring in; and it shall be twice as much as they gather daily.
Exo 16:8 And Moses said, [This shall be], when YHWH shall give you in the evening flesh to eat, and in the morning bread to the full;...
Exo 16:23 And he said unto them, This [is that] which YHWH hath said, To morrow [is] the rest of the holy sabbath unto YHWH: bake [that] which ye will bake [to day], and seethe that ye will seethe; and that which remaineth over lay up for you to be kept until the morning.



Israel Taught When to Observe Sabbath


The sabbath was (re)taught to Israel in the second month of their Exodus from Egypt.


The Israelites made it to camp on the fifteenth. That evening they had quail. The next morning (sixteenth) was the first of six days of manna. On the sixth day (twenty first) they were told to gather a double portion, for on the seventh day (twenty second) there was to be no manna.


It follows that if the twenty second is a sabbath that the eighth, fifteenth and twenty ninth would be also. The first would have been a new moon.





Est 9:18 But the Jews that [were] at Shushan assembled together on the thirteenth [day] thereof, and on the fourteenth thereof; and on the fifteenth [day] of the same they rested, and made it a day of feasting and gladness.


Sabbath on Fifteenth after Purim


The Jews rested on the fifteenth after Purim. Why did they rest? It was the sabbath.




Mat 20:19 And shall deliver him to the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify [him]: and the third day he shall rise again.

Mat 26:2 Ye know that after two days is [the feast of] the passover, and the Son of man is betrayed to be crucified.

Joh 19:31 The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and [that] they might be taken away.

Lev 23:11 And he shall wave the sheaf before YHWH, to be accepted for you: on the morrow after the sabbath the priest shall wave it.





The crucifixion week had one Sabbath
First day: Crucifixion occurred on the fourteenth, Passover


Second day: Messiah rested in the grave on the fifteenth, first day of Unleavened Bread, both a weekly and annual sabbath. Note "for that sabbath day was an high day."


Third day: Messiah rose on the sixteenth, the day of the Wave Sheath offering. This offering was to be made on the day following the sabbath. The debate over whether this sabbath was the first day of Unleavened Bread or the weekly sabbath during the feast is solved when one understands the Biblical Calendar. This debate could only have originated if the nature of the sabbath was corrupted.
















What is the role of the moon in the Biblical Calendar?







Gen 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:



Psa 104:19 He appointed the moon for seasons: the sun knoweth his going down.


The moon is for seasons, Hebrew mo'ed or appointed times.

You cannot tell what day it is by watching the sun.

You can tell what day it is by watching the moon progress through its lunar cycle.












New Moon

The new moon lefts on the astronomical new moon and is the period of one or two days when the moon is not illuminated, no light is visible to the naked eye at any time during this period. The record for observing the moon is 15.5 hours after conjunction. The crescent may be easily visible after twenty four to thirty six hours depending on locale condition, lag time, etc.











Amo 8:5 Saying, When will the new moon be gone, that we may sell corn? and the sabbath, that we may set forth wheat, making the ephah small, and the shekel great, and falsifying the balances by deceit?

First crescent


In the beginning of the second day of the month just after sunset the first crescent is visible -- signifying that intermission is over -- time to get back to work.

Psa 81:3 Blow up the trumpet in the new moon, in the time appointed, on our solemn feast day.


Major phases of the moon
The time between major phases of the moon averages 7.4 days.

First quarter follows seven days after the new moon announcing the first sabbath on the eighth.
Full moon follows about fifteen days after the new moon on the second sabbath, the fifteenth. This is probably the time appointed in Psa 81:3.
Last quarter follows about twenty two and a half days after the new moon on the third sabbath, the twenty second.
Seven days after last quarter is the last crescent as the next new moon conjunction approaches.







Lev 23:2, 3 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, [Concerning] the feasts of YHWH, which ye shall proclaim [to be] holy convocations, [even] these [are] my feasts. Six days shall work be done: but the seventh day [is] the sabbath of rest, an holy convocation; ye shall do no work [therein]: it [is] the sabbath of YHWH in all your dwellings.

The Weekly Sabbath is the First Feast


The weekly sabbath is the first feast [mo'ed] listed in Leviticus 23. All the other feasts listed in this chapter are determined by the moon. The weekly sabbath is no different.




Special acknowledgments go to Troy Miller for introducing me to this calendar and for his in depth research.

Better layout at website:
www.midclyth.supanet.com

rushdoony
04-19-2005, 05:39 PM
Moon landing feasibility

Click here to download and view the pdf file,
( rushdoony insert. I don't know if this
is going to work after I post, you may have to
go to www.midclyth.supanet.com and scroll down
to NASA : Moon Landing Feasibility )


"On the feasibility of landing a man on the Moon (and the claim that it has already been achieved)."

1.21 Mb. (You will need Adobe Acrobat Reader.)

rushdoony
05-02-2005, 10:03 AM
The singularly deep and wide role that NASA has played and is playing in the advancement of a Bible-destroying "Origins Program" cannot be denied. It may not be understood by many--even those involved in the Program--but it is obviously and demonstrably true. Once understood, the aura of NASA’s space exploration for altruistic "scientific" purposes will be laid bare as the mega-deception that it is.


Whether Sagan and Goldin were covert Kabbalists, knowingly using vast amounts of tax money, overt evolutionary indoctrination of NASA employees, and deceptive Virtual Reality computer-programmed telescopes, cameras, redshift and infrared technologies, etc., to fulfill the Kabbalist "Origins Scenario" and destroy Bible credibility, God knows. I hope it was unknowingly, but the odds are against it.


As for Sean O’Keefe, the new Director of NASA’s future priorities, he--along with many of the 18000 plus employees--could theoretically eschew all the Kabbalist evolutionary baloney and try to direct a fiscally and scientifically honest space operation. One could hope so.


But, realistically, this is a vain hope. The pivotal roll that NASA has played in establishing Copernicanism-dependent mythological Big Bangism (with its attendant Bible Destroying extraterrestrial evolutionism) is Satan's primary instrument for finishing off Bible Creationism and hence all Bible credibility. Its role will remain and expand under O'Keefe until God's scheduled hour of exposure arrives. That hour draws closer with every tick of the clock....
More: www.fixedearth.com

rushdoony
05-14-2005, 06:12 PM
Moon hoax debate - 1
http://www.geocentric-universe.com/page81.htm

There was never a moon landing!

rushdoony
05-14-2005, 10:44 PM
Fair enough nohope, but this
clubconspiracy website of Henry Makow's
is not "a game".

But do you see what's happening here folks?

My "The Earth Is NOT Moving" thread
has 2000 posts and nohopes'
"Gauging NWO progress by hollywood
productions" thread is up to 1200.

So nohope is jealous that somebody
other than he ( she? I don't know )
has a more popular viewership.
That is called coveting and that is a sin.

Also folks did you notice that nohope has personally made over 1000 posts
and is therefore exhibiting the same neurotic behavior
as the long gone ( hopefully ) MP?
I would rather see some quality postings
rather than quantity from nohope.
This site is not a popularity contest to see
who can post the most. This type of pathological,
predatory and irrational
behavior from nohope and a very few others is what has caused
serious scholarly conspiracy buffs to avoid or
leave this site permanently. If I were
Henry I would be highly P**SED about
low quality high quantity
"posting hogs" like nohope187 ( what a stupid name
by the way ).
By now I expected that Satan would choose someone
to negatively influence the dissemination of truth
regarding Heliocentric Incorrectness.
Congratulations nohope.

Like everyone else nohope might have some important things to say; but 1000 plus???
I think nohope needs to find a girlfriend
and get a social life rather than
spending time being mischievous.

My "The Earth Is NOT Moving" thread
( see also www.fixedearth.com and
www.geocentric-universe.com )
is a sincere
effort to disseminate what I feel is the truth
regarding a major and fundamental CONSPIRACY
on this world.

Signed Rushdoony c/c Henry Makow

truebeliever
05-15-2005, 02:06 AM
Rush...do you know why people come here?

Do you think it's because they genuinely believe what you have to post in this particular thread is anywhere as more believable as David Ickes Shape Shifting Lizards?

People come here for amusement and because you continue the thread and get it up on the front page everytime the whim overtakes you.

So nohope is jealous that somebody
other than he ( she? I don't know )
has a more popular viewership.
That is called coveting and that is a sin.

No Rush...NOHOPE is just a shit stirer...much like myself. To even make that claim indicates a degree of extreme childishness on your part.

Also folks did you notice that nohope has personally made over 1000 posts
and is therefore exhibiting the same neurotic behavior
as the long gone ( hopefully ) MP?

At what point does the - Diagnostic Statistical Manual Mark IV Revised, make posting levels neurotic?

Would you place content over number of postings as the main criteria for neurotic nehaviour Rush?

I would rather see some quality postings
rather than quantity from nohope.

True, i find NOHOPES trashing of the front page annoying...but then I troll through them and the mild chuckle and uplift in my mood compensates the dissapointment. Sorta like Huckleberry Finn meets modern grafitti.

This type of pathological, predatory and irrational behavior from nohope and a very few others is what has caused serious scholarly conspiracy buffs to avoid or leave this site permanently.

"Serious Scholarly Conspiracy Buffs"...like yourself Rush?

By now I expected that Satan would choose someone to negatively influence the dissemination of truth regarding Heliocentric Incorrectness.

So Satan must have sent NOHOPE? Does it occur to you Rush that Satan has no need to motivate thinking people to trash your views? That thinking people can muster a challenge without the Dark Overlord egging them on?

My "The Earth Is NOT Moving" thread
( see also www.fixedearth.com and
www.geocentric-universe.com )
is a sincere effort to disseminate what I feel is the truth regarding a major and fundamental CONSPIRACY on this world.

You are not a sincere truth seeker Rush, willing to put it out there and have it shot to pieces. You are a fundamentalist, dogmatic and insincere flat earther...who when challenged about the moon landings chose not to reconsider their position but simply shift the goal posts...
http://users.erols.com/igoddard/journal.htm

Like Ahmed...you have your view and will simply shift the goal posts when it suits you. For that I proclaim you tosser of the week.

rushdoony
05-15-2005, 03:48 AM
A Small, Young Universe After All!

Scoffers take a number and sit over there, please.... While you are waiting and mumbling expletives under your breath at such an outrageous claim, work the facts that follow in with what has gone before under the titles:

NASA's Agenda: Promoting Evolutionism

NASA's Hanky-Panky: Virtual Reality Technology

The Spiritual Roots of NASA's Big Bang Premise

Now consider:

A non-moving earth at the center of our universe--with the sun and a stellatum of stars going round every day--is still a model that explains all the important phenomena in the known (i.e., the REAL, non VR) universe. Calculations requiring the utmost precision, i.e., calculations about moon phases, air and sea navigation, satellite deployment and relocation, solar and lunar eclipses, etc., are all based on a non-moving earth (HERE). All sorts of arcane math symbols calling themselves heliocentric may be used but when these "fumididdles" (as one physicist called them) or "pseudomathematical decorations" (as Andreski called them) are set aside, the math is geocentric. Given the explanations in the seven part series on the Kabbala (begin HERE) and the seven part series on "The Size and Structure of the Universe According to the Bible and Non-Theoretical Science" (begin HERE), the Model of Apollonius is demonstrably both more Scriptural and more scientifically satisfying than the modified Brahe Model (HERE). (Physicist Dr. Neville T. Jones in Scotland has a marvelous CD with moving graphics of the Apollonian Model which you can read about and order by going to the May 2004 Bulletin (HERE).)

Thus, in spite of a world persuaded otherwise, Biblical cosmology stands just as impregnable in the 21st century as it did in 1600 AD. The Apollonian Model particularly shows the Earth at the center of the universe with a band of stars all around. Inside the misnamed "solar" system all the planets and the sun and the moon and the stars orbit the Earth, (The Earth is not a planet...which word means "wanderer" and--like "solar" system and capitalizing the planet's names and using the small "e" for Earth--are all just clever little indoctrination tools).

In short, the sun, moon, and stars are actually doing precisely what everyone throughout all history has seen them do. We do not believe what our eyes tell us because we have been taught a counterfeit system which demands that we believe what has never been confirmed by observation or experiment. That counterfeit system demands that the Earth rotate on an "axis" every 24 hours...at a speed of over 1000 MPH at the equator. No one has ever, ever, ever seen or felt such movement (nor seen or felt the 67000MPH speed of the Earth's alleged orbit around the sun...or its 500,000 MPH alleged speed around a galaxy...or its retreat from an alleged "Big Bang" at over 670,000,000 MPH! ).

Remember, no experiment has ever shown the earth to be moving. Indeed, these experiments have all reported the same thing, i.e., no movement. Add to that the fact that the alleged rotational speed we've all been taught as scientific fact MUST decrease every inch or mile one goes north or south of the equator, and it becomes readily apparent that such things as accurate aerial bombing in WWII (down a chimney from 25000 feet with a plane going any direction at high speed) would have been impossible if calculated on an earth moving below at several hundred MPH and changing constantly with the latitude. (You can see several such logical impossibilities treated in THE EARTH IS NOT MOVING.)

Note this well: a) If moving Earth Copernicanism is shown to be a colossal deception, the Bible is automatically proven to be right on this major aspect of Creation. The Earth is either moving or it isn't! b) Anyone jolted into recognizing that the whole world could be utterly fooled by the Copernican deception will have little trouble seeing Darwinism as fruit off of the same tree. c) Recognizing that the physical and biological sciences have been used to make these mega- deceptions as successful as they are, no strain will be required to see how the teachings of Marxism, Freudianism, Einsteinism, Zionism, NASA's Saganism and Goldinism, Zionist-supporting Christian Fundamentalism, AND KABBALISM have been used to bring that Bible-bashing mystic religion to the verge of pulling it all off and establishing the long-planned New World Order which is already programmed to quickly rid the world of Bible-based Christianity.

Because of Big Bangism's and Einstein's demands--based on "thought experiments", Kabbalistic mysticism, and flat-out VR fraud--we've all been led to believe that there are galaxies of stars so far away that even God could not get them around the Earth every day! Take away those demands--including Dr. Albert's scientifically unsupportable speed of light limitations--and it is downright easy to understand stars in a stellatum with about a 1/2 light day radius (twinkling and reflecting endlessly in the Bible's watery outer firmament (Gen 1:15) and going around the Earth daily just as we see them go and just as the Bible says they go. (Go HERE for first of seven part series describing a 1/2 light day thick universe. )

Though the physicists and electrical engineers involved in the steadily emerging ELECTRIC UNIVERSE concept do not make Biblical geocentrism connections, their model shrinks the universe enormously. More, it gets rid of Relativity, the Big Bang, and an Expanding Universe. In addition to all this, the concept and the evidence behind it make sense! A "small" universe with a young Earth is a model whose time is drawing very near. All that has to be done to make the Electric Universe model fit with Biblical Geocentrism is to get rid of the extraterrestrial evolutionary mind-set baggage of its proponents. This link (HERE) should go far toward getting rid of that baggage, and this link (HERE) will provide an overview of The Electric Universe Concept and its great potential for gutting modern theoretical cosmology and starting over.

Any reader still racked by waves of disbelief that such mind-boggling deceptions could have been pulled off (even by Satan, the master of deceit!) needs to possess only two things: 1) A heart that "can receive A LOVE OF TRUTH" (II Thess.2:10); and 2) A willingness to look at the various kinds of evidence which prove that these masterpieces of cosmological deception have indeed occurred, and, more, that they are terminally pregnant with technology's Virtual Reality Lies (HERE) calculated to finish off Christianity and crown Kabbalism and Talmudism ruler over all the Earth in a Zionist-ruled One World Government.

As for #1, it is undeniable that people can be forced to see a Truth and not Love It. These prefer lies to Truths, and though forced to see and know a Truth, will hate it and hate its author, God. Their father is Satan who was created "in the beginning with no Truth in him" to be the father of all who hate Truth...(John 8:44; etc. Go (HERE) to order a book entitled: Satan: What Makes Him Tick?

And for #2 (having looked at some of the scientific and logical evidence), all who will then look at the Historical development of Copernicanism (HERE and elsewhere) will see very plainly how this mega-deception has been able to overcome and replace indisputable observational and experimental evidence. All can see for themselves how Copernicanism gradually took over in the physical sciences at the universities (and has trickled down now to become a "fact" that is learned in kindergartens). All will see how liberalism took over in the churches and let the Copernican lie beat back the Bible with its scores of Scriptures declaring a non-moving and immovable Earth with the sun and stars going around daily (HERE) The real roles of Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, Newton, Einstein, Sagan, etc., in advancing this colossal Bible-bashing fraud will become obvious. The fact that these men have been put in man's Hall of Fame as great world-changing "scientists" attests again to Bible infallibility for we are told that God has allowed Satan to be "god of this world" (II Cor.4:4) until the time appointed when he is briefly taken out of the way (II Thess.2:7; Rev.11:15;12;12; 20:3), then restored for "a little season" (Rev.20:3,7) and then terminated permanently (Rev.20:10;Is.14:16; Is.66:24; etc.).

Furthermore, the hidden but real and unbreakable connection between Copernicanism and Darwinism will become totally plain and understandable to any who will look with an open mind and a heart capable of loving Truth. (Click HERE to see this symbiotic connection....) And the connections don't stop there! With the physical and biological sciences captive to Copernicanism and Darwinism being spewed from every bastion of "higher learning", the social "sciences" and the behavioral "sciences" and the arts, and ultimately Bible-based Christianity have all been driven into Satan's corral of Babylonish confusion.

Much sanity still remains in the world, however, do largely to the fact that Creationism-- while down for the count several times--is still in the ring and getting in a good punch here and there. Besides that, there are plenty of people who don't have the information with which to challenge evolutionism on scientific grounds, whose common sense nevertheless tells them it's a nutty idea and that it is a root cause of rudderless kids and adults everywhere.

Unfortunately, neither these folks nor knowledgeable creationists seem to have a clue that NASA is the agent being used to put Creationism on the mat for the full count. Consequently neither group can see that the Devil is on the verge of winning this critical match with his use of fraudulent VR simulation technology (HERE - HERE) propelled by and undergird by the multi-faceted religion of mystical Kabbalism, which, along with Talmudism, are the sworn enemies of Christianity (HERE - HERE). Thru NASA (and a host of other powerful evolution fronts: See: Time, 1/17/00,p.76), Satan intends to place man's new god for the 21st century--namely, anti-Bible Kabbalist Humanist-Paganism (HERE -HERE)--firmly in the driver's seat of a One World Government.

(The fact that a OWG is coming to pass and is imminent is no longer a moot point. Nationalism is dying on the vine as computerized telecommunications make the world a global village. World leaders openly envision a OWG as the utopia that man's wisdom will have finally put together. These will ignore the fact that Bible prophesies over 1900 years old tell us that such a global government will indeed come to pass...that it will look good at first, but will be empowered by Satan...that it will have "a war with the Lamb" which it will lose (Rev.17:14)...that this will result in a separation (not the Rapture!) of God's people (Rev.18:4) from those who then are committed to what has become an overtly Satan-led, Satan-worshipping, God-hating, drug-dispensing, global government...and that its formation will signal the very beginning of the end of this earth's history, etc. (Go (HERE) to order a book entitled: The Preterit View: Straining At A Gnat And Swallowing A Camel...a subject that fits into all "End Tim" considertions.

The dominos of man's "wisdom" ("foolishness to God": I Cor. 3:19) are all lined up. They cover every academic discipline and many of the false doctrines in all religions. Together they make up the deceptions upholding Satan's kingdoms on Earth, namely, "Babylon the Great", i.e., where Confusion and its author reign. (I Cor. 14:33; II Cor. 4:4; & I Tim. 4:1...which says that demons mess up doctrines....) [Go (HERE) to see how modern man's "knowledge" is rooted and grounded in deception which flows in a straight historical line from the success of the Copernican Revolution....

But, not to worry; a Sovereign, Omniscient, and Omnipotent God planned all this before the foundation of the world (Acts 15:18). He has declared that Babylon (i.e., confusion) will Fall (Rev. 14:8; 17:12-18; 18:1-24; etc.), and Fall it will!

Copernicanism is the first domino. Darwinism is the second.... These are the chief lies that have fooled not only the world but all the Christian churches and all other religions.. Not incidentally, that is why God's Judgment "...begins at the house of God" (I Pet. 4:17,18). HE will call His people out of Babylon once the OWG is formed and its true Satan-worshipping nature is revealed in the "war with the Lamb". HE has declared that "the gates of hell will not prevail [succeed] against His Church" (Matt.16:18). Believe it! Those gates are guarding the deceptions that rule the world and are seeking to destroy Jesus, the Lamb of God and the Church He established. That sacrificial Lamb, however, is also "The Lion of Judah"! With His "called, chosen, and faithful" (Rev.17:14) He will expose those deceptions (I Jn.3:8) and their author, and then He will finish God the Father's Plan for the end of this old earth and the beginning of the new heavens and the New Earth.

Few if any readers who have come this far could be more duped by the lies of the false science establishment than I have been. I believed it to be beyond challenge that all that modern science alleges about the cosmos, evolution, and all the rest was scientific fact, and that only red-necked ignorami in bib-overalls still believed the Biblical account of creation and on thru the New Testament of Jesus Christ. It was inconceivable to me that all the smartest people in the Universities with their training and books, etc., could be fooled or--worse--lying. Every book I read confirmed these convictions, and I read thousands of them.

But then an odd set of circumstances over thirty years ago caused me to investigate the claims of evolution thoroughly. I discovered that--beyond any question--evolutionism is a contra-scientific lie without the first piece of evidential proof to support its preposterous claims. More, I discovered that a belief in evolutionism was at the core not only of my disbelief in God and the Bible, but that this belief has also basically determined my socialist political and economic philosophy and my approach to sexuality and marriage and family and all that is connected with those things and all of which unconsciously combine to make up a person's total understanding of what life is all about. (To order the book which resulted from that about face - The Truth About Evolution - go HERE.)

Other developments led me to question the seemingly unchallengeable teaching that the earth revolves on an axis and orbits the sun. Though plainly contradicted by numerous Scriptures in the Bible, the Copernican Model was not only universally accepted as fact in the secular world...but (barring a few brave souls) was even accepted as fact by evolution-fighting Creationists and other hard core Bible people. Surely it couldn't be a contra-scientific deception like evolutionism!! Nonetheless, as any who want to know can find out, it is indeed pure deception. More, it is the mother of the success of evolutionism and the other pernicious isms built on both lies.

Having written The Earth Is Not Moving to demonstrate how Copernicanism has succeeded in spite of having no evidence and violating all we can see, I have only very recently been led to discover some of the additional facts related in these four short essays. The Kabbalistic connection is very important, as all can surely appreciate.

Its importance lies not only in the fact that it explains and amplifies the religious zeal driving NASA's leadership in its no-holds-barred goal of demonstrating anti-Bible evolutionism, but also that it explains and amplifies how thoroughly the Zionist Ashkenazis have tricked Fundamentalist Protestant Evangelicals into supporting their every move, and do so on the alleged grounds that they are still God's chosen people fulfilling Biblical prophecies by returning to the "holy land", etc.

In ways too involved to explain here (HERE) these Christian leaders have been tricked into ignoring or twisting scores of New Testament texts which declare that all the chosen people status and perks for the Jews were abrogated by Jesus so that God's grace could go to "whosoever will", whether "Jew or Greek", with "no respect of persons" whereby "If ye be Christ's, THEN are ye Abraham's seed and heirs according to the promise", etc., etc. Sheesh....

So, just as surely as the Space Program is driven by the Kabbalist-based Relativity-Big Bang-Expanding Universe cosmology, just so surely is the mis-characterization of Biblical End Time events by the most visible Christian evangelicals today (HERE - HERE) really a fulfilling of the anti-Bible, anti-Christian teaching of the Kabbala.

One of the long list of major ironies that leaps out from the Kabbalist origins of Big Bangism and Zionism was the selection of Einstein from a long list of notables to be "Man of the 20th Century". Big Al's crucial role in saving Copernicanism from the non-moving Earth results of the Michelson-Morley experiments with his Relativity nonsense (HERE) and his promotion of the key element of Big Bangism (energy produces matter) made him an unrivaled hero to one and all who were eager and determined to see Bible-based Christianity bite the dust.

Documented but not widely broadcast is the fact that Einstein was also a ZZ (Zealous Zionist), who was, in fact, offered the presidency of Israel when that state was formed in 1948. Did Einstein know that what he really was...was a Kabbalist superstar?! Did those who brought him out of obscurity and made him an international celebrity for the whole 20th Century and then crowned him "The Man of the Century" know it?! Surely, few will want to say that Einstein in particular and those others in general were too dumb to know that what they did was in the service of anti-Bible, anti-Christian Kabbalism.... Can the smartest of the smart have been that dumb?? And is it not obvious that--whether duped or not--synthetic Zionist Christians have been a major factor in bringing this Bible-bashing plot to its present stage of virtual completion?! (HERE, HERE)

All who are not afraid to look into this will see that the evidence to back it up is irrefutable, and they will see that it is a spiritual rather than a scientific need to portray a 15 billion year old and virtually endless universe that drives modern cosmology today. (HERE)

Einstein and those who crowned him knew exactly what his role was, and--in spite of the opposition of Genesis-believing Jews--are still doing their utmost to bring to pass a global government with the highest priority being the fulfillment of the Kabbalist goal of getting rid of New Testament Christianity by ultimately making it a Hate Crime deserving the death penalty if not renounced. What do we think the Mark of the Beast is anyway?! (See: Hate Crimes.)

Ah, but there's that "war the Lamb wins"! (Rev.17:14) The soon coming One World Government with all its big plans only lasts "one hour" (v.12) before its Satanic goals are exposed and foiled so that it has to show who its real god is. Then look for several years of very rough stuff spelled out in The Revelation. (Scriptural details in these books: HERE - HERE.)

The Question again is: What does a small universe have to do with all this?

Answer: Everything. The Big Bang's limitlessly expanding universe gets rid of a uniquely created geocentric Earth on the one hand and, on the other, it provides the billions of years needed for the triumph of the evolution myth which is the fatal wound, the coup de grace, the denouement, the final resolution of the centuries-old plot to destroy Bible credibility. With the credibility of its Creation foundation destroyed, all of the Bible is suspect. If the Biblical Creation accounts of the cosmos and of all life are disproved by "science" as claimed, then the Biblical Jesus has no credibility and can take His place alongside Buddha, Confucius, and Zoroaster.

That's what the facts add up to, like it or not.

Big Bang Kabbalism fueled by NASA's high-tech Virtual Reality simulations may have the world convinced that goofy billions of light year distances to their latest star discoveries are "scientific" and that Star-Trekian evolutionism has produced washboard-browed and pointy-eared life all over the place "out there", but science fiction and simulations are not real. They are imaginations and counterfeits of something not known, not scientific, and not real (1 p. sum: HERE) The known facts, i.e., the real scientific facts, add up to an Earth-centered "small" universe with the Sun, Moon, and Stars going around the Earth every day just the way we see them go (HERE). That is both the scientific and the Biblical model and no Kabbalistic plans, old or new, are going to change it.

http://www.fixedearth.com/a_small_young_universe.htm

























http://www.fixedearth.com/a_small_young_universe.htm

truebeliever
05-15-2005, 04:23 AM
You dont actually understand the stuff you post do you Rush?

Do you notice anything about my posts...in general? They are my views after much thought.

Can you post ANYTHING that is based on your understanding of a subject?

Explain to me the THOROUGH THRASHING Ian Goddard gives to the "no one went to the moon theory". All done, I might add, complete with his own home experiments which would equally prove your Earth is standing still theory...as crap.

You clung to that heavily and when it was debunked you stated in a post that Fox must have erected a straw man to bring down. A straw man that you supported enthusiastically.

Rush you are a complete fool. You need to know that.

And no...i'm not muttering expletives...i feel a little sorry for you.

You have a go at NOHOPE for being neurotically addicted to CC and yet I believe you are up at between 2-4 am in the morning...you are in the U.S ar'nt you?

You are of course familiar with the bible verse..."remove the beam in your own eye before pointing out the splinter in mine"...

truebeliever
05-15-2005, 05:45 AM
I have actually gone over the entire thread.

At first I must admit...it was highly amusing and seeing all the old names there in full flight was a walk down memory lane.

And then I came to this...

Rushdoony taught that every aspect of society should be based upon Biblical law, which includes death by stoning for practicing homosexuals. His work greatly influenced the political agenda of the Religious Right.

Just as whacko as your stationary Earth theory is the other theory that you're a Christian.

I'm genuinely sorry i ever gave you the time of day.

I'm genuinely sorry for putting this at the top of the latest posts.

rushdoony
05-15-2005, 11:48 AM
Proof of Heliocentric Incorrectness 3 - Celestial Poles

Abstract

Heliocentric and geocentric cosmologies are special cases of the general acentric universe model. Here we show, by simple physics, observation and logic, that the acentric model is irrefutably wrong and that the World is completely stationary.


Introduction

The Bible clearly states that "The world is firmly established; it cannot be moved." (1 Ch. 16:30, Ps. 93:1, Ps. 96:10, NIV.)
Not one single physics experiment or astronomical observation in all history has shown the World to be undergoing any form of movement.
A cosmological model must agree with observational data.


Nightly Stellar Observations

The stars appear to travel around the World from east to west. A long-exposure photograph of the stars, taken from within the northern hemisphere (like Fig. 1), will show the motion of the stars as being circular and concentric with the north celestial pole (when projected onto a plane that contains the pole). The 'pole star', Polaris (or Alpha Ursae Minoris in the Bayer Catalogue), produces the smallest, such readily detectable circle.



Figure 1: Star trails during a 20-minute exposure at around midnight on Wednesday, 8th September, 2004. Taken at the Hill O' Many Stanes historical site in Caithness, northern Scotland, using a Zenit 11 35-mm SLR, with a Helios 58-mm, f2 lens. (Copyright © 2004 Steven Jones.)



In the southern hemisphere, too, things are just like they are in the north, except that there is not a bright star so correspondingly close to the south celestial pole (Polaris Australis, or Sigma Octantis in the Bayer Catalogue, has a visual magnitude of 5.5, which is considerably fainter than Polaris' 2.1 visual magnitude).



The Heliocentric Model

The ruling, anywhere-centred (acentric) paradigm allows people to assume that the Sun is at the centre of the universe (star streaming and so forth has shown that this cannot be the case, but never mind). This is Canon Kopernik's obscene and blasphemous idea of 1543.

Our supposed diurnal rotation about an axis is the interpretation given to explain the circles traced out by the stars. In other words, the World's alleged rotation is sufficient to give the 'illusion' that Polaris completes a perfect circle each sidereal day. Why, then, do we not see Polaris complete a far, far larger circle during the course of twelve months, when our movement through space, with respect to the 'fixed' background star, Polaris, enormously exceeds that which would be due to our rotation about an axis? It cannot be that Polaris is so far away that we would not observe such an effect, for, if that were so, then we definitely would not get any small circle appearing as a result of the World's alleged spin.

As always with the heliocentric myth, some additional, spurious component of motion is attached to the World, in order to satisfy the requirement of accounting for what we actually see. In this case, the extra component is a precessional motion of the World's axis (i.e., analogous to the wobble of a child's spinning top), such that the World's north pole always, rather miraculously, aligns itself with the north celestial pole.



Consequence of Axis Precession

Figure 2 illustrates the general situation, and the problem that is inherent with it. For if the north pole is so aligned, then what will the World's south pole align itself with? The answer must be nothing. Any movement of the World's alleged axis, such that the north celestial pole maintains its position, would necessitate a constant shifting of the south celestial pole, around a large circle (c1 ® c2 ® c3, etc.) and vice versa. But this is not what we see.



Figure 2: In the heliocentric model, either one celestial pole would change throughout the year, or they both would. (These 2-D drawings are meant to clearly show the 3-D concept behind this paper, rather than being an attempt to accurately display the World's alleged orbital plane within the celestial sphere.)



Hopefully, the discrepancy is now clear. In the heliocentric fairytale, the World goes around such a staggeringly large orbit that it has to be travelling at over 66,000 mph to merely get around it in one year. Stars in close angular proximity to the north celestial pole, such as Polaris, are not so far away that they do not describe small circles, as a result (so we are told) of the World's rotation about an axis. The only way that such stars would be observed to describe circles (and not loops), and not be seen to trace very much larger orbital paths over twelve months of observation, is if the World's axis constantly tilts such as to point directly towards the (arbitrary, in this scenario) north celestial pole. This is pretty far-fetched, but even if it did occur without anyone feeling it, the situation looking toward the south celestial pole would be completely different to what we observe to be the case, for in this scenario the south celestial pole would change hourly.

A three-dimensional representation of this argument is shown in Fig. 3, below.





Figure 3: A grossly exaggerated depiction of the change in axis orientation, in order to convey the main point. (Illustration by Jack Lewis.)



Conclusions

The conclusion is that the World does not orbit the Sun and that it does not rotate about an axis, either. This can be reasoned via the following logic:

The stars complete circular paths every 23h 56m 4.091s, apparently as a consequence of the observer having completed a circle of absolute maximum circumference 24,860 miles.
No similar, annual motion of the stars is observed, in consequence of our supposedly hurtling around an (approximate) circle of 584,058,077 mile circumference (i.e., 23,494 times bigger than the equatorial maximum given in point number 1).
Precession of the World's imaginary axis, such that it always points to the same point in the northern sky, will not produce such an alignment in the south, and vice versa.
The World therefore would have to remain aligned with the north-south axis of the celestial sphere, which, in turn, means that it cannot be orbiting the Sun, unless the stars are somehow tied to the World as the World moves.
Such non-fixed 'background' stars would be contrary to the heliocentric scheme.
Heliocentrism is therefore an invalid model.
Acentrism is therefore an invalid model.
Geocentrism (with a rotating World) is therefore an invalid model (see Proof of Heliocentric Incorrectness 2), because it is geometrically equivalent to a heliocentric model. Hence, since the heliocentric one is wrong, the equivalent geocentric one must also be wrong, simply because of its equivalence.
Star circles cannot be due to a rotating World, because they do not vary with latitude (a camera situated at the North Pole will still capture Polaris moving around the same-sized circle).
We are therefore left with a World that must remain on the north-south axis of the celestial sphere, must be central, because of countless other observations (e.g., Y.P. Varshni's paper, briefly mentioned under "Solar System," elsewhere on this website), and which cannot be a World that rotates.
The heliocentric and geocentric (with rotating World) cosmological models are geometrically equivalent, since they can be considered as sharing a common point of rotation. This is Mach's Principle. The heliocentric and geostatic systems, on the other hand, are not equivalent, either dynamically or geometrically. They are totally different, physical systems. There is no common point of rotation between them. Mach's Principle does not therefore apply, although many people get themselves and others completely confused by erroneously claiming that it does. Hence, the geostatic reference system (as discussed in the previous proof, linked to on point number 8) again matches observational facts, whereas the heliocentric/acentric concept does not.

Our method here has been similar to the phenomenon of stellar parallax, which Tycho Brahe used to argue his case against heliocentrism, and which is addressed in the scientific paper, "Stellar distances and the age of the universe." (Note that huge distances to the stars were only brought in as another ad hoc to prop up the heliocentric deception.)

We thus conclude once more, and without the necessity for any mathematical analysis, that the cosmos is geocentric and geostatic.

Quod erat demonstrandum.

From: www.geocentric-universe.com

rushdoony
05-15-2005, 01:58 PM
THE EARTH IS NOT MOVING (One Page Summary)
FACTS:

THERE IS NO PROOF THAT THE EARTH ROTATES ON AN "AXIS" DAILY AND ORBITS THE SUN ANNUALLY. NONE.
ALL CALCULATIONS FOR ECLIPSES, THE SPACE PROGRAM, NAVIGATION, SATELLITE MOVEMENTS--ANYTHING THAT DEMANDS PRECISION AND ACCURACY--ARE BASED ON A NON-MOVING EARTH. BOILED DOWN, HELIOCENTRIC MATH IS THE SAME AS GEOCENTRIC MATH. MATHEMATICS HAS BEEN INVENTED SPECIFICALLY TO UPHOLD COPERNICANISM. (EINSTEIN CALLED MATH AN "ART FORM" AND SO IT IS!)
NO EXPERIMENT HAS SHOWN THE EARTH TO BE MOVING (MUCH LESS AT 30 TIMES RIFLE BULLET SPEED IN SOLAR ORBIT AND 250 TIMES RBS AROUND A GALAXY!) ONE WOULD THINK SUCH SPEEDS WOULD FLAP ONE’S COLLAR A LITTLE EVEN IF THE "SCIENCE" ESTABLISHMENT SAYS NO....
MULTIPLE EXPERIMENTS HAVE SHOWN THE EARTH TO BE STATIONARY.
REVISIONIST HISTORY REVEALS THE ROLES THAT COPERNICUS, KEPLER, GALILEO, NEWTON, EINSTEIN, SAGAN ET AL HAVE PLAYED IN FOISTING THIS LIE ON MANKIND.
THE LOGIC AGAINST A MOVING EARTH IS OVERPOWERING.
WORLD-CLASS ASTRONOMER SIR FRED HOYLE SAID TAKE YOUR PICK BETWEEN THE TWO MODELS....
COPERNICANISM PAVED THE WAY FOR DARWINISM (WHICH SPAWNED MARXISM, FREUDIANISM, EINSTEINISM, SAGANISM)
STAR SPEEDS ARE NOT A PROBLEM WHEN THE THICKNESS OF THE UNIVERSE IS SEEN TO BE WHAT IT REALLY IS, THAT IS, LESS THAN 1/2 LIGHT DAY THICK. BEGIN HERE...
NASA’S SPACE PROGRAM IS LABELED "ORIGINS RESEARCH" AND COSTS TAXPAYERS MEGA-BUCKS. COMPUTERIZED TELESCOPES ARE PROGRAMMED TO SEND BACK "SYNTHESIZED IMAGES". THE "IMAGE WARPER" PERMITS "GEOMENTRIC TRANSFORMATIONS" WHILE "ORIGINS TECHNOLOGY... CONFIGURES THE MULTIPLE SMALL MIRRORS..." IN THESE TELESCOPES. TALK ABOUT A CON JOB!
THE BIBLE SAYS THE EARTH IS NOT MOVING AND CANNOT BE MOVED. WHAT’L IT BE FOLKS? FALSE SCIENCE AS THE SOURCE OF ABSOLUTE TRUTH...OR GOD’S WORD??
Book Order: HERE...

from:
www.fixedearth.com

rushdoony
05-15-2005, 02:33 PM
The Universe is not one ten-trillionth
the size you have been told by NWO propaganda.

From www.fixedearth.com :


The Size and Structure of the Universe

According to the Bible and Non-Theoretical Science



Part I....."Star Reflections In The Biblical Model" - HERE I wish I may, I wish I might...

Part II...."Highly Reflective Water Crystals Are The 'Waters Above' The Biblical

Firmament" - HERE Plain and simple....

Part III..."Rare Scriptural Confirmation of the Role of Reflections in The Biblical

Model of the Universe - HERE Ezekiel, you wascal you!

Part IV... Star Trails: A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words - HERE Well??

Part V.... The Mother of All Space Science Fraud Is At Work In The Measurement

of Star Distances - HERE An absolutely deadly revelation for all of modern cosmology...

Part VI... More Unyielding Evidence of Flagrant Deceptions In The Measurement of Star

Distances - HERE A cosmological Humpty Dumpty ready to fall!

Part VII.. A Clear and Unavoidable Choice Between the Biblical and the Kabbalist

Creationist Models Looms for One and All - HERE Ultimately, it's God or g'd....

rangergord
05-15-2005, 04:59 PM
17 pages devoted to idiocy? Well done!

rushdoony
05-15-2005, 05:29 PM
www.geocentric-universe.com

Atheistic Philosophy


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The laws of physics

Dr. Neville Jones, Ph.D., M.Sc.(Phys), M.Sc.(Comp), D.I.C., B.Sc.(Hons), M.Inst.P.



Introduction

On page 1 of Professor Herbert Pohl's book, "Quantum Mechanics for Science and Engineering," we read that, "Quantum mechanics is a remarkable theory. There seems to be no real doubt that much of physics and all of chemistry should be deducible from its postulates or 'laws'."

Wow. Very impressive indeed.

Impressive, that is, if you have no understanding of science. For just a little further on in the same book and this apparent theory of everything is demoted to being just a model, with the clarification: "Our every attempt to describe or interpret nature involves the use of a model. From it are deduced 'laws' which it is hoped will aid in describing and interpreting natural events. Clearly, as our experience grows, constant revision of these imputed 'laws' will be required. Models, based upon analogies, are often very helpful – but never complete. In this sense we must always be prepared to abandon it for a better one. … [In quantum theory,] frequent recourse to approximations of all kinds is required, ranging from mere truncation of series expansions to outright hand-waving. Model after such model will be encountered, but each must be recognized for what it is – a model."

We can summarize Prof. Pohl's teaching by saying that quantum mechanics has "laws," but is a model. "Constant revision of these 'laws' will be required, [because] models [are] never complete. [In addition,] frequent recourse to approximations … [including] outright hand-waving" are necessary.

Suddenly quantum mechanics is by no means as impressive as we had been led to believe just a few paragraphs earlier. These so-called "laws," which popular commentaries would have us believe that God Himself is constrained by, are apparently nothing more than postulates of a model that is not only a set of approximations and assumptions, but can be thrown out any minute for a "better" model. This ought to come as no surprise, since if Newton's "laws" of motion, for example, are really "laws," then why would we need anything like quantum mechanics and general relativity in the first place?

In this small paper, I shall argue that standard, scientific education misleads the general public, in much the same way that the medical profession does. I.e., it places upon science an aura of mystique and absolute correctness that is totally unjustified. On the contrary, it needs to be realized that our level of understanding of everyday things is exceedingly limited.





Kinetic energy and linear momentum

Consider the following, typical extract from a good high-school physics textbook:

"In collisions, the total momentum of the colliding objects is always conserved. Usually, however, their total kinetic energy is not conserved. Some of it is changed to heat or sound energy, which is not recoverable. Such collisions are said to be inelastic." (Nelkon and Parker, p. 21.)

Here we are instructed, then, that the total linear momentum is always conserved, yet that the total kinetic energy is not conserved in inelastic collisions.

Kinetic energy is a function of only two things; mass and velocity. If we are not discussing nuclear reactions, then we can assume that mass has remained constant during the collision. Hence, something connected with the velocities of the two objects must have been lost and is "not recoverable." However, linear momentum is merely the product of mass and velocity and, since part of the total velocity has been lost, whilst the total mass has remained constant, then total linear momentum must have changed also, between what it was before the collision and what it is afterwards. But if it has changed, then linear momentum can not have been conserved in the case of the inelastic collision.

Consider Fig. 1.



Figure 1: Two particles on a collision course with one another.



Kinetic Energy

½ m1u12 + ½ m2u22 = KEB

½ m1v12 + ½ m2v22 = KEA

Linear Momentum

mu1 + mu2 = LMB

mv1 + mv2 = LMA

where KEB, KEA, LMB and LMA are the kinetic energy before, kinetic energy after, linear momentum before and linear momentum after the collision, respectively.

To rigourously test the values of total linear momentum before and after an inelastic collision, a computer program was written, the heart of which is shown in Fig. 2, and the results from which are shown in Fig. 3. The spheres were varied in mass, such that either one could be significantly greater than the mass of the other. The collision could occur either from left to right or from right to left. The before velocities were iterated through many discreet values and the after velocities varied through twice that number. Only inelastic collisions, where a small percentage of total kinetic energy is lost, were considered.





Figure 2: Section of computer code for testing the assertion that linear momentum is conserved in all inelastic collisions between two objects.



In this code, if statements are used to ensure that a collision will definitely occur, that one particle will not 'pass through' the other particle, that the collision is inelastic and that the loss of energy is at most 3.5%, respectively.







Figure 3: Results obtained by subtracting the total linear momentum after an inelastic collision from that existing before the collision. The solid, black line displays the trend towards decreasing total linear momentum as a function of the number of collisions.



Does Fig. 3 support the contention that linear momentum has been conserved in these 65,053 simulated collisions? No, it does not. On the contrary, the general trend displayed here is clearly that of a loss of linear momentum occurring over time, in complete agreement with what ought to be expected. In fact, only 0.8% of the 65,053 possible inelastic collisions examined conserved linear momentum. These results plainly deny the "law" of the conservation of linear momentum.

Why, then, do Nelkon and Parker state that "In collisions, the total momentum of the colliding objects is always conserved"? It cannot be because they were blissfully unaware that their statement is an untrue generality, because on the previous page they had written,

"The principle of the conservation of linear momentum states that, if no external forces act on a system of colliding objects, the total momentum of the objects remains constant." (Page 20, emphasis mine.)

I.e., they qualified their statement of the "law" of the conservation of linear momentum on page 20, but left out any such rider on page 21. Probably, therefore, they were just emphasizing something to the student who they knew would be sitting an 'A'-Level physics examination paper and, in order to answer a mathematical question regarding some collision between solid objects, the student should assume conservation (otherwise the mathematical treatment goes beyond what the student would by that stage have been taught). At this level of understanding of the subject, the scholar is deemed to be better equipped by being taught an approximation as fact, rather than burdened with a complication that only those who are going to study physics at a much higher level will ever need to know about.

However, this approach raises some problems, because to many this level of education becomes terminal. Journalists and writers of 'popular science' will use such texts and place their trust in what they read therein. Even most of those who go on to degree and postgraduate courses will not question the books and papers that they read.





Application to the atmosphere

Figure 4 shows the development of the computer program to facilitate the simulation of specific scenarios. In particular, the statistical nature of collisions within the World's atmosphere was examined in this run.





Figure 4: Small loss of total kinetic energy (0.05%) and large variation in mass simulates collisions within the atmosphere.



A variation of 22 times in particle masses represents the possibility of a collision between a carbon dioxide molecule and a hydrogen atom (and anything inbetween). A wide variation in before velocities was allowed and the total loss in kinetic energy was limited to just 0.05% (atmospheric collisions are approximately elastic). There were 978 collisions that fitted these criteria and we observe the same general trend as was seen in Fig. 3 – namely, that the total linear momentum of the atmosphere, in the absence of external influences, will decrease with time. The information area at the bottom of the graphical user interface shown in Fig. 4, displays the fact that conservation was not observed in even a single instance.





Conclusion

There is a tendency in the media to promote "the laws of physics," as some sort of mystical framework within which the cosmos must operate. As alluded to earlier, it is even said that God Himself must abide by these figments of our imagination. The original purpose of simplification is lost along the way, and replaced instead by rigid, incontrovertible rules. Close examination of these "laws," however, show them to be transient conveniences, based upon assumptions and approximations. Reality very rarely lends itself to being expressed in some neat little equation.

Furthermore, aspects of Kopernik's ruling paradigm are supported and defended by people who quote 'science', either from elementary textbooks, or from Internet sites, without having a deeper comprehension of what they are talking about. In the eyes of the general public, supporters of atheistic heliocentrism that resort to 'laws of physics' arguments are given credence, not only because such things can be looked up for themselves in what are perceived to be authoritative and established sources, but mainly because -

And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. (2 Tim 4:4, KJV.)



Copyright © 2004-2005 Dr. Neville Jones. All rights reserved.





Acknowledgement

This paper has been significantly extended and elaborated upon as a result of criticism levelled by Mike Boyd. His comments were highly instrumental in my reassessment of the material presented here.





References

Nelkon, M. and Parker, P., 1977, "Advanced Level Physics," 4th ed., Heinemann Educational Books, London.

Pohl, H.A., 1967, "Quantum Mechanics for Science and Engineering," Prentice-Hall, Inc., New Jersey.

rushdoony
05-16-2005, 06:09 AM
www.geocentric-universe.com

The Universe

Black holes, worm holes, superstrings, branes, pulsars, quasars, dark matter, nebulae, galaxies and so forth. The universe appears to be a strange, hostile, cold and purposeless place. "Many and strange are the universes that drift like bubbles in the foam upon the River of Time." (Arthur Clarke, popular science fiction writer). As for the World (or Earth), let's consider what Prof. Carl Sagan (1934 - 1996) had to say: "As long as there have been humans we have searched for our place in the cosmos. Where are we? Who are we? We find that we live on an insignificant planet of a humdrum star lost in a galaxy tucked away in some forgotten corner of a universe in which there are far more galaxies than people." (Sagan, C., "A Gift for Vividness," Time, Oct. 20, 1980, p. 61.)

In Chapter 1 of Genesis, though, we are told something very different indeed. There we find a cosmos being created by God in six days, filled with purpose and order, beauty and design. There we find no mention of dangerous things like black holes. No mention of 'space-time continuums'. Not even a hint of 'multiverses' and aliens. "And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day. Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made." (Gen 1:31 - 2:2, KJV.)

So, what are we to believe? Do we accept the combined wisdom and knowledge of men such as Mikolaj Kopernik (commonly referred to by the Latin form of his name: "Nicolaus Copernicus"), Johannes Kepler, Galileo Galilei, Isaac Newton, Ernst Mach, Albert Einstein, Edwin Hubble, Fred Hoyle, Carl Sagan, Kip Thorne and Stephen Hawking? (A pretty formidable array of 'stars'.) Or do we stand behind the written testimony of someone who formed the real stars out of nothing, and who calls each of them by name? For Genesis 1 was written by God Himself.

To discuss these mutually exclusive viewpoints, we need to be totally clear about one thing from the start. Given all the time, effort and money that goes into astronomical sciences, it is only natural to suppose that a great deal of factual knowledge about the universe has by now been accumulated. However, this assumption is false. All that science "knows" still comes from terrestrial observation, just as Sir Arthur Eddington pointed out in 1933, "There are no purely observational facts about the heavenly bodies. Astronomical measurements are, without exception, measurements of phenomena occurring in a terrestrial observatory or station; it is only by theory that they are translated into knowledge of a universe outside." (Eddington, "The Expanding Universe," CUP.) Clearly, then, we are constrained in our data collection activities by our essentially two-dimensional imaging, instrumental imperfections and lack of spatial mobility.

Since the 1970s it could be argued that the American government agency, NASA, has provided an enormous amount of information regarding outer space, but we investigate their increasingly outlandish claims (and the agency itself) in a separate section of this site.

The theories of astrophysics and cosmology, through which astronomical observations "are translated into knowledge of a universe outside," are like a tangled ball of wool, with each knot being added in order to 'fix' some kink in the previously 'fixed' ball. Our task is either to unravel the ball, or to throw the ball out and start again with new wool. The latter course of action is to be preferred.

A very common misconception, even amongst professional astronomers, is that telescopes provide us with a measure of distance. They do not. Exactly as with a microscope, the telescope is an optical instrument that simply provides an angular resolution greater than that of the human eye.

Consider, for instance, the following quotation taken from Rev. Alexander Hislop's scholarly book, "The Two Babylons," fourth edition, 1929: "There is this great difference between the works of men and the works of God, that the same minute and searching investigation, which displays the defects and imperfections of the one, brings out also the beauties of the other. ?If the microscope be brought to bear on the flowers of the field, ?instead of their beauty diminishing, new beauties and still more delicate, that have escaped the naked eye, are forthwith discovered."

We can see these intricacies through a microscope, not because the microscope is somehow looking 50-cm behind the flower, but because it can resolve detail that our eye cannot. We see exactly the same thing as the microscope objective "sees," but we need the assistance of the microscope lenses, in conjunction with our own, to resolve the detail.

The same is true of a telescope. A telescope does not "see" more distant objects; rather, it "sees" the same things as we do with our eyes. However, the telescope resolves these objects, or magnifies them. Just as with using a microscope to examine the detail of a flower, we can use a telescope to examine the detail and structure of the firmament. What we observe is therefore not things that are further and further away from us, but finer detail of the same thing.

There is thus no observational basis for claiming that the universe is billions of light-years in radius. We observe a rotating dome above our heads, and there is no reason why this should not, in actuality, be the case.



Summary
"Astronomical measurements are, without exception, measurements of phenomena occurring in a terrestrial observatory or station; it is only by theory that they are translated into knowledge of a universe outside." - Sir Arthur Eddington.

rushdoony
05-16-2005, 04:31 PM
Quotations From Contemporary Scientists

Showing Viability of Geocentricity Model

In Comparison With Heliocentricity Model


Gerardus D. Bouw, Ph.D. Geocentrist Astronomer wrote:


"...The world has just as many myths today

as it had 3000 years ago.

Can we help if the humanists and Bible critics

have swallowed every myth we have today while

rejecting the Truth as myth?

Having said that, we need to prove our point for we are,

after all, challenging the established [heliocentricity based] belief system."1


*******

World Class Astronomer Sir Fred Hoyle

wrote these four affirmations of the Geocentricity Model:


"We know that the difference between a heliocentric

theory and a geocentric theory is one of relative motion only,

and that such a difference has no physical significance." 2


*******


"Tycho Brahe proposed a dualistic scheme...

and in making this proposal he thought he was

offering something radically different from Copernicus...

[and] Kepler obviously thought so too.

Yet in principle there is no difference."3


*******


"Today we cannot say that the Copernican theory

is "right" and the Ptolemaic theory is "wrong"

in any meaningful sense.

The two theories...are physically equivalent to one another."4


*******


"Science today is locked into paradigms.

Every avenue is blocked by beliefs that are wrong,

and if you try to get anything published in a journal today, you will run up against a paradigm, and the editors will turn you down."5


*******

Astronomer Dr. Bouw on Geocentricity and the Space Program:


"...Again, once more for the record:

it has been shown at least six different ways

this century alone that the equations

and physics used by NASA to launch satellites

are identical to the equations derived

from a geocentric universe.

Thus, if the space program is proof of anything,

it proves geocentricity and disproves heliocentrism."6


*******

"The evidence for heliocentrism

is even weaker than the evidence for evolution."7


*******


(More to come....For example: Physicist Dr. Neville T. Jones has a new web page that all who

are interested in this growing challenge will want to visit.

Go here > www.midclythsupnet.com )


*******

BIBLIOGRAPHY


1 - Gerardus D. Bouw, Ph.D., "Draco the Dragon", The Biblical Astronomer, Vol. 12, #100, Spring, ‘02

2 - Sir Fred Hoyle, Astronomy and Cosmology, 1975, p. 416, (Quoted in Spring, 02 BA, p.64.)

3 - Hoyle, Nicolaus Copernicus, 1973, p. 3, (Quoted as in #2.)

4 - Ibid. p. 88.

5 - Hoyle, Scientific American, March, 1995, p. 47, (Quoted on p. 73 of Spring, 02 BA.)

6 - G. D. Bouw, "News Extracts", Bulletin of Tychonian Society, Spring, 1990, #53, p.28, (Quoted p. 43, The Earth Is Not Moving, by Marshall Hall, 1994 printing.)

7 - Dr. Jim Paulson, Prof. biochemistry at the University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh, (Spring ‘02 BA, p.80.)
more: www.fixedearth.com

rushdoony
06-01-2005, 09:05 AM
June 2005 Bulletin


Intelligent Design Pitfalls: Is "ID" A Genuine Threat To The Evolution Monopoly? Or Is It A Tricky Compromise To Save Factless Evolutionism?? The upside and the downside of ID’s entry into the escalating battle to break the Evolution Monopoly in tax supported schools in the USA (HERE).


Whether the Earth rotates and orbits the sun as the Kabbala teaches (HERE, p.3 - HERE), or whether it is stationary with the sun going around daily as the Bible teaches (HERE - HERE - HERE), the gigantic New Truth on the Block is this: There is no secular choice between the two! Both concepts are religious. Period. One is the "creation scenario" of the Christian Religion; the other is the "creation scenario" of the Pharisee Religion. Both are unlawful in tax supported education in the USA according to the Constitution (HERE , HERE, HERE). Can anyone--religious or not-- who hates being deceived, fail to understand the importance of that fact ??


"Darwin’s German Bulldog and Marx’s Right Hand Man Recognized the Unbreakable Link Between Darwinism and Copernicanism" (HERE). This short essay--along with this one (HERE) and this one (HERE)--will show anyone interested in learning the truth about evolutionism that they must first understand that the conquest of the physical sciences by the wholly assumption-based Copernican model (HERE) paved the way for the conquest of the biological sciences by the equally factless Darwinian model.


There is a strange phenomenon involved in the ongoing Spiritually Pivotal battle over Evolutionism...in the USA particularly. Everybody on both sides of that battle seems to be fully engaged in either challenging or defending the Darwinian Model which has been quietly scuttled and replaced by the Panspermia Model over the past quarter century (details: HERE). Extraterrestrial and intergalactic evolution fantasies where comet-spewed bacteria produces humans and Klingons in four or five billion years is where the evolution buck stops now. It reinforces the 15 billion years old Big Bang Model, you see (HERE). "Man will believe anything to keep from believing the Bible", is a statement attributed to Napoleon. How true; how true....


Newcomers to this web domain can begin filling in the blanks as to how the false science myths of a moving earth and of terrestrial and extraterrestrial evolutionism are interdependent and how they have come to control modern man’s "knowledge" by going (HERE - HERE - HERE) and following the internal links.

From: www.fixedearth.com
See also: www.geocentric-universe.com

rushdoony
06-04-2005, 04:00 PM
Intelligent Design Pitfalls:

Is "ID" A Genuine Threat To The Evolution Monopoly?

Or Is It A Tricky Compromise To Save Factless Evolutionism?


There is a well-financed strategy all across the USA which is dominating challenges to the evolution monopoly in the schools. This strategy advocates teaching ID "Intelligent Design" and let students draw their own conclusions about the Designer.


As shown in this link about Atheism and Agnosticism (HERE), the Intelligent Design argument is indeed deadly to those two isms. No one who claims to be honest can agree to pick from any dozen of a blue million real phenomena, analyze the ineffable complexity of the design features involved, and honestly resist the inescapable conclusion that such Design must have a Designer. That done, one might as well call this Designer "god". From that point on, both "atheism" and "agnosticism" become inaccurate labels.


So, without argument, the Intelligent Design Strategy is unbeatable for attacking and nullifying atheism and agnosticism, isms which are both completely dependent upon a secular evolutionary explanation for all that exists.


But is the ID Strategy one that really challenges evolutionism per se? Or, is it a strategy with the agenda of salvaging evolutionism through compromise with ID??


In other words, is ID a cleverly conceived strategy for protecting the belief in a "scientifically certified" evolved universe, earth, and mankind while permitting belief in some kind of "god" who designed it all? And is this "permission " granted just so long as the choice restricts this "god’s" identity to one who has created everything through the evolutionary process and not through the Biblical process?!


In other words, is the elimination of literal Biblical Creationism the unchanging, real ball game being played out through the ID initiative?


One thing is certain: This sort of compromise or "cooperation" between "science and religion" is usually called "theistic evolutionism" and it is not new. Various recent polls in the USA show that there are three groups that have now taken shape in the irrepressible County and State challenges to the evolution monopoly: 1) One group represents c. 30% of those who protest the evolution monopoly but are content with the "god did it through evolution" compromise,; 2) A second group of c. 30% insists that no challenge to evolution be allowed at all; and; 3) The third group of c. 40% (repeatedly defeated by the "Establishment Clause" ruling) is rewording its challenges, with the Intelligent Design advocates getting most of the media attention, but with those calling for the teaching of secular scientific facts arguing that this is the only way to be legal, get the truth out, and beat evolution with that truth at the same time. .


Scientific facts--it is confidently and accurately believed by those in this third group--will expose and destroy all the theoretical claims of the evolutionists in short order once certain students and academics get hold of them. This in turn will lead to a Constitutional prohibition against all evolutionary explanations for the origin of the universe, earth, and mankind as "false science" in the USA first (HERE - HERE), and will leave the courts only one alternative, viz., teach the secular scientific facts.


While it is quite true that teaching the facts would indeed produce that result, it is naive to think that the enormous power and self-interest attached to the evolution enterprise would not see this coming and head it off by one means or another.


Hence the reappearance of the oldest anti-evolution argument around (Intelligent Design) which can be--and already is--being labeled as just another attempt by Bible Fundamentalists to get "religion" into the tax-supported education apparatus.


In short, this ID label is just baiting the Fundamentalists. They are to believe that if they can succeed in getting Intelligent Design into the curriculums, they have scored a big victory against evolutionism. In fact they are just stepping into a trap set by those who are quite willing to back off from pure atheist evolutionism, and to allow some kind of "god" into the creation business... just so as long as it is not the God of the Bible Who emphatically rules out evolutionism in all of its guises.


Said yet another way, the "theistic evolutionist" position controlling some 30% of the challengers to the evolution monopoly represents people who have accepted evolution as a scientific fact but want "god" directing the creative process. These people are very open to the ID concept. Perhaps half of these would welcome hard scientific facts which would destroy the evolution paradigm altogether, while the other half wants evolution to stay and will join with the atheist evolutionists if necessary to keep evolution-destroying facts out of the schools.


Both of these groups of "theistic evolutionists" agree that the design evident in all that exists is too incredibly complex to have happened by random accident evolutionism, so there had to be some supernatural Designer behind it all. That’s where the ID movement locks in the whole 30%. Never mind that probably half would prefer that evolution be proven false and the other half would hate to see that proven. The reality is: That by accepting the ID "theistic evolutionist" concept, both sides are accepting the evolutionary process which began with a Big Bang about 15 billion years ago, produced the earth about 4.6 billion years ago, and finally "evolved" mankind about a million years ago.


This acceptance by "theistic evolutionists" accomplishes three things:

1) In spite of the facts that could destroy it, this concept prevents those facts from being taught and certifies evolutionism as valid science and winner of the contest;

2) In spite of the fact that the Big Bang Evolutionary Paradigm is demonstrably the "Origins Scenario" of the Pharisee Religion, that Paradigm would remain intact under the Intelligent Design compromise and would continue to commit train loads of tax money in support of THAT Religion’s "Origins Scenario" in violation of the U. S. Constitution;

3) In spite of the fact that the Copernican Model is wholly assumptive, factless, vulnerable, and the Keystone of the entire Pharisaic Big Bang Evolutionary Model (HERE - HERE), it would remain untouchable in the ID compromise.


Therefore, it could not be more clear that "Intelligent Design"--while it is wonderful for nullifying atheism and agnosticism--leaves the Pharisee religion’s evolutionary paradigm in absolute control of the theoretical science establishment and succeeds thereby in outlawing the teaching of scientific facts which threaten the whole lying masquerade.


So, when one factors in the recently available and highly explosive fact that Evolutionism itself is a "creation scenario" from a holy book (Kabbala) of the religion of Phariseeism (HERE - HERE - HERE - HERE)--and hence is subject to the "Establishment Clause" prohibition in the USA (HERE - HERE - HERE)--it can readily be seen why the "Intelligent Design" strategy has suddenly been called upon to rescue not only evolutionism, but the entire Pharisaic Cabal.


That cabal now controls the world’s most rudimentary knowledge about the Origin of everything (HERE). That cabal has succeeded by clothing itself in the priestly robes of "theoretical science" and has very nearly brought about the triumph of the Kabbala’s "Origins Scenario" while simultaneously very nearly discrediting the Bible’s "Origins Scenario" even in professed Bible churches.


With a fortune in the 600 millions, Howard Ahmanson--it turns out, has been a big contributor to the ID movement, particularly to the current leader of that movement, The Discovery Institute in Seattle. Some of Ahamson’s other views-- basically Reconstructionist Post-Millennial eschatological utopianism--are Scripturally impossible, but that’s his bag, his business, and another story (HERE).


As for the Discovery Institute’s Director, Stephen C. Meyer, he has accomplished a lot in a short time with the big money that has come his way. Senator Rick Santorum (R. PA) uses his material. Scholars from Baylor, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, etc., are on board and drawing attention to the ID strategy.


All of this (and a lot more!) is escalating awareness about the most fundamental weakness of pagan evolutionism, namely, the fact that it can not explain the ineffable complexity of design that is intrinsic in a blue million actual examples. Basically--though I was just as obtuse as the next one--it is just plain stupid to say that all this inescapable design came to be as it undeniably is without a Designer.


Thus--let it be stressed again--the "Intelligent Design" argument completely pulls the rug from beneath the huge atheist and agnostic populations of the world. That in itself is a great gain for Truth.


However, this warning must be repeated and made unmistakably clear so that no reader misses it: If getting ID into the education system is the ultimate goal of those who want to combat evolutionism , it is the wrong goal for those who want the whole Truth. The ID plan will leave all the essentials of evolutionism in the textbooks. The only change that will be noticed is that students will be driven logically to accept some kind of supernatural intelligence which has used evolution to create everything over some 15 billion years according to the Big Bang Paradigm.


Thus, there is only one real victor that is certain to arise if the ID tactic for breaking the evolution monopoly is allowed to be the ultimate goal of any challenge to the evolution monopoly. That victor will be the Pharisee Religion from whence is derived the 15 billion year old evolution paradigm via the Kabbala. The big loser with such a tactic is the Christian Religion from whence is derived the literal six-day ("evening and morning") anti- evolution paradigm via the Bible.


Given that the Virtual Reality Deception is already in control of the theoretical science establishment and being media-fed to the world (HERE - HERE), the Pharisee Plan is stepping up its vigorous promotion of a powerful ecumenical movement led by the Catholic Church. The ecumenical concept here is basically that people should believe in some kind of g’d but be tolerant of all beliefs. The only limitation in this lovey-dovey- sounding ecumenical tolerance is this: The evolutionary model over billions of years must be treated as factual science, i.e., as Absolute Truth. This is the identical conclusion that would follow a ruling that ID be taught as a final compromise settlement to end all future challenges to evolutionism.


All that is required to pull off this humungous cabal is, of course, the formation of a Global Government with a World Court. With that accomplished, people can rattle beads in a coconut and dance around a fire and worship whatever they want, animal, vegetable, or mineral. They certainly can worship Satan, the most hyped and probably the fastest growing "deity" worldwide, and the one guaranteed in writing over 1900 years ago to be sponsored by a Global Government (Rev. 13:2b-8; etc.).


When it begins, it’s "angel of light" persona will deceive most everyone. "Tolerance" for all religions will be the official mantra, no matter how pagan (HERE - HERE) or overtly diabolical. And again, the only exception to this "tolerance" will be: No religion can be allowed which challenges or denies the evolutionary "science" that tells us about the origins of the universe, the earth, and ourselves. The central "scientific fact" of a Big Bang 15 billion years ago which has brought all that exists into being through an evolutionary process must be acknowledged by all religions.


If some hard heads want to worship Jesus, or even believe in parts of the Bible, that will be tolerated...at least until the 6th Trumpet "Mark of the Beast" time frame kicks in. At that point, the Government will decree that these worshippers must take the Mark and worship the image of the Beast or die (Rev. 13:15-17;Acts 15:18: HERE).


All of today’s incipient world government sweet talk about ending wars, poverty, disease, racism, religious intolerance, etc., is diabolical trickery from start to finish. The goal is the emasculation of Biblical Christianity and the triumph of Talmud/ Kabbala Phariseeism. (Check John 8:44 for the author of this trickery!)


Because the "Intelligent Design" movement essentially forces people to believe in a supernatural Designer (but is elastic enough to permit said "designer" to have used the 15 billion year old evolutionary model to do the creating) this movement is no threat either to:

a) Contra-scientific, Bible-destroying evolution mythology; nor to:

b) The total victory of the religion of the Pharisees and their Talmud/Kabbala g’d over the religion of the Christians and the Biblical God.


Yet, say yes to "Intelligent Design" in your State and County school districts! Then say a LOUDER YES to teaching just the secular facts of science in your schools!


But don’t stop with that!


Go to the microphone and say No! to the use of taxes to promote the evolutionary "creation scenario" of the Pharisee religion!! You will be on solid ground because; a) That religion has deceptively misrepresented itself as "science" to get its evolution model taught everywhere, and; b) Because that fact puts this teaching in direct violation of the Establishment Clause of the U. S. Constitution (HERE - HERE).


If those needed actions above are taken, putting the teaching of "Intelligent Design" in the curriculum will serve a wonderful purpose.


If those actions are not taken, students will not only be denied foundational truth about the origin of all that exists, but they will continue being spiritual acolytes serving the anti-Christ mystical religion of Phariseeism...at taxpayer’s expense!


The choice ahead couldn’t be more clear. All students, parents, educators, and judges in the USA who profess to champion the teaching of factual science, who are eager to expose deception, who venerate the rule of law, who value knowledge that gives children direction and purpose in their formative years rather than aimless nihilism, can not--now that they have the facts about the evolution controversy-- stand by and allow those students to be denied the beauty of scientific facts about their origins. These are facts which will lead them to a sure knowledge of their very own "Intelligent Designer", One in whom they can trust today and forever....

http://www.fixedearth.com/intelligent_design_pitfalls.htm

See also: www.geocentric-universe.com

06-05-2005, 09:22 PM
Aw, GAWD,

Nothing they've told us is true!!

One minute, babies should wear hard shoes, next minute they shouldn't.

One minute, we should eat this, next minute, we shouldn't.

I don't trust anything they've told me from the moment I was born!!

Liars??

rushdoony
06-07-2005, 08:06 AM
NASA's AGENDA:

Promoting Copernicanism & Evolutionism



NASA has a spiritual agenda. Yes, spiritual. It projects the image of cutting edge science opening exciting space frontiers for the good of mankind, but the facts say otherwise. Judge for yourself:

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

"Cosmic roots...?? Origins...???

There are two major beliefs about the origin of mankind and all other life forms. One says God created man and everything else not very long ago. The Bible states this view over 100 times and allows for no other explanation. God created everything fully formed as part of an eternal plan, the Bible teaches. Period. The other belief says everything came to be as it is accidentally and randomly as the result of natural forces acting upon themselves and "evolving" over billions of years. Clearly, the evolutionary belief is anti-Bible, but--more to the point about NASA's goals being spiritual--it is a belief that attributes miraculous powers of creation of all that exists to a "force" or a god known as "matter" (and "gases"). Matter did it all. All hail "matter"! No God who demands recognition and accountability is needed! With "matter" as creator we can do what we want ('cause nothing matters...).

As might be expected, a compromise belief has arisen out of these two opposites. It is called "theistic evolutionism". This view acknowledges that there has to be a God to explain the mind-blowing design that exists any which way we turn. But, says the Theistic Evolutionist, this God did not create everything fully formed but used an evolutionary process over billions of years to do the job. This evolution-dependent compromise allows a Creator God of sorts, but does not allow the Omniscient and Omnipotent Creator God Who authored the Bible. (Of note too is the fact that the Moslem Koran makes no compromise with evolution either....).

Therefore, NASA's stated goal of searching space for clues to man's origins reveals the premise behind their taxpayer supported Origins Program. That premise is that evolution is true and the Bible (along with the Koran) is false. This premise is not secular; it is spiritual. It claims to be scientific and therefore independent of religion. It is not scientific, as we shall see. It is religious, as we shall also see. The evolutionary premise violates all known science and logic. It does not have the first piece of verifiable evidence to support the squirrely evolution myth it calls "scientific". Evolutionism embodies a single spiritual agenda, viz., disqualify and replace the Bible as the source of Truth.

In support of its Origins Program, NASA says it will answer such questions as:

"Are there any planets outside our solar system that are capable of supporting life?"

"How did life originate on earth?"

"Is there life (however primitive or evolved) outside our solar system?"

Under the heading "ORIGINS SCIENCE" we see that NASA makes it plain that its goal of establishing extraterrestrial evolutionism is symbiotically connected to its dependency on another "scientific" hypothesis. Note this connection and the dependency upon the unproven Big Bang hypothesis that NASA is using to achieve its goal of establishing evolutionism as a "fact". From part of its Web Page we read:

"NASA's ORIGINS PROGRAM follows the 15-billion year long chain of events from the birth of the Universe at the Big Bang, through the formation of the chemical elements, galaxies, stars, and planets, through the mixing of chemicals and energy that cradles life on Earth, to the earliest self-replicating organisms and the profusion of life."

Seen in this statement is the unmistakable dependency of NASA's evolutionary agenda upon the Big Bang Myth. That Myth grants them and others the billions of years that the Evolution Myth requires. "Time" is indeed the hero of this plot!

NASA goes on to say that "The long-term goals of ORIGINS address fundamental questions about our place in the Universe:

How did galaxies form in the early universe and what role do galaxies play in the appearance of planetary systems and life?

How do stars and planetary systems form and are there life-sustaining planets around other stars?

How did life originate on Earth and does it exist elsewhere in the universe?"

Now notice very carefully HOW all this is to be accomplished:

"ORIGINS will use revolutionary new technologies to investigate these questions..."

Underscore revolutionary new technologies! They are revolutionary all right! Under the next heading we will see the utter deception that NASA is building into these "revolutionary new technologies". Further along, we will see that these technologies are designed to achieve their Bible-bashing goal of establishing extraterrestrial evolutionism thru the use of highly sophisticated VIRTUAL REALITY SIMULATIONS.... (More on high tech fraud in space: HERE - HERE - HERE - HERE.)

For the moment though, let's just add a thing or two to further establish that: 1) NASA's goal in its Origins Program is to settle the argument over Origins in favor of evolutionism, & 2) That this goal is Spiritual rather than scientific....

We can read many places that the late Dr. Carl Sagan (d.Dec.'96) was closely associated with NASA's planetary exploration involving The Mariner, Viking, Voyager, and Galileo missions. What we don't read about in many places is that Sagan was a avid pot-head. His biographer, Kay Davidson, AP writer Scott Andrews, Harvard Psychiatry Prof. Grinspoon, his widow, Ann Druyan, etc., all confirm that his essays and scientific insights were products of marijuana assisted inspirations. That Sagan was totally sold on the evolutionary explanation for all that exists is reflected in all his writings (the evolution of the human brain, little telescoping critters on the moon, his famous Cosmos TV series, etc.). He carried that zeal for replacing Biblical creationism with evolutionism over into his highly praised work at NASA. Indeed one Web bio summed up those years by noting that: "He played a leading role in the American space program since its inception." In a posthumous award to Dr. Sagan, "the National Science Foundation declared that his research transformed planetary science...."

Sagan capsulized his belief about man's significance thusly: "Who are we? We find that we live on an insignificant planet of a humdrum star lost in a galaxy tucked away in some forgotten corner of a universe in which there are far more galaxies than people."

This evolution-grounded nihilistic mindset has been prevalent in and out of academia for several generations. It's not surprising that Sagan embraced it, nor that few if any dissenters toward that mindset would be found in NASAdom. By the time Sagan (and lots of us) went to the University, eight or ten generations of increasingly sophisticated indoctrination had seemingly closed and locked the door against any challenge to the Copernican Model which made the Earth go around the Sun instead of the Sun going around the Earth, as the Bible taught. The ever-increasing spread of Darwinism after the 1850's demanded millions and then billions of years for evolution to take place. Clearly, the Sun, Moon, and Stars had to be billions of years old too for they could not be younger than the Earth. Indeed, a universe billions of years old was the only way Evolutionism could lay hold on the billions of years it needs to lend even superficial credibility to its fantastic claims.

So, let it be set in factual concrete: Copernicanism and Darwinism (i.e., Heliocentricity and Evolutionism) are Siamese Twins. Appearing first, Copernicanism paved the way for Darwinism's success by using invented mathematical models in the physical science "disciplines" of Astronomy and Physics, and by contradicting the Bible's teaching about an immovable Earth at the center of Creation with the Sun going around daily. Darwinism then reinforced Copernicanism by requiring billions of years for everything to evolve. Now the Biological Sciences had joined with the Physical Sciences in contradicting the Biblical Creation with its young Earth and Man as the special Creation of God, made in His Own Image and with an option for eternal life on a heavenly New Earth. All that was needed by the time of Sagan's University days was a way to get rid of the stubborn, lingering belief in God's Creation of Mankind in six literal ("evening and morning") days. This belief had to be put on a level with the almost totally defeated and forgotten belief in a very special unmovable Earth at the center of God's plans. Nobody argued for that anymore, but hundreds of millions of people were still clinging to a conviction that evolution theory was total nonsense and that Mankind is the special creation of an Almighty God with a great purpose and plan for His Creation. How could this resistance to evolution be ended once and for all??

That was the challenge that faced hallucinating "exobiologist" Sagan and Co. when he got in the driver's seat at NASA. In that position, taxpayer's billions of dollars could provide the ways and means to eliminate all challenges to the Big Bang model as the "scientific" explanation for the origin of the universe, Earth included. Then thru the development of cutting-edge computerized telescope and camera technology a way was opening up to settle the creation/evolution controversy forever in favor of evolution.

Of course, Sagan's total commitment to evolutionism (in tandem with Biologist J. Gould at Harvard) was spread far and wide thru his TV Cosmos series and his books at the time computer technology was developing. He taught that widespread extraterrestrial evolution was a certainty and would soon be proven. He was at the center of NASA's drive for perfecting computerized telescopes and cameras with Virtual Reality technology for a dozen years before he died. But he didn't live to see the job completed. Just a couple of years before his death, he admitted in his article "The Search for Extraterrestrial Life" in the Scientific American ('94) that of all of his NASA supported missions: "None of these [spacecraft] encounters has yielded compelling, or even strongly suggestive, indications of extraterrestrial life."

That's a pretty strong confession when you think about it. Indeed, "Exobiology" is a "science" without any data...the ultimate oxymoron.

In 1992, four years before Sagan's death, Daniel Saul Goldin became NASA's Administrator. His policies have since earned him many accolades, including the title of "brilliant visionary" and being named "one of the 100 most influential men and women in government". No one questions his ability to vigorously and innovatively fulfill NASA's stated goals. His vision has nowhere "been more evident than in his comprehensive strategy for space exploration". We want to take a very close look at the main components of that "comprehensive strategy" momentarily, but let the overriding goal of that strategy be understood and underscored yet again.

Mr. Goldin has not altered the goal of finding extraterrestrial life forms and establishing evolutionism as a "scientific fact" which will no longer can be contested by anyone. Indeed, his administration has streamlined NASA's whole operation by putting those revolutionary new technologies mentioned earlier on afterburners, as it were. Mr. Goldin means to see NASA's goal accomplished, and he means to do it speedily.

His Web bio reveals that: "He initiated the ORIGINS PROGRAM to understand how the Universe has evolved, to learn how life began on Earth and to see if life exists elsewhere." (Goldin update: HERE)

Let's see how he proposes to achieve these goals. Go to: NASA's Hanky Panky Virtual Reality Technology.
From: www.fixedearth.com
Also see: www.geocentric-universe.com

rushdoony
06-07-2005, 12:31 PM
Fallacy: Ad Hominem



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Description of Ad Hominem
Translated from Latin to English, "Ad Hominem" means "against the man" or "against the person."

An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting). This type of "argument" has the following form:


Person A makes claim X.
Person B makes an attack on person A.
Therefore A's claim is false.
The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not (in most cases) have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made (or the quality of the argument being made).

Example of Ad Hominem

Bill: "I believe that abortion is morally wrong."
Dave: "Of course you would say that, you're a priest."
Bill: "What about the arguments I gave to support my position?"
Dave: "Those don't count. Like I said, you're a priest, so you have to say that abortion is wrong. Further, you are just a lackey to the Pope, so I can't believe what you say."

www.fixedearth.com
www.geocentric-universe.com

rushdoony
07-02-2005, 07:54 AM
"Darwin And The Church In England:

Are We [in the USA] Next?"


This is the title of the front page article in last month’s leading Creationist publication.* It tells of the radical decline in church attendance in England which began with the onset of Darwinism and has reached a point today where only 3% of Britishers now attend church.

The article ends with this lament:


"We have yet to discover effective ways to stop the wholesale

deterioration in reliance on God’s Word which would reverse

this process [church morbidity in England]. Can we encourage

or initiate such a movement? Why not join us on the ICR tour

to England this fall and help search for a solution...." *

*(Acts & Facts, vol. 34, no. 6, June 2005, p.1)


It is a sad truth that in spite of their excellent work in destroying the arguments of Darwinian evolutionists, the Creationist Leadership must admit that they "have yet to discover effective ways to stop the wholesale deterioration in reliance on God’s Word..." and that England’s moribund churches present a picture that "...will be repeated in the United States unless something changes to reverse the trend...."


In response to the question: "Can we [The Institute for Creation Research] encourage or initiate a movement that would reverse this trend?"....The answer is a loud YES!


All that is required of ICR to reverse this trend is to apply the same level of Scriptural and Scientific discipline to exposing vulnerable Copernicanism that has been successfully applied to the exposure of vulnerable Darwinism.


A non-moving earth is, after all, a creationist issue. The earth was certainly stationary when created, and there is nothing whatever in Scripture that remotely suggests that it suddenly went from zero to 67,000 MPH on the fourth day when the sun was created. Indeed, Biblically, it is a grammatical and semantic fact that the sun, not the earth, was set in motion around the earth on the day it was created (HERE). More, the sun’s motion--not the earth’s--is certified by scores of other Scriptures (HERE).


Contrariwise, there is no Scripture whatsoever which teaches either a rotating or an orbiting earth. Therefore, altering plain geocentric teaching from God--especially in light of certain proof that the Copernican Model is the indispensable foundation of the Big Bang Evolutionary Paradigm--would surely be something that a Creationist would not want to be found guilty of when "the books" are opened (Rev. 20:12)!


What it comes down to is this: Embracing Scriptural Geocentrism and the science that abundantly supports it is the only way to expose and destroy the evolutionist lie. It is the only strategy that will blow away the billions of years claimed by--and indispensable to--the evolutionists.


There are three interconnected reasons--and a fourth separate one--why this is so:


1) Copernicanism paved the way for Darwinism (and now Panspermiaism: HERE). The two are symbiotically connected. To continue denying this connection is more than fatuous, it is deadly to all efforts to defeat evolutionism (HERE - HERE - HERE - HERE).

2) The Copernican Model establishes a 186,000,000 million mile orbital diameter as a baseline for parallax measurements instead of an 8,000 mile baseline based on a stationary earth. This assumption alone stretched distances to stars 23,250 times after 1838 (HERE,pp.5,6). That factor--along with more recent, demonstrable, computer-generated virtual reality fraud in the measurement of star distances (HERE - HERE - HERE - HERE)--provides the heartbeat of the current 15 billion year old universe and the basis for all terrestrial and extraterrestrial evolution lies.

3) Copernicanism is 100% assumption based (HERE). It continues to rule in spite of the stark defiance of ALL observable and photographic evidence which declares daily revolutions of the stars around a stationary earth (HERE)-. Copernicanism is demonstrably the foundational concept underlying a universe billions of light years thick and billions of years old, the twin concepts necessary to maintain evolutionary mythology and destroy Bible credibility (HERE - HERE).


4) This separate reason (about which ICR seems unaware) is powerful enough in and of itself to absolutely derail all evolutionist claims to be secular science...and thus powerful enough to Constitutionally bar the teaching of evolution in tax supported schools in the USA (HERE - HERE).


The facts that back up the fourth reason are these:


The entire Evolutionary Paradigm is now known to be the concept-for- concept fulfillment of the "creation scenario" of the Pharisee Religion’s Rabbinical writings in the mystical Kabbala over at least two millennia. Those writings incorporate Heliocentricity (pre-dating Copernicus by 300 years), Relativism, a Big Bang, and an Expanding Universe).

Together, this Paradigm supplies the basis for a 15 billion year old universe, a 4.6 billion year old earth, and a 3,800.000 million year time frame allotted in the textbooks for spontaneously generated one-celled life to evolve into human beings.

The huge FACT that this recently revealed information makes plain both to the world, and the "houses of God" where God’s Judgment begins (HERE), is this: Evolution is not secular science at all. Rather--to repeat: Evolution is merely an anti-Bible alternative "creation scenario" from the writings of Rabbinic sages in the mystic Kabbala of the anti-Christ Pharisee religion. This revelation--which is utterly devastating to the entire evolutionary concept--has only come to light in the past eight or ten years over the Internet and in books (e.g., HERE - HERE). A seven part series on the Kabbala which documents these revelations begins: (HERE). A very recent three part series summarizes the whole matter and demonstrates why evolutionism is not secular science but is a religious creation scenario. That fact automatically puts evolutionism in violation of the Establishment Clause of the U.S Constitution and thus forbids it being taught in tax supported schools (HERE HERE).


The power of that fact alone cannot be overstated!

Forced upon courts in the USA, it is sufficient

in and of itself to destroy and eliminate the

credibility of evolutionism in all of its ramifications....


These links and dozens of others within them provide all the Scriptural and Scientific answers that ICR needs to stop evolution’s steady march toward victory over the Bible and a doctrinally purified Church.


Perhaps some who are taking the ICR tour to England this fall in search of "a solution" will take copies of these links which point to the one and only solution for exposing and defeating evolutionism...the one solution that honors God’s Word and satisfies all known science. It is certain that God is looking for Creationist leaders and students to raise this issue, and that He will honor and give the victory to those who will dare to stand up for His Bible and a Science-based geocentric universe.


So, First: Get into your spirit the Scriptures which teach that it is the sun and not the earth that moves (again: HERE - HERE - HERE). For Creationist Christians, the Biblical doctrine of a non-moving earth must be treated like all other inescapably specific Bible doctrines, i.e., we dare not ignore, or worse: twist and alter-and even reverse--their meanings so as to make the words say the opposite of what is specific and clear as, in this case, to conform to the dictates of a Bible-destroying model of the universe designed by scientists who are overwhelmingly evolutionists.


This keystone geocentric Truth is the Word kept in store by God for this time when the g’d of evolutionism is in his final stages of destroying the Bible’s credibility as the infallible Word of Truth from the infallible God of Truth. Rest assured: That Word will not come back to the Biblical God void (Is. 55:11)! God’s Geocentric Word must be honored and vigorously championed by all who claim the title of Bible Creationist. "Sun stand thou still...And the sun stood still..." (Joshua 10:12,13). You can know this--and dozens of moving sun Scriptures--is the Truth of the matter. Don’t dare let anyone persuade you to ignore that Truth or to change it!


After it is settled in your spirit that the Bible irrevocably teaches that it is the sun and not the earth that moves, then you will see that the scientific support for Biblical Geocentrism is readily available (e.g., HERE - HERE - HERE). Then you will see how computer-generated fraud is upholding Big Bangism and its billions of years of evolutionism (e.g., HERE - HERE - HERE - HERE).


Then, beyond all that, you will see and understand that God has saved the revelation of the ultimate terminator, the very Achilles Heel of all evolutionist lies until these days when those lies threaten the last vestiges of the Bible’s and the Churches’ credibility, and hence the very survival of Bible-based Christianity.


That Achilles Heel is the aforementioned Truth which has recently come out of the closet after centuries of the most secret machinations. This--the greatest of all Cabals--has been carefully fit together by Talmudist/Kabbalist Rabbis to replace the Bible God’s Creation Account in Genesis of six literal "evening and morning" days with the 15 billion year old evolution model now in absolute control of academia and the media.


This whole Evolution Paradigm--which ICR and other creationists realize is killing Bible credibility and hence Bible Christianity--has been revealed to be--by Kabbalists themselves!--the "creation scenario" of the Pharisee Religion. This Evolutionary "origins scenario" is derived from the occult Kabbala and has deceived the world by masquerading as secular theoretical science. That "science falsely so called" (I Tim. 6:20,21) is based totally on observation-denying and utterly factless assumptions... just the same as the Darwinian lies that Creationists have laid bare.


Up until the recent revelation of the Pharisee/Kabbala authorship of the 15 billion year old evolved universe--and its dependence upon Copernican pseudo-science--hit the Net and the bookstores, there were some excuses and reasons why ICR and other Creationists have been hesitant, reluctant--and even adamant (HERE)--about steering clear of joining any attack on Copernicanism (HERE).


The time is now past for giving these reasons any weight.


My hope is that the Creationists at ICR and elsewhere will prayerfully re-visit this issue--especially the non-moving earth message in the plain geocentric Scriptures. May they seek and receive all of God’s mercy and the strength that they are going to need to bite this bullet, and then may they determine to galvanize their members and their churches in leading the final charge to fulfill their ministry’s stated purpose of destroying evolutionism.
www.fixedearth.com
see also:
www.geocentric-universe.com

rushdoony
07-03-2005, 02:03 AM
The entire Evolutionary Paradigm is now known to be the concept-for- concept fulfillment of the "creation scenario" of the Pharisee Religion’s Rabbinical writings in the mystical Kabbala over at least two millennia. Those writings incorporate Heliocentricity (pre-dating Copernicus by 300 years), Relativism, a Big Bang, and an Expanding Universe).

Together, this Paradigm supplies the basis for a 15 billion year old universe, a 4.6 billion year old earth, and a 3,800.000 million year time frame allotted in the textbooks for spontaneously generated one-celled life to evolve into human beings.

The huge FACT that this recently revealed information makes plain both to the world, and the "houses of God" where God’s Judgment begins (HERE), is this: Evolution is not secular science at all. Rather--to repeat: Evolution is merely an anti-Bible alternative "creation scenario" from the writings of Rabbinic sages in the mystic Kabbala of the anti-Christ Pharisee religion. This revelation--which is utterly devastating to the entire evolutionary concept--has only come to light in the past eight or ten years over the Internet and in books (e.g., HERE - HERE). A seven part series on the Kabbala which documents these revelations begins: (HERE). A very recent three part series summarizes the whole matter and demonstrates why evolutionism is not secular science but is a religious creation scenario. That fact automatically puts evolutionism in violation of the Establishment Clause of the U.S Constitution and thus forbids it being taught in tax supported schools (HERE HERE).
www.fixedearth.com

rushdoony
07-04-2005, 04:10 PM
1) Copernicanism paved the way for Darwinism (and now Panspermiaism: HERE). The two are symbiotically connected. To continue denying this connection is more than fatuous, it is deadly to all efforts to defeat evolutionism (HERE - HERE - HERE - HERE).

2) The Copernican Model establishes a 186,000,000 million mile orbital diameter as a baseline for parallax measurements instead of an 8,000 mile baseline based on a stationary earth. This assumption alone stretched distances to stars 23,250 times after 1838 (HERE,pp.5,6). That factor--along with more recent, demonstrable, computer-generated virtual reality fraud in the measurement of star distances (HERE - HERE - HERE - HERE)--provides the heartbeat of the current 15 billion year old universe and the basis for all terrestrial and extraterrestrial evolution lies.

3) Copernicanism is 100% assumption based (HERE). It continues to rule in spite of the stark defiance of ALL observable and photographic evidence which declares daily revolutions of the stars around a stationary earth (HERE)-. Copernicanism is demonstrably the foundational concept underlying a universe billions of light years thick and billions of years old, the twin concepts necessary to maintain evolutionary mythology and destroy Bible credibility (HERE - HERE).
from: www.fixedearth.com
see also
www.geocentric-universe.com

rushdoony
07-07-2005, 05:15 PM
All that is required of ICR to reverse this trend is to apply the same level of Scriptural and Scientific discipline to exposing vulnerable Copernicanism that has been successfully applied to the exposure of vulnerable Darwinism.


A non-moving earth is, after all, a creationist issue. The earth was certainly stationary when created, and there is nothing whatever in Scripture that remotely suggests that it suddenly went from zero to 67,000 MPH on the fourth day when the sun was created. Indeed, Biblically, it is a grammatical and semantic fact that the sun, not the earth, was set in motion around the earth on the day it was created (HERE). More, the sun’s motion--not the earth’s--is certified by scores of other Scriptures (HERE).


Contrariwise, there is no Scripture whatsoever which teaches either a rotating or an orbiting earth. Therefore, altering plain geocentric teaching from God--especially in light of certain proof that the Copernican Model is the indispensable foundation of the Big Bang Evolutionary Paradigm--would surely be something that a Creationist would not want to be found guilty of when "the books" are opened (Rev. 20:12)!


What it comes down to is this: Embracing Scriptural Geocentrism and the science that abundantly supports it is the only way to expose and destroy the evolutionist lie. It is the only strategy that will blow away the billions of years claimed by--and indispensable to--the evolutionists.
More:
http://www.fixedearth.com/England's%20churches%20ICR.htm

Dreak
07-08-2005, 10:48 AM
Rush..

Firsly, the information herin is implying that the known forces of gravety,light,magnetism etc. are lies in themselves..however it does not explain the alternatives for these forces existing.

The Bible does not explain anything at all about "lightning" or "weather" but they do exist right ?

Your data still has not proved the Theory of Seasons..You know..summer..winter..hot cold..happining oh every 6 months or so ?

You know what a "light year" is ?
There are aprox. 1000000000000000000000 stars out there .. the closest one to us takes 8 minutes for its light to reach Earth.That makes for an infinately HUGE universe ( not the one impied in the data your suggesting )

IF the Sun "orbits" the Earth as you are impying then the earth would have an EXTREAM wobble to it (due to the gravitational force of the Suns MASS) creating Massive and Cataclysmic tidal waves and plate movement that would prevent life to exist.

Is your data suggesting that the other Solar systems we have discovered ( you know..the ones with Planets orbiting there SUN ) are the common styles of planetary action..and our system is "unique" in were everything is bass akwards ?

(your probably gonna suggest all of the astronomers are part of this NWO and there is no such thing as other planetary systems in the 1000000000000000000000 stars out there)

to put that in prospective..IF you took ALL the grains of SAND on the whole Earth (alot of freaking sand grains eh? ) you would have a MILLION stars for EVERY GRAIN OF SAND ! ( thats a whole buttload of stars !! )

Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell me if you have understanding. Who determined its measurements? Surely you know (Job 38:4,5).

For this they willfully forget; that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water (2 Peter 3:5).

Peace Dreak

Dreak
07-08-2005, 11:47 AM
HOWEVER .... I did run across this

Prove that the Earth orbits the Sun and win

$1000.00 !!

http://www.catholicintl.com/epologetics/articles/science/geochallenge.htm

Dreak

rushdoony
07-23-2005, 10:05 PM
Falwell & The Religious "Right":

The Ultimate Source Of Zionism’s Power?


The time is nigh for a shootout over what constitutes the "Religious Right"... in the USA particularly.


As things stand now, the Falwells, Robertsons, and assorted TBN and radio preachers all embrace a series of doctrines that they claim commit Bible Christians to support and protect the Zionist State of Israel no matter what. Falwell and other advocates of this position are regular guests on TV talk shows where they promote this linkage relentlessly and passionately. They are invited on these shows as expert witnesses for Bible Christianity. Thus, their unvarying support for Zionist Israel is accepted uncritically not only by their followers, but is impressed upon other millions who assume that the Falwellian line is Biblically supported from A to Z.


This fact in and of itself is a curious phenomenon, for there are many millions of Bible Christians (and lots of Jews!) who can show categorically that the "end time" message of the Falwellian "Right"--which handcuffs the U.S.A. to Zionist Israel--is a misguided political position which cannot be sustained Biblically.


So, one of the main things that has been slipping through the cracks amid all the Near East/Mid East terrorism clamor is not only a realization that the Zionists control the American Secular Media and American Foreign Policy, but even more interesting is the fact that they also control the American Religious Media.


On matters concerning U.S.A./Zionist Israel it is this Fallwellian doctrinal stance that has been tagged the "Religious Right". It is this stance that is always presented as the only Biblically grounded position for the U.S.A. to have. And, it is this stance--with its virtual monopoly in the religious media--that has come to characterize the position of all Bible Fundamentalist Christians on matters relating to Zionist Israel. ("Zionist" is stressed because: a) It is accurate; b) Many Jews oppose Zionism.)

From:
http://www.fixedearth.com/falwell.htm
See also:
http://www.geocentric-universe.com/page14.htm

rushdoony
07-31-2005, 09:44 AM
"The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a CONSPIRACY SO MONSTROUS he cannot believe it exists." Whether you are a fan of J. Edgar Hoover or not, he got that right! All of us are now witnessing the finishing touches being applied to the greatest conspiracy ever foisted on the world by Satan. Start with this FACT: All knowledge is built upon one’s understanding of how all that exists originated, and how it came to be as it is (HERE). So, which is it: A six day creation by God (Bible & Koran) or fifteen billion years of evolution with or without g’d ("theoretical science" & Talmud-Kabbala)? We know that evolutionary "science" totally dominates the schools and the media today, and that this "science" is what provides the intellectual basis of the world’s knowledge about the origin of everything that exists, mankind included. The conspiracy part?? Well, every single claim that the near-triumphant, yet utterly factless evolutionist "creation scenario" makes (through its theoretical science mouthpiece) is found in the Christ-hating, once-secret Pharisee Religion’s mystic Kabbala (begin HERE - also: HERE -HERE). Now, as it turns out, the Copernican lie is the vulnerable keystone holding up the entire conspiracy (HERE).
From: www.fixedearth.com
See also:
http://www.geocentric-universe.com/page14.htm

rushdoony
07-31-2005, 04:57 PM
"The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a CONSPIRACY SO MONSTROUS he cannot believe it exists." Whether you are a fan of J. Edgar Hoover or not, he got that right! All of us are now witnessing the finishing touches being applied to the greatest conspiracy ever foisted on the world by Satan. Start with this FACT: All knowledge is built upon one’s understanding of how all that exists originated, and how it came to be as it is (HERE). So, which is it: A six day creation by God (Bible & Koran) or fifteen billion years of evolution with or without g’d ("theoretical science" & Talmud-Kabbala)? We know that evolutionary "science" totally dominates the schools and the media today, and that this "science" is what provides the intellectual basis of the world’s knowledge about the origin of everything that exists, mankind included. The conspiracy part?? Well, every single claim that the near-triumphant, yet utterly factless evolutionist "creation scenario" makes (through its theoretical science mouthpiece) is found in the Christ-hating, once-secret Pharisee Religion’s mystic Kabbala (begin HERE - also: HERE -HERE). Now, as it turns out, the Copernican lie is the vulnerable keystone holding up the entire conspiracy (HERE).
From: www.fixedearth.com
See also:
http://www.geocentric-universe.com/page14.htm

Dreak
07-31-2005, 08:18 PM
you know..ever since the tsunami..earth days are actually shorter now ? I mean atomic clocks .. shorter.. did you know that ?

why you may ask ..well..the earth is spinning faster now..

how you might wonder..

because more MASS is closer to the center of the earth now..

Like a skater pulling in the arms making him/her go faster..

get a grip and smoke some more ganja for me :)

D.

rushdoony
07-31-2005, 09:11 PM
For photos go to:
http://www.fixedearth.com/Size_and_Structure%20Part%20IV.htm
--------------------------------------------


The Size and Structure of the Universe

According to the Bible and Non-Theoretical Science


Part IV


Star Trails:

A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words

These two time exposures show the paths traced by the stars as they swarm around the Pole over a period of about eight hours. As the nearest bright star to the Pole, Polaris appears as the small bright crescent in the center of the images.

Lest anyone wonder how these stars can be going around the earth viewer every 24 hour day as the time exposures plainly show, there is the usual heliocentric explanation under this picture: "As the Earth turns on its axis, the stars in the sky seem to turn around the North Celestial Pole."

The familiar saying about a picture being worth a thousand words was never better illustrated than in the cosmological phenomena depicted above. Hundreds of photographs showing this phenomena with varying lengths of time exposure are available on the Net. Here is another one with what looks like an exposure of an hour or more:

If you can do so for a few minutes, just lay aside the Copernican indoctrination that accompanies such pictures and take a good hard look at these photographs of something that really, really happens every single night.

Do you see what I see? I see all the visible stars in the northern skies going around the North Star in perfect circles. In other words, I see all the stars which these time exposures have recorded actually going around that navigational star that is there for we Earthlings in the Northern Hemisphere. Remember: the first two pictures are eight hour exposures. Again, look closely and you can see the third of a circle in the center and in the next star trail or so. This means that each star circles in one 24 hour day (i.e., 23 hours and 56 minutes). (The same thing is captured in circumpolar photos taken in the Southern Hemisphere....)

You see that too, you say, but you "know" that this is really an illusion caused by the Earth rotating West to East ccw every 24 hours. Right? The stars are really not going around the Earth, you want to tell me (as if talking to a seven year old child). It just looks like they are moving because the Earth is rotating around its polar axis, and that rotation gives us the illusion that the stars are actually going around... as any fourth grader will explain to you. If you doubt that is what is really happening, just read under the pictures, for Pete’s sake! Most will tell you the same thing, and the others don’t bother because practically every literate person in the world knows that this is what is happening! mumble, mumble....


Well (...that failed attempt at levity aside), this universally accepted explanation for this phenomena that we can watch with our own eyes and record on our own film is always the same. That is to say, we are assured that what we see and record with our cameras is an illusion caused by the Earth rotating on an axis in an East to West direction at an equatorial speed of c. 1040 MPH.


This universally accepted "explanation" is pure assumption! It is an "explanation" without the first piece of indisputable evidence to support it...and it is in denial of the plentiful evidence that rejects it!

The untouched photos themselves plainly and precisely "explain" what happens to the stars every 23 hours and 56 minutes, namely: They go around a stationary Earth! What we’ve all been taught is an "explanation" is--in fact--just one of seven interdependent assumptions which all interact to uphold the moving Earth mythology (HERE).


It is immensely important for those who don’t like being deceived to step back and decide for themselves which is an illusion and which is the truth about this observable and photographable phenomena. One of the chief reasons why it is immensely important is that this whole business about the stars having to go around the Earth every night is what makes or breaks either the Biblical or the Kabbalic Big Bang Model of the Universe. Both models are totally dependent on the truth or falsity of the "explanation" for what we can see and what the photographs show.


So, which is the illusion?! Is what you can watch and see with your own eyes--and record photographically with your camera--an illusion?

A trick of your eyesight? A delusion? Something imagined...not real?


Or, is what you are told by the Theoretical Science Establishment upholding the Kabbalist Model of the universe... by a single thread, i.e., this very issue of a daily rotating Earth!...the unsubstantiated illusion- delusion -deception??


What will it be? Will you trust your eyes (and your camera!) to record the truth of the matter? Or will you trust the anti-Bible Kabbalist religion’s model of the universe? That Model stands or falls on its ability to keep the world believing that those star trails are caused by something all observational and experimental and pictorial evidence denies, i.e., a daily rotating Earth. Take another look:




This is a two hour exposure taken in bright moonlight.


Here is one more example which also appears to be about a two hour exposure. To forestall any questions, it is entitled: "Star Trails as Earth Rotates!"



An important part of the message below this picture tells us to:

"Notice the difference in the colors of the stars!" O.K. That’s good advice. Now apply that thinking to the optical facts involved with the whole spectrum of colors being reflected off of the crystalline dome specified in the Biblical Model of the Universe! (HERE - HERE - HERE). Is that Biblical Model of the Universe not perfectly designed to produce these observable colors in this star trail photograph?! And, doesn’t this phenomena provide us with yet another reason to reject the redshift claims which never deviate from pre-programmed computer models which are locked into all the calculations upholding the Big Bang Expanding Universe Paradigm??


Trust your eyes and your cameras! They have no reason to deceive you about whether the stars are going around nightly! Then get it in your mind: This single fact surrounding star trails that has been photographed thousands of times and cannot be denied must be explained away by the Theoretical Science Establishment. All of the factless allegations--a rotating and orbiting Earth; billions of light year distances to the stars; a 15 billion year old universe; the whole Big Bang Paradigm; all of the alleged evolution of the universe, earth, and mankind; ...that is to say: all of modern evolution-based cosmology controlling "knowledge" today...all of it... is completely undone if the stars are doing what cameras show they are doing, namely, going around the Earth nightly...

see also:
http://www.geocentric-universe.com/page14.htm

rushdoony
07-31-2005, 10:06 PM
The Mother of All Space Science Fraud Is At Work

In The Measurement of Star Distances


Considering that it must be clear by now that the whole matter of the structure and size of the universe is a contest between two religious teachings about the Origin of the universe and all that is in it, we must try to sort out which religious teaching we are going to accept when all the evidence is factored in.


Uppermost in one’s mind in this decision should be these seven points which have been shown to be demonstrable facts in previous discourses in this series and in the seven essays on "The Kabbala" particularly:

1) The indispensable foundation of all modern cosmology is the Copernican Model of a rotating, orbiting Earth and a stationary sun.

2) This foundational heliocentric model is built solely on seven interdependent assumptions which deny observational and experimental evidence.

3) The observationally verifiable transit of the stars around the Earth nightly is said by modern cosmology to be forever disproved because some of the stars are 15 billion light years distant and the speed they would have to go to get around nightly is so great as to be incomprehensible and foolish to consider; ergo, the Earth is rotating, causing it to appear that the stars are revolving nightly.

4) The determination of which model of the universe is the true one comes to rest on the matter of the "thickness" or radius of the universe, i.e., the distance from Earth to the furthermost known entity in the universe. Though theoretically the Machian Geocentricity Model claims any speed is possible, the Model is not taken seriously by very many people. The reason is isn’t taken seriously is because it also accepts billions of light year distances to the most distant stars and therefore must accept the speeds required to get them around nightly. When it is realized that those speeds are forced to be millions of times faster than the speed of light, the credulity of even those who want to believe what they see and want to believe the Bible’s plain stationary earth teachings (HERE), is stretched beyond the breaking point. This conclusion about distances and speeds is, of course, the conclusion that has been made by the world...and even Christian churches committed to Biblical Creationism. This conclusion speaks volumes as to not only the steady decline of Bible credibility and Christian influence since Copernicanism took hold but, beyond that, a solid explanation for the dramatic acceleration of that decline since the evolutionary mind-set which fuels Big Bangism began its conquest of academia and the media a generation ago.
More:
http://www.fixedearth.com/Size%20&%20Structure%20Part%20V.htm

Arjuna
07-31-2005, 11:51 PM
The first hurdle to get over is realizing that the Bible is not the "word of God". It is a collection of writings penned over thousands of years by people trying to understand their world and their relationship to God. In fact, the Bible is still being written today. New translations are offered on a regular basis, and each one presents a different message, a different "word of God".

To people living thousands of years ago, it was reasonable to conclude that the earth was flat, stationary, and at the center of the universe. Science has since shown us that these beliefs are untrue, but many people cling to them today fearing that they would betray God if they let go of these primitive ideas.

In fact, you can even use the Bible itself to help you understand that it is okay to let go of old ideas once a fuller realization of the truth is achieved. Jesus taught many ideas that went beyond and often contradicted the teachings recorded in the Old Testament.

I think another error many Christians make is believing that Jesus was the "only Son of God", and that the only way to get to know God is to believe in Jesus. Keeping in mind that the Gospels were all written many years after Jesus died, and have been translated and altered many times since then, go ahead and read your New Testament and see if Jesus really made those claims. I do not believe he did. One statement attributed to Jesus that I believe is accurate is: "They see but they do not see. They hear but they do not hear." If Jesus were alive today, he would still be preaching that message, especially to the Christian churches.

The earth is not the center of the universe; it moves around the sun. The sun is in a cluster of stars, and those stars orbit the center of that cluster. The Milky Way galaxy is made up of millions of clusters of stars, and they all orbit the center of the galaxy. The galaxy is in orbit around the center of a cluster of galaxies. And so on. Where is the center of the universe? I don't think its location has been determined yet.

I believe that Jesus was an avatar, an embodiment of God. The fact that there have been other avatars does not diminish the greatness of Jesus in any way. Christians may not understand this, but Jesus certainly does.

I think the biggest mistake Christianity ever made was holding onto the Old Testament. If you doubt this, spend some time reading it. There is some great wisdom in the Psalms and Proverbs, but most of the Old Testament is a badly written historical account of the problems experienced by the Hebrew tribes. Read some of it, and then honestly ask yourself if it is the "word of God". Modern day Pharisees, know today as Zionists, use the Christian attachment to the Old Testament against them. I periodically watch Christian preachers on television, proclaiming their support for Israel, promoting Christian Zionism (an oxymoron if there ever was one), and "to the Jew first, and then to the nations." Of course, all of these preachings are based upon "the word of God".

If the Christians could just let go of the silly notion that the Bible is the "word of God" and start using their God-given intelligence, they would be in a much better condition to create the Kingdom of God that they prophesy.

rushdoony
08-01-2005, 01:11 AM
Arjuna wrote:

it ( the earth ) moves around the sun.
------------------------------------------
But you are just repeating common "knowledge"
that is spouted by the masses. This thread is about refuting the theoretical scientific
establishment view of cosmology.
The scientific proof, based on observation
and experiment, says you and the masses
have been misinformed.

Arjuna, you must have read the same New Age/Spiritual
books I did because if I could go back ten years in time I was saying the same thing as you.
I would have wrote almost verbatim what you have.
You have read the same mass produced and marketed
books from the corporate bookstores that I did.
I have gone through and advanced from your
stage, but I had to do it myself when the time
was right for me and when life circumstances put
me through a crisis and I was forced to change
and did discover the truth - Biblical Christianity
( not what you see on TV and in "Churches").
I discovered that the New Age/Spiritual/Hindu
ideas were basically all a pack of lies
born of Satan and his minions. I will not
regress or go back to the lies you believe in.

I don't have the time or expertise to refute each of your points but you should start properly educating yourself by reading this link:
http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/Cults/newage.htm

Dreak
08-01-2005, 07:24 PM
well.. refute my point there rush..

how do you suggest that our days are shorter now ?

you need to still smoke another one and snap up m8

D.

rushdoony
08-02-2005, 05:12 PM
Look Dreak,

You actually believe that because a
government paid theoretical scientist
who wants
to make a name for himself,
comes out
and says the earth's ( presumed ) rotation is a
millionth of a second faster or slower
then I should automatically believe that?
Get a grip. It's pretty hard for someone
to prove or disprove the accuracy of
this theoretical scientists' statement
because the claimed change is so minute,
but it does wonders for their organizations budget. That is how the world really works
Dreak ( Drunk Geak ??? ).

What is m8 ? I keep seeing that.

Also if you think the past, present and future are all one and the same then you should give your head a good shake. Why do you wear a watch then? You see how Satan could use that lie?
Someone could kill you and then claim that you
were going to die anyhow of old age in
the future, but the future is the same as
the present, so it doesn't matter that the criminal killed you.
It's just another New Age/Quantam Physics lie
from the father of all liars Satan.
Go here:
www.fixedearth.com
www.geocentric-universe.com
Read these two websites then get back to me.

08-02-2005, 07:45 PM
Yeah, what is M8???

However, RUSH, do you really think the current state of our world needs to be "distracted" with a topic such as "The Earth is NOT Moving?"

Are you saying this is a conspiracy?

If so, for what purpose???

Dreak
08-02-2005, 10:14 PM
First off.. " m8 " is mate ....

Ive been on boats for along time..and mate ( or I say m8 ) is just a part of me..

Dreak isnt drunk geek hehe

Does Rushdoony mean a " Righhanded Undergoning Severe Hormonal Dick Orgasm Online Only Not You " ? statement ? Please dont Play with my name..its been in my life longer then you have been alive man .. and long before the internet..

second..

Im sure speculative Scientist are willing to put there lives on the line for a stupid cause of the earth not spinning..or spinning..but..were not talking about that..

Prove it wrong if thats what your wanting to do..

Earth spins..nuf said

oh yea...didnt you suggest that if you "jump" then you should be a thousand miles off the point of origin ? rofl.. goofball..

D.

08-02-2005, 10:55 PM
Dreak wrote:
First off.. " m8 " is mate ....

Ive been on boats for along time..and mate ( or I say m8 ) is just a part of me..

Are you still on a boat?

Dreak isnt drunk geek hehe

Really??

Does Rushdoony mean a " Righhanded Undergoning Severe Hormonal Dick Orgasm Online Only Not You " ? statement ? Please dont Play with my name..its been in my life longer then you have been alive man .. and long before the internet..

Oh, that's nice!!!

second..

Im sure speculative Scientist are willing to put there lives on the line for a stupid cause of the earth not spinning..or spinning..but..were not talking about that..

So, what are we talking about?

Prove it wrong if thats what your wanting to do..

Earth spins..nuf said

"Nuf said." What does that mean? Shut up!!

oh yea...didnt you suggest that if you "jump" then you should be a thousand miles off the point of origin ? rofl.. goofball..

Look how is calling a goofball a goofball!!

D.

rushdoony
08-03-2005, 04:36 PM
BlueAngel wrote:
However, RUSH, do you really think the current state of our world needs to be "distracted" with a topic such as "The Earth is NOT Moving?"
---------------------------------------------

So, since it is essentially beyond argument that man’s knowledge (what he thinks is true) is ultimately determined by his beliefs about the ORIGIN of all that exists, it follows inexorably that all five categories of knowledge held by an individual or a whole population will be colored and shaped by what is thought to be true about ORIGINS. (The Five Categories of Knowledge are: Physical Sciences; Natural Sciences; Social [and Behavioral] Sciences; Arts & Humanities; Religion.)

Thus, as we’ve seen, when Copernican "science" (in spite of ALL observational and experimental evidence to the contrary!) captured the Physical Science "disciplines", a great change in man’s beliefs about the place of the Earth and of mankind in the universe gradually took over and became "fact". Reduced by Copernicanism to just another speck of flotsam in the universe, man’s image of himself and the Earth as special creations by God for a special purpose was steadily eroded. Since then, mankind has been relentlessly conditioned by "education" and ever increasingly sophisticated media indoctrination to add yet other levels of nihilistic philosophy to his "knowledge" of what theoretical "science" tells him is true.
--------------------------------------------
Indeed, it was this Copernican heliocentricity concept that gradually broke the back of Bible credibility as the source of Absolute Truth in Western Culture. Once the Copernican Revolution had conquered the physical sciences of Astronomy and Physics and put down deep roots in Universities and lower schools everywhere, it was only a matter of time until the Biological sciences launched the Darwinian Revolution.

This embrace of Darwinism then quite predictably emboldened increasingly secular-minded mankind to further reject Biblical Absolutism and replace its teachings with yet more new "truths" in areas of learning having to do with economics and government. Thus was unsuccessful and floundering Marxism given new life. Marx openly tried to dedicate his own books to Darwin, exulting: "You have given me the basis for my system". Thus, the "Social Science" disciplines were born and began to make their contributions to the destruction of Bible credibility.
More:
Indeed, it was this Copernican heliocentricity concept that gradually broke the back of Bible credibility as the source of Absolute Truth in Western Culture. Once the Copernican Revolution had conquered the physical sciences of Astronomy and Physics and put down deep roots in Universities and lower schools everywhere, it was only a matter of time until the Biological sciences launched the Darwinian Revolution.

This embrace of Darwinism then quite predictably emboldened increasingly secular-minded mankind to further reject Biblical Absolutism and replace its teachings with yet more new "truths" in areas of learning having to do with economics and government. Thus was unsuccessful and floundering Marxism given new life. Marx openly tried to dedicate his own books to Darwin, exulting: "You have given me the basis for my system". Thus, the "Social Science" disciplines were born and began to make their contributions to the destruction of Bible credibility.
More:
http://www.fixedearth.com/knowledge%20impact.htm

Arjuna
08-03-2005, 11:56 PM
The same argument used to support the idea that the earth is the center of the universe could be used to argue that any other location in the universe is the center of the universe.

My earlier post claimed that the center of a group of objects in space is the point about which all of the objects orbit, that point being the center of mass of the group of objects; the center of the universe is the center of mass of the entire universe. Letting the center of mass determine the center is based on an assumption, just as stating that the earth is the center is based on an assumption.

The assumption I, and most scientists, make is that a consistent and coherent method that provides useful information when applied to any region of space is the preferred method.

The assumption made by geocentrists is that the only location in the universe of any significance or importance whatsoever is earth.

For example, the geocentrist view claims that the center of the Milky Way Galaxy is the earth. Since the earth is inside of the Milky Way Galaxy, it is possible to choose the earth as the point of reference for motion, and consider the entire galaxy revolving around the earth.

Now choose a different galaxy, say the XYZ Galaxy. Where is the center of the XYZ Galaxy? It cannot be the earth, since the earth in not inside the XYZ Galaxy. You could choose any point inside the XYZ Galaxy and claim that it is the center, in the same way that you claimed the earth to be the center of the Milky Way Galaxy. Would you not agree that selecting any arbitray point within the XYZ Galaxy as its center provides no useful information whatsoever? If you do agree, then you now understand why claiming that the earth is the center of the Milky Way Galaxy, or the entire universe for that matter, provides no useful information whatsoever.

Letting the center of mass define the center does provide useful information. It makes it possible to understand the relative motion of objects in a consistent and coherent manner, guided by consistent and coherent principles. The consistent and coherent principles used are called laws of physics.

The geocentrist view is not scientific, it merely assumes that the earth is the center of the universe because we live on earth. The view is motivated by the need to feel special and important, not by physics; in other words, geocentrism has nothing to do with motion and everything to do with psychology.

It has only been in the past 100 years that science has revealed the enormity of the universe. There are billions of galaxies. A lot of people are having a hard time adjusting to that fact. Many religions are struggling to reconcile old teachings in the light of modern science.

Personally, I love the cosmology science has revealed. I live in an awesome universe! The God who created it is an awesome God!

Here is an excellent article regarding geocentrism:
http://www.answers.com/topic/modern-geocentrism

rushdoony
08-04-2005, 08:37 AM
Arjuna,

You need to read this paper.
Let me know after you have read it.

Rushdoony
----------------------------------------
Proof of heliocentric incorrectness 2 - Mach's Principle

Dr. Neville Thomas Jones, Ph.D., D.I.C., M.Sc.(Phys), M.Sc.(Comp), B.Sc.(Hons), M.Inst.P.,
formerly of the Clarendon Laboratory, Oxford University, England.

Preliminary Conclusions

Differences, such as the actual times of dichotomy in each model, can be expected to show up because the geostatic and heliocentric(/geocentric) systems work in a different way. In particular, extra components of motion must be assigned to the World, in order for the heliocentric model to tally with reality. Here, though, we have deliberately sought a phenomenon that does not depend upon one such ad hoc motion (namely, the supposed rotation of the World about an 'axis'), and investigated the behaviour of the two conflicting models.

The correct model will agree with all observations. The phase 'anomaly' of Venus is an undeniable, observational fact, that has been known of for at least two hundred years (from the time of its description by Schröter). The heliocentric idea does not predict what actual observations consistently show. The heliocentric idea must therefore be wrong (as was demonstrated by Arago, Airy, Michelson & Morley, Michelson & Gale, Trouton & Noble, et al.). On the other hand, the geocentric, geostatic model, insofar as it has been tested, correctly matches the data.

These investigations remain on-going, but appear extremely promising. In particular, I remain confident that the written word of YeHVaH Elohiym, halloed be His name, will once again prove to be totally vindicated and, if so, in a way that could not be more fitting, or ironic, for the observed phases of Venus is the exact same phenomenon that Galilei originally (and fraudulently) claimed disproved a geostatic cosmos!
More:
http://www.geocentric-universe.com/page14.htm

rushdoony
08-15-2005, 06:28 PM
What is happening is that a Naturalistic Origins Scenario--which has been promoted relentlessly for generations by a Theoretical Science Establishment-- has succeeded in planting and rooting an "anti-religious humanism" philosophy worldwide which has caused a widespread loss of trust in the Bible’s Origins Scenario (and the Koran’s, for that matter...).


This loss of trust in Biblical Creationism has undermined the credibility of the entire Bible right on through the New Testament’s Virgin born, crucified and resurrected Jesus Christ.


Paganism--being the spiritually elastic and eclectic form of religion that it is--can tolerate and include a non-Biblical Jesus (e.g., the Koran again) along with a smorgasbord of other "deities". Thus, what is happening is that this revived Paganism is filling a "religious" vacuum created by the well-advanced destruction of the Bible’s credibility. This Bible-destroying agenda is, at bottom, a diabolical strategy which has employed Theoretical Science (i.e., "science falsely so called": I Tim. 6:20) with ever-increasing success since the Copernican Revolution historically began in 1543.


That Revolution ultimately succeeded not only nullifying numerous plain geocentrism Scriptures, thereby blasting a gaping hole in the Bible’s credibility as the inerrant Word of God, it also effectively paved the way for the substitution of the Theoretical Sciences for God as the source of Truth in all areas of "knowledge".


Thus, the steady success of that Revolution (without the first piece of indisputable evidence!) paved the way for the success of the Darwinian Revolution and the concomitant Marxian, Freudian, Einsteinian, Saganian Revolutions. These have all been true Revolutions that have brought about a total restructuring of man’s "knowledge" or, as Nietzsche aptly put it: "A transvaluation of values" (HERE). Every aspect of these Revolutions has been based on the alleged destruction and defeat of the credibility of the Bible as the source of all Truth...and on the transfer of that credibility to the pronouncements of the Theoretical Science Establishment.
From:
http://www.fixedearth.com/Part%20I%20Paganism.htm
See also:
http://www.geocentric-universe.com/page14.htm

rushdoony
08-31-2005, 05:31 PM
September 2005 Bulletin


As this challenge to Copernicanism and all that is riding on it continues to spread across the Net, I have noticed three false arguments that are being used to discourage people from taking the challenge seriously and investigating the movement on its historical, scientific, and Biblical merits. I will mention two of those false arguments this month and follow with the other one in October. Note:


1) It is being said that the Copernican Model is simpler and therefore better than the stationary earth model. Nonsense! All the calculations for precision that are demanded in eclipse prediction are based on a non-moving earth. The same is true of all space shots. Stationary earth math is the only math that works! Also, consider the incredibly wild and factless string of hypotheses that make up the Big Bang Paradigm! They are all totally dependent upon the "simple" Copernican Model! Then, add to all that the recently revealed fact that a Bible-killing, Christ- hating religion is the real author of the ruling Big Bang evolutionary explanation for all that exists. With that done, it will become obvious why attention must be kept off of the "simple", vulnerable Copernican keystone (HERE - HERE - HERE - HERE).



2) Those who are quick to mock any challenge that threatens the Copernican stranglehold on all knowledge frequently equate all such challengers with people who still believe in a Flat Earth. Presented as something profound by aspiring pundits, this sarcastic and lame analogy reflects pure ignorance of the subject. Challenging Copernicanism is both a Biblical and a Scientific Issue. Every Scripture that speaks of the sun moving (HERE - HERE) is a Scripture that denies a Flat Earth just as surely as it affirms a stationary Earth. A non-moving Earth IS a Bible doctrine; a flat earth is not. As for the Scientific Issue, every observable, repeatable, photographical, fact of science confirms that the sun, moon, and stars go around the earth daily (HERE). That is true science. By contrast, all Copernican-based Big Bang evolutionary "science" rests on mathematically modeled assumptions that deny true science in every instance (HERE). Today’s textbook Cosmos is a computer-generated virtual reality pseudo-scientific religious fraud from start to finish, a fraud which supplies the billions of years that evolutionary mythology requires (HERE - HERE - HERE - HERE - HERE - HERE).
www.fixedearth.com

rushdoony
10-02-2005, 10:19 AM
Complete paper:
http://www.fixedearth.com/Size_and_Structure%20Part%20IV.htm
-------------------------------------------

If you can do so for a few minutes, just lay aside the Copernican indoctrination that accompanies such pictures and take a good hard look at these photographs of something that really, really happens every single night.


Do you see what I see? I see all the visible stars in the northern skies going around the North Star in perfect circles. In other words, I see all the stars which these time exposures have recorded actually going around that navigational star that is there for we Earthlings in the Northern Hemisphere. Remember: the first two pictures are eight hour exposures. Again, look closely and you can see the third of a circle in the center and in the next star trail or so. This means that each star circles in one 24 hour day (i.e., 23 hours and 56 minutes). (The same thing is captured in circumpolar photos taken in the Southern Hemisphere....)

You see that too, you say, but you "know" that this is really an illusion caused by the Earth rotating West to East ccw every 24 hours. Right? The stars are really not going around the Earth, you want to tell me (as if talking to a seven year old child). It just looks like they are moving because the Earth is rotating around its polar axis, and that rotation gives us the illusion that the stars are actually going around... as any fourth grader will explain to you. If you doubt that is what is really happening, just read under the pictures, for Pete’s sake! Most will tell you the same thing, and the others don’t bother because practically every literate person in the world knows that this is what is happening! mumble, mumble....


Well (...that failed attempt at levity aside), this universally accepted explanation for this phenomena that we can watch with our own eyes and record on our own film is always the same. That is to say, we are assured that what we see and record with our cameras is an illusion caused by the Earth rotating on an axis in an East to West direction at an equatorial speed of c. 1040 MPH.


This universally accepted "explanation" is pure assumption! It is an "explanation" without the first piece of indisputable evidence to support it...and it is in denial of the plentiful evidence that rejects it!

The untouched photos themselves plainly and precisely "explain" what happens to the stars every 23 hours and 56 minutes, namely: They go around a stationary Earth! What we’ve all been taught is an "explanation" is--in fact--just one of seven interdependent assumptions which all interact to uphold the moving Earth mythology (HERE).


It is immensely important for those who don’t like being deceived to step back and decide for themselves which is an illusion and which is the truth about this observable and photographable phenomena. One of the chief reasons why it is immensely important is that this whole business about the stars having to go around the Earth every night is what makes or breaks either the Biblical or the Kabbalic Big Bang Model of the Universe. Both models are totally dependent on the truth or falsity of the "explanation" for what we can see and what the photographs show.


So, which is the illusion?! Is what you can watch and see with your own eyes--and record photographically with your camera--an illusion?

A trick of your eyesight? A delusion? Something imagined...not real?


Or, is what you are told by the Theoretical Science Establishment upholding the Kabbalist Model of the universe... by a single thread, i.e., this very issue of a daily rotating Earth!...the unsubstantiated illusion- delusion -deception??


What will it be? Will you trust your eyes (and your camera!) to record the truth of the matter? Or will you trust the anti-Bible Kabbalist religion’s model of the universe? That Model stands or falls on its ability to keep the world believing that those star trails are caused by something all observational and experimental and pictorial evidence denies, i.e., a daily rotating Earth. Take another look:

10-02-2005, 12:11 PM
La La La :lol:

Day breaks without falling,

Night falls without breaking.


:-D La La La

rushdoony
10-31-2005, 03:31 PM
http://www.fixedearth.com/ten_step_process_exposing%20evol.htm

Ten Step Process For Exposing And Destroying

The 15 Billion Year Evolutionary "Creation Scenario"


1) Understand: There appear to be three basic ways to explain the Origin of all that exists, namely:

a) Creation by God in six literal days about 6000 years ago with no evolution involved whatsoever.

b) An explosion of a "substanceless substance" some 15 billion years ago has created all that exists solely by naturalistic random chance "evolution".

c) Everything has evolved over the same billions of years, but under some level of supernatural direction which can be attributed to some kind of g’d of one’s choice...except for the Biblical God.


2) Though there appear to be three explanations, it immediately becomes obvious that there really are only two. One of these explanations involves no evolution at all and is brought about by God in six literal days. The other two require billions of years of evolution with or without supernatural intervention. Hence, there are only two models, viz., a non-evolutionary six day creation model, and an evolution- dependent two part model requiring billions of years. 1)Six days. 2)Billions of years.


3) Basically unknown to the world until about a decade ago is the now revealed and undisputed fact that the 15 billion year evolutionary model is derived from a holy book (the Kabbala) of the Pharisee religion. Also from the same religion the now available facts tell us that the other essential components of the evolutionary model-- beyond the indispensable 15 billion years--i.e., heliocentricity [300 years before Copernicus] Relativity, a Big Bang, an Expanding Universe] are also found in the once secret writings of Kabbalist sages over at least two millennia (begin HERE, also: HERE - HERE).


4) Since the facts about this astonishing revelation recently became available to an unsuspecting world, it remains only that the five alarm wake-up call embedded in those facts (which impact every living person!) be made available everywhere, i.e. todo el mundo. What message? This: The root of all evolution-based belief--both terrestrial and extra-terrestrial--is actually another "creation scenario" from another "holy book" belonging to the anti-Christ religion of Pharisaic Judaism.


5) In light of the magnitude and scope of this deception and its demonstrable control over all of modern man’s "knowledge" (HERE), the first thing for those who despise having their minds controlled by ANY cabal of religionists to understand fully, is that the time is past when evolutionism--and all teachings based on it--can be classified as secular science. Evolution is not secular; it is religious. Evolution is not science; it is contra-scientific hypothesizing bereft of the first piece of indisputable evidence, and it contradicts all observation-supported true science (HERE-HERE-HERE).


6) Given those demonstrable facts, it is reasonable to ask how a deception of this magnitude could be pulled off so smoothly over many centuries. The answer is at hand and easily understood in the next paragraph and in numbers 7-10 following:

The completion of Jesus’ ministry and His New Covenant with "whosoever will" in the 1st century A.D. spelled out the end of the Old Covenant with the Hebrews alone, (e.g. HERE, etc.). Biblically, this meant the end of the Hebrew’s "chosen people" status, and the end of the Pharisaic Religious Establishment (in spite of all Pharisaic and Dispensationalist efforts to restore it: HERE - HERE). As was well known centuries before Jesus (Aristarchus’ heliocentricity: 3rd century B.C., Gnostic evolutionism, etc.), the single most effective way to destroy the Bible and the Biblical God’s credibility was to destroy the credibility of the literal six day creation account. In the 1st century A.D. Rabbi HaKanna inscribed his mystic formula which determined that the universe was 15.3 billion years old (HERE, p.6). This is the same age that has become textbook cosmology today! (Keep in mind: Without those billions of years evolutionary "science" and its control over all "knowledge" (HERE)-- would be impossible.)


7) In the 13th century the esteemed Kabbalist, Raban Nachmanides, inscribed the other four essentials of the Kabbalist Big Bang Evolutionary "creation scenario", namely: a) Aristarchian heliocentricity (300 years before Copernicus...who also initially recognized Aristarchus’ contribution); b) Relativity; c) The "Big Bang"; d) An expanding Universe. The world knew nothing of these ultra secret Kabbalist writings until about a decade ago. In the 16th century--as the Copernican Model provided the launch pad--the venerated Kabbalist, Isaac Luria, connected the dots from HaKanna and Nachmanides, and by his own early death in 1572 had completed the formula for progressively destroying the Biblical six-day "creation scenario" and replacing it with the Kabbalic 15 billion year "creation scenario".


8) But why would the vast and mighty Christian Civilization from the 16th century to today exchange the Biblical Creation Account of its religion for the "creation account" of an avowedly Christ-hating religion?! Why would Christendom--with its cornerstone belief in the Biblical God of Creation Who offered--and obviously could deliver on a promised eternal plan for all mankind-- exchange all that for an atheist/agnostic religion which teaches precisely opposite moral and ethical values (HERE)? Why would Christendom abandon the Biblical writers and accept the mystic writings of a handful of Rabbinic "sages" set forth in their intensely secretive, Bible-destroying Talmud/Kabbala holy books? How could a self-serving religion which views non-Jews as sub-human cattle, ever hope to convince the Christian World to abandon its Biblical God and His love-driven plan for an eternal New Earth (HERE)? How could such a thing be pulled off?!


9) How indeed?! The outcome of a contest between the huge Christian Religion with its foundational Six-Day, exnihilo Biblical Creation Account, and the tiny, esoteric, and mystic Religion of Pharisaic Judaism with its 15 billion year Kabbala-based Evolutionary Account, could hardly have ever been in doubt if the world from Copernicus to today had known what was going on! The issue has never been presented as a "creation scenario" from one religion that is competing with the "creation scenario" of another religion. No, no, no! No such contest of different religious creation models has ever been leaked to the world until about the last decade... through the Internet principally, and in books (e.g., HERE - HERE). Rather, what has been offered in every single instance in over 4-1/2 centuries is a battle for the minds of mankind over whether the Bible-based Creation Account of the Christian Religion--and the God behind that Creation--or the creation account of an alleged secular science establishment with no religious motivation or connection whatever would win that battle. The world has never, ever been given even a hint that there was a Religion that taught all of the components of today’s 15 billion year old Big Bang Paradigm of an evolved universe, Earth, and Mankind. In short, until some ten years ago, the whole world has been kept totally in the dark from Copernicus forward about the fact that the Big Bang Evolutionary Paradigm is the fulfillment, i.e., the manifestation of the "creation scenario" of the Talmud/ Kabbala-based Religion of Pharisaic Judaism. The world has been led to believe that each of the five components of the Big Bang Model (Heliocentricity, Relativism, 15 Billion Years, Big Bang, Expanding Universe) is backed up by completely secular science evidence with no religious agenda whatsoever. One may judge how far this Model would have proceeded from Copernicus to today if the secret religious cabal behind it had not been secret...and how far it will proceed as that cat comes out of the bag!


10) The tenth step in understanding how evolutionism is going to be exposed and destroyed centers on recognizing the fact that the Copernican Model is the keystone that is holding up the Big Bang Paradigm of 15 billion years of evolutionism (HERE). That keystone is entirely assumption-based, factless, and contrary to all known science (HERE - HERE). By making the Sun just one star amongst trillions of stars-- and the Earth just a gravitationally captured planet--the stage was set for a steady expansion of the age and size of the universe to reach its present fulfillment of the Kabbala’s 15 billion years and 15 billion light year thickness. Without those billions of years, evolutionary mythology--in all its ramifications (HERE - HERE)--goes down in flames. The level of deception and outright fraud involved in maintaining the critical 15 billion year old and 15 billion light year radius mantras can be grasped (HERE - HERE - HERE - HERE - HERE etc.) Biblically, Satan--"as the god of this world" and ruler "of all its kingdoms" (II Cor. 4:4; Matt. 4:8,9)--now has all of his eggs in one basket, as far as protecting his kingdoms and position is concerned. His moves on God’s chess board are limited to those that drive him inexorably toward the place where it is written: "The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord..." and "...the devil knows that his time is short...." (Rev. 11:15; 12:12).


Satan’s Biblically prophesied end (Rev. 20:11; also HERE) tells the world that he will lose his battle to prevent an all-out attack against the vulnerable Copernican Keystone (Rev. 17:14), now holding up his entire edifice of deceptions. Once that factless lie is exposed, that edifice will crumble suddenly and usher in the Seven Trumpet and "little season" time frames and the promised eternal New Earth (HERE - HERE).

***

10-31-2005, 08:15 PM
Ok...so...the law of gravity as we understand it is a complete farse.

Greater, more massive objects tend to gravitate toward smaller, less massive objects.

The earth does not move at all. It is the only object in the entire universe that does not move...well...except for the sphere of fixed stars, but they move around the whole universe every day.

The earth is the center of the solar system. The moon revolves around the earth. The Sun revolves around the earth. Mars revolves around the earth. Venus revolves around the earth. Mercury revolves around the earth. Pluto, Uranus, Neptune, Saturn, Jupiter all revolve around the center of the solar system - the Earth.

Finally, every star, constellation, galaxy, black hole, etc...revolve around the earth every single day. These constellations, and galaxies and stars travel literally trillions upon trillions of light years in the short span of 24 hours.

Just one more thing, the Bible does not teach a geocentric universe.

Any questions?

...waiting...

P.S. oh, yes, and the solstices and equinoxes throughout the year are a result of the crazy orbit of the sun that is all over the place.

The sun makes an orbit around the earth every day. To do so, the sun is travelling near the speed of light...and the constellations are travelling far faster then the speed of light. They're travelling at something like ...warp 1000.

Insider
10-31-2005, 09:54 PM
Movement is a function of time and time is a delusion of the human brain.

10-31-2005, 09:57 PM
Insider wrote:
Movement is a function of time and time is a delusion of the human brain.

Time is a function of geometrical space and geometrical space has nothing to do with the human mind.

Read Kant, Outsider.

Insider
10-31-2005, 10:03 PM
Geometrical space and the concept of space is held entirely in the human brain. It is a sensory response to stimuli solely produced for the comfort of the human brain. Outsider! Don't give yourself away.

10-31-2005, 10:09 PM
Insider wrote:
Geometrical space and the concept of space is held entirely in the human brain. It is a sensory response to stimuli solely produced for the comfort of the human brain. Outsider! Don't give yourself away.

Yes, it is a concept...in Kantian terms a 'presentation'. It is clear that the mind differs from the presentation for the mind is the knower and the presentation is the thing known. This soars above modernistic concepts of pure reason. Therefore my thesis stands, space/time does not have anything to do with the mind because the mind is separate from such concepts and the mind is even separate from the geometrical physick of the human body.

Outsider, you already have given yourself away. You're a sophist of the worst order.

Insider
10-31-2005, 10:18 PM
Oudsider, Insider, Upsider, Downsider, The ID has no meaning. The term human mind was not used, the term human brain was used. You do not know the difference?

10-31-2005, 10:23 PM
Insider wrote:
Oudsider, Insider, Upsider, Downsider, The ID has no meaning. The term human mind was not used, the term human brain was used. You do not know the difference?

I realize the terms that you used. I used different terms.

Do you know the difference?

Insider
10-31-2005, 10:29 PM
No care is given to the terms you use. We do use them to profile you though.

10-31-2005, 10:37 PM
Insider wrote:
No care is given to the terms you use. We do use them to profile you though.

This is pleasing. Profiling is a symptom of Marxist based psychological grounded research. It is the definition of pseudo-science.

Profile away.

Insider
11-01-2005, 08:09 AM
You are an authority on pseudo-science and the use of many words.

rushdoony
11-01-2005, 08:11 AM
Conclusions

The conclusion is that the World does not orbit the Sun and that it does not rotate about an axis, either. This can be reasoned via the following logic:

The stars complete circular paths every 23h 56m 4.091s, apparently as a consequence of the observer having completed a circle of absolute maximum circumference 24,860 miles.
No similar, annual motion of the stars is observed, in consequence of our supposedly hurtling around an (approximate) circle of 584,058,077 mile circumference (i.e., 23,494 times bigger than the equatorial maximum given in point number 1).
Precession of the World's imaginary axis, such that it always points to the same point in the northern sky, will not produce such an alignment in the south, and vice versa.
The World therefore would have to remain aligned with the north-south axis of the celestial sphere, which, in turn, means that it cannot be orbiting the Sun, unless the stars are somehow tied to the World as the World moves.
Such non-fixed 'background' stars, attached to the World in some way, would be contrary to the heliocentric scheme.
Heliocentrism is therefore an invalid model.
Acentrism is therefore an invalid model.
Geocentrism (with a rotating World) is therefore an invalid model (see Proof of Heliocentric Incorrectness 2), because it is geometrically equivalent to a heliocentric model. Hence, since the heliocentric one is wrong, the equivalent geocentric one must also be wrong, simply because of its equivalence.
Star circles cannot be due to a rotating World, because they do not vary with latitude (a camera situated at the North Pole will still capture Polaris moving around the same-sized circle).
We are therefore left with a World that must remain on the north-south axis of the celestial sphere, must be central, because of countless other observations (e.g., Y.P. Varshni's paper, briefly mentioned under "Solar System," elsewhere on this website), and which cannot be a World that rotates.
The heliocentric and geocentric (with rotating World) cosmological models are geometrically equivalent, since they can be considered as sharing a common point of rotation. This is Mach's Principle. The heliocentric and geostatic systems, on the other hand, are not equivalent, either dynamically or geometrically. They are totally different, physical systems. There is no common point of rotation between them. Mach's Principle does not therefore apply, although many people get themselves and others completely confused by erroneously claiming that it does. Hence, the geostatic reference system (as discussed in the previous proof, linked to on point number 8) again matches observational facts, whereas the heliocentric/acentric concept does not.

Our method here has been similar to the phenomenon of stellar parallax, which Tycho Brahe used to argue his case against heliocentrism, and which is addressed in the scientific paper, "Stellar distances and the age of the universe." (Note that huge distances to the stars were only brought in as another ad hoc to prop up the heliocentric deception.)

We thus conclude once more, and without the necessity for any mathematical analysis, that the cosmos is geocentric and geostatic.

Quod erat demonstrandum. more:
http://www.geocentric-universe.com/page32.htm

Insider
11-01-2005, 08:40 AM
Distance does not exist, it is just a part of how human brains create order within and confined to their reality and perception of the arrow of time.

John_1335
11-11-2005, 01:13 AM
As a Spirit-filled Christian, who diligently seeks for the Truth (That is found in God's Word), I totally agree with you. The earth is not moving, there is no evidence to go to the contrary that I have seen.. and plenty to show that the earth is stationary.

And judging by God's Word, which is absolute Truth, and also by what I observe, I have come to the conclusion that the sun and stars and everything in the universe rotate around the earth.

Trust God.

Psalm 118:8

John_1335
11-11-2005, 01:55 AM
Anonymous wrote:
Ok...so...the law of gravity as we understand it is a complete farse.

Greater, more massive objects tend to gravitate toward smaller, less massive objects.

The earth does not move at all. It is the only object in the entire universe that does not move...well...except for the sphere of fixed stars, but they move around the whole universe every day.

The earth is the center of the solar system. The moon revolves around the earth. The Sun revolves around the earth. Mars revolves around the earth. Venus revolves around the earth. Mercury revolves around the earth. Pluto, Uranus, Neptune, Saturn, Jupiter all revolve around the center of the solar system - the Earth.

Finally, every star, constellation, galaxy, black hole, etc...revolve around the earth every single day. These constellations, and galaxies and stars travel literally trillions upon trillions of light years in the short span of 24 hours.

Just one more thing, the Bible does not teach a geocentric universe.

Any questions?

...waiting...

P.S. oh, yes, and the solstices and equinoxes throughout the year are a result of the crazy orbit of the sun that is all over the place.

The sun makes an orbit around the earth every day. To do so, the sun is travelling near the speed of light...and the constellations are travelling far faster then the speed of light. They're travelling at something like ...warp 1000.

First, the "universal" law of gravity as Newton defines it is farse, this is discussed earlier in the thread, but you can look here:

"Universal Law of Gravitation" is taught and believed by one and all but is, nevertheless, an absolutely insane concept which violates and contradicts its essential magnetic principle every second of every day, year in and year out.

Even if one can momentarily lock one's brain into conceiving of a delicate balance between say the Earth and the Moon's gravitational forces, a balance that would be achieved by the most precise, exact and unvarying distance between the two bodies, then that same brain is boggled when it is confronted with the fact that no such stable distance exists between these two bodies (or any other two!). Indeed, the undeniable reality is that the moon regularly varies its distance from the Earth by over 31,000 miles! When it comes closer and closer it gets in the stronger and stronger pull of Earth's gravity. How can it then resist that pull and start going against that attraction? Contrariwise, as it goes out to the apogee and is moment by moment breaking loose from Earth's gravitational pull at tremendous speed, how can it stop the outward movement and start back??

Gravity doesn't explain this. Gravity can't explain it. Gravity doesn’t explain the tides. Gravity can't explain them. The same is true of the Earth's supposed annual orbit around the sun. The simple fact is that we are closer by three million miles to the sun at certain times than we are at other times.

The gravitation explanation for heavenly bodies doing what they do has no scientific evidence whatsoever behind it. It is pure nonsense from A to Z, a contradictory, illogical, impossible notion perpetrated upon the world by "you know who" to discredit the Bible.

Indeed, universal gravitation is a bankrupt and stupid hypothesis just the same as Darwin's "natural selection" mechanism is now being recognized as a bankrupt and stupid hypothesis that is incapable of explaining evolutionism. These bankrupt hypotheses both have the same author, satan the deceiver. They both have the same purpose: undermining the credibility of Scripture. They both have the same destiny: exposure as lies to be adhered to only by those who "cannot receive a love of the Truth" (2 Thessalonians 2:10), those who "willfully" embrace these lies when they know better (II Peter 3:5), by those, in short, whose real god is the father of lies (John 8:44).

Second, as for the earth not moving, you are indeed correct when you say that the earth isn't moving, everything rotates around us each day/night.

Third, you seem to misunderstand the correct viewpoint. Yes, it is true that everything revolves around the earth, but not in the way you think.. this is how it works:

http://web.clas.ufl.edu/users/rhatch/images/b-tychonic-sml-blk.jpg

or:

http://honolulu.hawaii.edu/distance/sci122/Programs/p10/Tychonic.gif

Fourth, you assume that stars are lightyears away, when in fact they are not. The furthest star we see is within one lightday of the earth. This fact cannot be contended against with observable data. Quit assuming that everything that's pumped into you from NASA and school is correct about the origin and state of the universe. You should do some reading at fixedearth.com

Fifth, the Bible does in fact teach a geocentric universe:


Genesis 15:12
And when the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell upon Abram; and, lo, an horror of great darkness fell upon him.

Genesis 15:17
And it came to pass, that, when the sun went down, and it was dark, behold a smoking furnace, and a burning lamp that passed between those pieces.

Genesis 19:23
The sun was risen upon the earth when Lot entered into Zoar.

Genesis 28:11
And he lighted upon a certain place, and tarried there all night, because the sun was set; and he took of the stones of that place, and put [them for] his pillows, and lay down in that place to sleep.

Genesis 32:31
And as he passed over Penuel the sun rose upon him, and he halted upon his thigh.

Exodus 17:12
But Moses' hands [were] heavy; and they took a stone, and put under him, and he sat thereon; and Aaron and Hur stayed up his hands, the one on the one side, and the other on the other side; and his hands were steady until the going down of the sun.

Exodus 22:3
If the sun be risen upon him, [there shall be] blood [shed] for him; [for] he should make full restitution; if he have nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft.

Exodus 22:26
If thou at all take thy neighbour's raiment to pledge, thou shalt deliver it unto him by that the sun goeth down:

Leviticus 22:7
And when the sun is down, he shall be clean, and shall afterward eat of the holy things; because it his food.

Numbers 2:3
And on the east side toward [i]the rising of the sun shall they of the standard of the camp of Judah pitch throughout their armies: and Nahshon the son of Amminadab [shall be] captain of the children of Judah.

Deuteronomy 11:30
[Are] they not on the other side Jordan, by the way where the sun goeth down, in the land of the Canaanites, which dwell in the champaign over against Gilgal, beside the plains of Moreh?

Deuteronomy 16:6
But at the place which the LORD thy God shall choose to place his name in, there thou shalt sacrifice the passover at even, at the going down of the sun, at the season that thou camest forth out of Egypt.

Deuteronomy 23:11
But it shall be, when evening cometh on, he shall wash [himself] with water: and when the sun is down, he shall come into the camp [again].

Deuteronomy 24:13
In any case thou shalt deliver him the pledge again when the sun goeth down, that he may sleep in his own raiment, and bless thee: and it shall be righteousness unto thee before the LORD thy God.

Deuteronomy 24:15
At his day thou shalt give [him] his hire, neither shall the sun go down upon it; for he poor, and setteth his heart upon it: lest he cry against thee unto the LORD, and it be sin unto thee.

Joshua 1:4
From the wilderness and this Lebanon even unto the great river, the river Euphrates, all the land of the Hittites, and unto the great sea toward [i]the going down of the sun, shall be your coast.

Joshua 8:29
And the king of Ai he hanged on a tree until eventide: and as soon as the sun was down, Joshua commanded that they should take his carcase down from the tree, and cast it at the entering of the gate of the city, and raise thereon a great heap of stones, [that remaineth] unto this day.

Joshua 10:12
Then spake Joshua to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon.

Once again, the sun was told to stand still.. Do you disagree? Do you want me to believe that the sun was not told to "stand thou still"?

Joshua 10:13
And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. [Is] not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.

Once again, the sun stood still in the midst of heaven. Am I to believe that it didn't? It seems you want me to believe that the earth has always been spinning and moving around the sun, and that for these specific verses.. that the earth stopped spinning? Is that it?

Joshua 10:27
And it came to pass at the time of the going down of the sun, [that] Joshua commanded, and they took them down off the trees, and cast them into the cave wherein they had been hid, and laid great stones in the cave's mouth, [which remain] until this very day.

Joshua 12:1
Now these [are] the kings of the land, which the children of Israel smote, and possessed their land on the other side Jordan toward the rising of the sun, from the river Arnon unto mount Hermon, and all the plain on the east:

Judges 5:31
So let all thine enemies perish, O LORD: but [let] them that love him [i]as the sun when he goeth forth in his might. And the land had rest forty years.

Judges 8:13
And Gideon the son of Joash returned from battle before the sun [was up],

Judges 9:33
And it shall be, [that] in the morning, as soon as the sun is up, thou shalt rise early, and set upon the city: and, behold, [when] he and the people that with him come out against thee, then mayest thou do to them as thou shalt find occasion.

Judges 14:18
And the men of the city said unto him on the seventh day before the sun went down, What [is] sweeter than honey? and what [is] stronger than a lion? And he said unto them, If ye had not plowed with my heifer, ye had not found out my riddle.

Judges 19:14
And they passed on and went their way; and the sun went down upon them [when they were] by Gibeah, which to Benjamin.

2 Samuel 2:24
Joab also and Abishai pursued after Abner: and the sun went down when they were come to the hill of Ammah, that [lieth] before Giah by the way of the wilderness of Gibeon.

2 Samuel 3:35
And when all the people came to cause David to eat meat while it was yet day, David sware, saying, So do God to me, and more also, if I taste bread, or ought else, till [i]the sun be down.

2 Samuel 23:4
And [he shall be] as the light of the morning, [when] the sun riseth, [even] a morning without clouds; [as] the tender grass [springing] out of the earth by clear shining after rain.

1 Kings 22:36
And there went a proclamation throughout the host about the going down of the sun, saying, Every man to his city, and every man to his own country.

1 Chronicles 16:30
Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.

I suppose you want me to believe that the world shall not also be stable, that it shall, is, and always has been moving? Would you bet everything you have on that? I'm trying to show you that this assumption you all have could be untrue.. and the assumption that the world is unstable and moving is in light of God's Word: untrue.

2 Chronicles 18:34
And the battle increased that day: howbeit the king of Israel stayed [himself] up in [his] chariot against the Syrians until the even: and about the time of the sun going down he died.

Psalm 19:4
Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun,

Set a tabernacle for the sun, what do you suppose that means? Wait, it's explained if you continue reading:

Psalm 19:5
Which as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, [and] rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race.

The sun (or sun's tabernacle?) is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber? That implies movement, does it not? Come on guys, wake up!

Psalm 19:6
His going forth [is] from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.

Once again! His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it! The sun has a going forth and a circuit!? Guys, it is pretty clear, please read God's Word on this issue..

Psalm 50:1
[[A Psalm of Asaph.]] The mighty God, [even] the LORD, hath spoken, and called the earth from the rising of the sun unto the going down thereof.

Psalm 93:1
The LORD reigneth, he is clothed with majesty; the LORD is clothed with strength, [wherewith] he hath girded himself: the world also is stablished, that it cannot be moved.

You still expect me to believe that the world has always been moving, that it is now also?

If you have the Holy Spirit, or even if you don't, why not pray this prayer:

Heavenly Father, your Word says that the world is stablished, that it cannot be moved. Does that mean that it is or isn't moving?

Psalm 104:19
He appointed the moon for seasons: the sun knoweth his going down.

Psalm 104:22
The sun ariseth, they gather themselves together, and lay them down in their dens.

Psalm 113:3
From the rising of the sun unto the going down of the same the LORD'S name to be praised.

[b]Ecclesiastes 1:5
The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose.

[b]Isaiah 13:10
For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine.

The sun's going forth? Oh yeah.. the sun is moving, contrary to the notion that it is the center of the solar system.

Isaiah 38:8
Behold, I will bring again the shadow of the degrees, which is gone down in the sun dial of Ahaz, ten degrees backward. So the sun returned ten degrees, by which degrees it was gone down.

This is expressly stated, that the sun returned ten degrees. Either it did return or it didn't.. Not some quasi-understood interpretation using scientific excuses and explanations. The sun returned ten degrees! Now, do you STILL expect me to believe something else?

Isaiah 41:25
I have raised up [one] from the north, and he shall come: from the rising of the sun shall he call upon my name: and he shall come upon princes as [upon] morter, and as the potter treadeth clay.

[b]Isaiah 45:6
That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that [there is] none beside me. I [am] the LORD, and [there is] none else.

I know that the sun rises, anyone want to argue and try to refute that?

Isaiah 59:19
So shall they fear the name of the LORD from the west, and his glory from the rising of the sun. When the enemy shall come in like a flood, the Spirit of the LORD shall lift up a standard against him.

Come on Spirit of the LORD!! Lift up a standard against the deceiver who has deceived these children of Yours!

Isaiah 60:20
Thy sun shall no more go down; neither shall thy moon withdraw itself: for the LORD shall be thine everlasting light, and the days of thy mourning shall be ended.

The sun shall no more go down, the moon shall no more withdraw itself. Tell me, please.. does this not mean what it says? You should check out Isaiah 60:19 also, which declares that the sun shall be no more light by day, neither the moon give light..

Jeremiah 15:9
She that hath borne seven languisheth: she hath given up the ghost; [i]her sun is gone down while [it was] yet day: she hath been ashamed and confounded: and the residue of them will I deliver to the sword before their enemies, saith the LORD.

Daniel 6:14
Then the king, when he heard [these] words, was sore displeased with himself, and set [his] heart on Daniel to deliver him: and he laboured till the going down of the sun to deliver him.

Amos 8:9
And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the Lord GOD, that I will cause the sun to go down at noon, and I will darken the earth in the clear day:

Do you read this or not: Saith the Lord GOD: that He will cause the sun to go down at noon. Will He [i]instead cause the earth to stop spinning and spin in the opposite direction really fast for a half a day, as you want me to believe?

Wake up guys!

Jonah 4:8
And it came to pass, when the sun did arise, that God prepared a vehement east wind; and the sun beat upon the head of Jonah, that he fainted, and wished in himself to die, and said, better for me to die than to live.

Micah 3:6
Therefore night [shall be] unto you, that ye shall not have a vision; and it shall be dark unto you, that ye shall not divine; and the sun shall go down over the prophets, and the day shall be dark over them.

Nahum 3:17
Thy crowned [are] as the locusts, and thy captains as the great grasshoppers, which camp in the hedges in the cold day, [i]when the sun ariseth they flee away, and their place is not known where they [are].

[b]Habakkuk 3:11
The sun [and] moon stood still in their habitation: at the light of thine arrows they went, [and] at the shining of thy glittering spear.

Did they or did they not stand still? If they stood still, are they not moving? Wake up guys!

Malachi 1:11
For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same my name [shall be] great among the Gentiles; and in every place incense [shall be] offered unto my name, and a pure offering: for my name [shall be] great among the heathen, saith the LORD of hosts.

Matthew 5:45
That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.

Words that Jesus spoke should get special recognition, should they not?

Matthew 13:6
And when the sun was up, they were scorched; and because they had no root, they withered away.

Mark 1:32
And at even, when the sun did set, they brought unto him all that were diseased, and them that were possessed with devils.

Mark 4:6
But when the sun was up, it was scorched; and because it had no root, it withered away.

Mark 16:2
And very early in the morning the first [day] of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.

Luke 4:40
Now when the sun was setting, all they that had any sick with divers diseases brought them unto him; and he laid his hands on every one of them, and healed them.

Ephesians 4:26
Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath:

James 1:11
For the sun is no sooner risen with a burning heat, but it withereth the grass, and the flower thereof falleth, and the grace of the fashion of it perisheth: so also shall the rich man fade away in his ways.

John_1335
11-11-2005, 02:02 AM
And as for marrypoppins, if she's still harassing this thread with worthless, insulting, posts she needs to re-read the terms of board usage in the disclaimer or get out:

You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful,
threatening, sexually-orientated or any other material that may violate any
applicable laws. Doing so may lead to you being immediately and permanently
banned (and your service provider being informed). The IP address of all
posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions.

:-D

11-11-2005, 08:34 AM
Additionally, the cosmological red and blue shifts can also indicate a geocentric system.

rushdoony
11-11-2005, 11:45 AM
Introduction to Geocentrism

Dr. Neville Jones, Ph.D.

Geocentric means World-centred. In particular, a geocentric universe is one in which the centres of the World and of the universe coincide.
That the universe is, in fact, geocentric is indicated by physical experiments, astronomical observations, our senses, and the Hebrew Scriptures (or Tenach). Any accusation that recourse to the written word of the God of Israel is 'unscientific', would be untrue and would indicate a complete lack of understanding of the sciences. The more enlightened reader may point out that the Tenach does not explicitly state that the World is situated at the centre of the universe; however, the fact that such a claim is implicitly contained within the Tenach is demonstrated in the article, "Do the alleged Apollo Moon landings conflict with the Hebrew Scriptures?".


Cosmology is the area of physics that deals with the workings and structure of the universe as a whole.
There are several fine geocentric cosmologies, four of which are due to Tyge (Latinized as Tycho) Brahe (1546-1601 CE), Claudius Ptolemy (Latinized form of Klaudios Ptolemaios, c.90 - c.168 CE), Hipparchus of Nicaea (c.190 - c.125 BCE) and Apollonius of Perga (c.262 - c.190 BCE).

We feel no motion of the World on which we all live. Furthermore, no experiment in all physics has ever demonstrated that the World moves around the Sun, or that it rotates on an axis. From the standpoint of our senses, therefore, we are justified in attributing the motion of the Sun, Moon, planets and stars to those objects themselves, rather than to some multi-component, contorted movement of the World. Certainly, to a good approximation, the stars seem to go around us as if they are each attached to the inner surface of a huge celestial sphere, which is itself rotating above our heads from east to west on a celestial north-south polar axis.


Figure 1: The celestial sphere.


In most geocentric models of the universe, the Sun goes around the World every day, following a path in the sky called the ecliptic. The seasons are simply explained by the Sun traversing the ecliptic over a period of twelve months, such that the declination of the Sun (effectively a measure of its height above the celestial equator) will vary slightly from one day to the next. Contemplation of Fig. 1 will illustrate the mechanism by which the Sun reaches its highest position in the sky on the summer solstice, its lowest position on the winter solstice and that it crosses the equator at the points referred to as the vernal and autumnal equinoxes.

Some geocentrists, the most notable of which were three patriarchs of the Cassini family, maintain a central, but rotating, World. In this case, the Sun would take twelve months to orbit the World, not the average 24 hours which other geocentric cosmologies predict.


Cosmogony is the name given to research into the origin of the universe.

We are currently taught the notion that everything around us sprang into existence, of its own accord, between twelve and twenty billion years ago. However, the considered opinion of the primary authors of this website is that such a proposal is an untenable fairy-tale. In this respect, therefore, we are in agreement with the prominent twentieth-century cosmologist, Professor Sir Fred Hoyle (1915-2001), who originally, and contemptuously, nicknamed this hypothetical explosion a "Big Bang" (after which he never referred to it by that name again).


Summary

Within a geocentric model of the universe, the World is not a planet and it does not orbit the Sun. Rather, it is positioned at the very centre of the universe.

Copyright © 2005 Dr. N.T. Jones. Permission is granted to print or otherwise reproduce this page on condition that the content is not changed in any way.
http://www.geocentric-universe.com/page78.htm

See also: www.fixedearth.com

John_1335
11-18-2005, 01:02 AM
In January 1967, Virgil "Gus" Grissom, an American astronaut, held an unauthorized press conference in which he told reporters that the United States was "at least a decade away" from even contemplating a lunar mission. He was severely rebuked for giving that interview without permission.

Following this reprimand, Gus Grissom later came out of a reduced gravity water tank simulation of the supposed lunar landing module, and then attached a lemon to a coat-hanger, which he then hung in front of a NASA emblem to indicate to the cameras, without speaking, what he and his fellow crew members, Roger Chaffee and Edward White, thought of the Apollo programme.

A few days after this, on 27 January 1967, Grissom, Chaffee and White were murdered, via a horrific pressurized oxygen fire, when locked in the capsule at the top of a Nazi war murderer's Saturn V rocket.

Two and a half years later, in July 1969, NASA faked a Moon landing with Amstrong, Aldrin and Collins.

More HERE (http://www.geocentric-universe.com/page51.htm)

-

http://www.geocentric-universe.com/Moon%20distance%202.png

Had the famous Saturn V rocket been fitted with five genuine Rocketdyne F1 engines, it would have almost certainly blown up most of the eastern United States. Instead, this lumbering, though impressive looking, giant struggled to even get modest payloads into Low Earth Orbit (LEO), which is defined as being between 200- and 400-miles above the World's surface. LEO is indicated above (light blue), together with the inner and outer limits of the highly radioactive Van Allen belts.

Since the Saturn V was scrapped, and the plans for building it mysteriously destroyed, no man has achieved an altitude of higher than 350 miles, when they reported seeing flashes of light even with their eyelids closed. All manned spaceflight before and after the Apollo programme was in LEO.

Just how Armstrong, Aldrin and Collins chartered so smoothly such unknown dangers is truly amazing. How pleased they must have been when they got out as far as the white circle shown in Fig. 1. Unbelievable! Or, as one of the astronots said, "absolutely unreal."

No protection against lethal radiation. Less computer memory than that in a domestic washing machine. No experience of successfully piloting the landing vehicle. No method of cooling themselves or their craft. No test runs past LEO. And so on, and so forth.

Looking at the distance to the white circle above really does put this "achievement" into perspective for anyone except those who are physically or willingly blind. Quite remarkable. But still well less than one third of the claimed distance to the Moon!

And, for the icing on the cake, President Richard Nixon then phones the Moon and calls those days in late July, 1969, "the greatest week since Creation."

More HERE (http://www.geocentric-universe.com/page85.htm)

-

YOU ARE HERE! (NOT!) Artist's rendition:
http://www.geocentric-universe.com/Galaxy_1.jpg

Computer-generated representation:
http://www.geocentric-universe.com/Galaxy_2.jpg

Spread over a page and a half and with the outrageously-enormous heading, "YOU ARE HERE!", the Scottish Daily Mail of 17.08.2005 presented a piece by its "Science" Editor, Michael Hanlon.

For those many readers who just look at the pictures and the odd headline or two, there is a very odd headline to accompany an equally odd picture. This headline reads, "Seen here for the first time, a stunning image of our galaxy - and our minuscule place in it."

A rather imprecise statement from the "Science" Editor, because what is presented in the newspaper is not an "image of our galaxy." How could it be? Who has ventured outside of the galaxy? It is, in reality, an artistic impression that has been quite deliberately made to portray the overriding and overbearing cosmological principle that the physical universe is infinitely large and that we live on "an insignificant planet of a humdrum star lost in a galaxy ..." (in the words of that well-known professor of science fiction and atheism, Carl Satan - I mean Sagan - 1980).

Many and varied are the assumptions that are implicitly interwoven in the fabric of this science fiction drawing. Many, too, are the problems that get swept under the carpet. Let us just briefly consider one of these problems: Olbers' paradox. This states that the night sky ought to be as bright as day, due to the light from other sources that impact upon the World. Certainly the centre of this monstrous 'galaxy' would set the night sky ablaze with light and x-rays — if it really existed. For, according to Prof. Ed Churchwell, "one of the scientists responsible for this picture," there are "billions" of stars in a bar-like "corridor down which matter falls into the gaping maw of the [huge] black hole." As shown by Prof. Stephen Hawking, matter spiralling down into a black hole would generate radiation in the form of x-rays. We poor earthlings would thus be bombarded with light and x-rays from this black hole ("thought to weigh as much as a million Suns" - Hanlon). The combined facts of dark night skies and overall lack of radiation sickness amongst the populace tends therefore to rule out [the above images] as depicting reality.

Mr. Hanlon is obviously unaware of these trifling inconveniences, and the overall lack of constraint upon the extent of artistic license that can be used to produce such fictitious pictures, but he does treat his readers to some excellent "science" instead, claiming that "truth, as ever in astronomy, is far stranger than fiction." Adding, "that the billions of stars you see here may be home to countless life forms and civilisations, each pondering the majesty of creation in their own way.

"Maybe they have their own telescopes, and have produced their own 'you are here' maps. Maybe they have their own legends to that [sic] explain the existence of their galaxies.

"But however alien they may be, however many arms, or tentacles or heads they have, and however advanced their civilisation may be compared to ours, they will have one thing in common with us: they live in our town. Now we have a map. Maybe, before too long, we will get to meet our neighbours."

Yes, far stranger indeed. Can't argue with that one.

The World we live on is not "insignificant," nor is it a "planet," but it is positioned at the very centre of the physical universe created by the God of Israel, blessed be His name.

More HERE (http://www.geocentric-universe.com/page42.htm)

-

From the 1970 book, "First On The Moon: A Voyage With Neil Armstrong, Michael Collins, Edwin E. Aldrin, Jr.," by Gene Farmer and Dora Hamblin, published by Michael Joseph Ltd., London, we read that,

"[Michael] Collin's job was flying the command and service module, and handling the celestial navigation. He navigated Apollo 11 out there, and he navigated it home again. Buzz Aldrin also had a few thoughts on that subject …

'The stars are, as Jim Lovell said, your best friends. They sit there and you line up on them and you know where you are. … For spacecraft navigation - getting there and back - we use thirty-seven stars - plus the earth, the sun and the moon. We don't use Venus, but we do use Polaris, Rigel, Capella, Canopus, Sirius, Antares, Vega, Arcturus, Altair and a big one called Fomalhaut which is less widely known. You sight a pair of stars and mark on each one. Then the computer will calculate spacecraft attitude.' "

That's very interesting, because when Patrick Moore asked the three astronauts a direct question, during the post-flight interview, about the visibility of the stars during the period of time that they were allegedly photographing the solar corona (a small ring of light around the Sun), they all denied seeing any. This could not have been put down to any sort of glare on the lunar surface, since Collins was not on the lunar surface (just as Armstrong and Aldrin weren't), nor would Collins have been wearing a visor. The stars all around the Sun, even quite close to it in angular extent, would be very bright indeed. You can verify this for yourselves if you pick a time and day when Venus is above your horizon, just hold your thumb up to obscure the immense glare of the Sun (never look directly at the Sun at any time other than sunrise or sunset) and, lo and behold, you can see Venus very easily. So it would have been for the astronots; by looking at the heavens in all directions other than directly towards the Sun, they would have seen the stars very easily. It would have been impossible to miss them. Unless the astronots were blind. Or unless, of course, they were not where we are told that they were. The visors could not have been so dark that the stars became invisible, since the astronots were able to see without difficulty in the shadows of the "landing module."

Here is the actual response and they certainly do not sound like men who are speaking with any authority on the issue (in this clip you will hear Patrick Moore ask the question, Neil Armstrong reply and then Michael Collins come in at the end with, "I don't remember seeing any.") :

MP3 Audio (http://www.geocentric-universe.com/Stars.mp3)

So, a few days after returning, their navigator, who needed to mark the brightest stars in various constellations in order to rendezvous with the Moon in one direction, and the World in the other, "[could not] remember seeing any." Hmmm, I see, said the blind man. Did he spend his time looking directly at the Sun?

Notice, also, that Neil Armstrong clearly implied that they could see them "through the optics." Whatever these "optics" were, they obviously did not include the best medium-format cameras available either then or now - Hasselblad - because no stars were ever photographed on any "Apollo mission."

More HERE (http://www.geocentric-universe.com/page53.htm)

-
Figure 1:
http://www.geocentric-universe.com/NASA%20solar%20eclipse.jpg

The photograph shown [above] was claimed by NASA to have been taken during their supposed Apollo missions to the Moon. It is to be found in, amongst other places, the Photo Gallery of the very well-established Maris Multimedia astronomical program, "Redshift."

In the "About Redshift" menu option of the main program (Windows version 1.2, copyright © 1993 Maris Multimedia Ltd.), we read that, "Where applicable, the copyright ownership of individual photographs is as stated in the Photo Gallery."

Notice, in addition to the subjective unreality of this picture, the following objective, observational criticisms:

1. The angular size of the World, with respect to that of the Sun, is far too small.
2. The amount of the Sun's disc (and hence brilliant light) that is apparently still present would bleach the entire exposure.
3. The lack of atmospheric effects around the lower hemisphere of the World.
4. The darkness of the "lunar surface."
5. The uneven illumination of the "lunar surface."
6. The absence of flaring down the lens.
The "Sun" and "World" shown are not of circular cross section.
7. The title is even wrong, because this would not have been an "Earth eclipse," but a solar eclipse.

Whoever faked this photograph made one serious blunder. They did not realize that the angular extent of the World, when viewed from the Moon (if that were possible), is very different to that of the Moon, when viewed from the World, as [the images below] (created via the same "Redshift" software package) will demonstrate.

http://www.geocentric-universe.com/Redshift%20Solar%20Eclipses.jpg

Figure 2: (a) The relative sizes of the World and Sun, as would be seen from the Apollo 11 "landing site." (b) After totality in a solar eclipse, as viewed from the World.

Note how similar Fig. 2 (b) is to whatever was used in Fig. 1

More HERE (http://www.geocentric-universe.com/page36.htm)
HERE (pdf) (http://www.geocentric-universe.com/Apollo%20analysis.pdf)
HERE (insider information) (http://www.geocentric-universe.com/page76.htm)
HERE (blunders) (http://www.geocentric-universe.com/page41.htm)
HERE (http://www.geocentric-universe.com/page37.htm)

and here:

The following argument, which I traced as being from the website of a one William Cooper (1943 - 2001), is nicely put :

To make interstellar travel believable NASA was created. The Apollo Space Program foisted the idea that man could travel to, and walk upon, the moon. Every Apollo mission was carefully rehearsed and then filmed in large sound stages at the Atomic Energy Commissions Top Secret test site in the Nevada Desert and in a secured and guarded sound stage at the Walt Disney Studios within which was a huge scale mock-up of the moon.

No man has ever ascended higher than 300 miles, if that high, above the Earth's surface. No man has ever orbited, landed on, or walked upon the moon ...

The tremendous radiation encountered in the Van Allen Belt, solar radiation, cosmic radiation, temperature control, and many other problems connected with space travel prevent living organisms leaving our atmosphere with our known level of technology. Any intelligent high school student with a basic physics book can prove NASA faked the Apollo moon landings If you doubt this please explain how the astronauts walked upon the moons surface enclosed in a space suit in full sunlight absorbing a minimum of 265 degrees of heat surrounded by a vacuum. NASA tells us the moon has no atmosphere and that the astronauts were surrounded by the vacuum of space.

Heat is defined as the vibration or movement of molecules within matter. The faster the molecular motion the higher the temperature. The slower the molecular motion the colder the temperature. Absolute zero is that point where all molecular motion ceases. In order to have hot or cold molecules must be present.

A vacuum is a condition of nothingness where there are no molecules. Vacuums exist in degrees. Some scientists tell us that there is no such thing as an absolute vacuum. Space is the closest thing to an absolute vacuum that is known to us. There are so few molecules present in most areas of what we know as "space" that any concept of "hot" or "cold" is impossible to measure. A vacuum is a perfect insulator. That is why a "Thermos" or vacuum bottle is used to store hot or cold liquids in order to maintain the temperature for the longest time possible without re-heating or re-cooling.

Radiation of all types will travel through a vacuum but will not affect the vacuum. Radiant heat from the sun travels through the vacuum of space but does not "warm" space. In fact the radiant heat of the sun has no affect whatsoever until it strikes matter. Molecular movement will increase in direct proportion to the radiant energy which is absorbed by matter. The time it takes to heat matter exposed to direct sunlight in space is determined by its color, its elemental properties, its distance from the sun, and its rate of absorption of radiant heat energy. Space is NOT hot. Space is NOT cold.

Objects which are heated cannot be cooled by space. In order for an object to cool it must first be removed from direct sunlight. Objects which are in the shadow of another object will eventually cool but not because space is "cold". Space is not cold. Hot and cold do not exist in the vacuum of space. Objects cool because the laws of motion dictate that the molecules of the object will slow down due to the resistance resulting from striking other molecules until eventually all motion will stop provided the object is sheltered from the direct and/or indirect radiation of the sun and that there is no other source of heat. Since the vacuum of space is the perfect insulator objects take a very long time to cool even when removed from all sources of heat, radiated or otherwise.

NASA insists the space suits the astronauts supposedly wore on the lunar surface were air conditioned. An air conditioner cannot, and will not work without a heat exchanger. A heat exchanger simply takes heat gathered in a medium such as freon from one place and transfers it to another place. This requires a medium of molecules which can absorb and transfer the heat such as an atmosphere or water. An air conditioner will not and cannot work in a vacuum. A space suit surrounded by a vacuum cannot transfer heat from the inside of the suit to any other place. The vacuum, remember, is a perfect insulator. A man would roast in his suit in such a circumstance.

NASA claims the spacesuits were cooled by a water system which was piped around the body, then through a system of coils sheltered from the sun in the backpack. NASA claims that water was sprayed on the coils causing a coating of ice to form. The ice then supposedly absorbed the tremendous heat collected in the water and evaporated into space. There are two problems with this that cannot be explained away. 1) The amount of water needed to be carried by the astronauts in order to make this work for even a very small length of time in the direct 55 degrees over the boiling point of water (210 degrees F at sea level on Earth) heat of the sun could not have possibly been carried by the astronauts. 2) NASA has since claimed that they found ice in moon craters. NASA claims that ice sheltered from the direct rays of the sun will NOT evaporate destroying their own bogus "air conditioning" explanation.

Remember this. Think about it the next time you go off in the morning with a "vacuum bottle" filled with hot coffee. Think about it long and hard when you sit down and pour a piping hot cup from your thermos to drink with your lunch four hours later... and then think about it again when you pour the last still very warm cup of coffee at the end of the day.

The same laws of physics apply to any vehicle traveling through space. NASA claims that the spacecraft was slowly rotated causing the shadowed side to be cooled by the intense cold of space... an intense cold that DOES NOT EXIST. In fact the only thing that could have been accomplished by a rotation of the spacecraft is a more even and constant heating such as that obtained by rotating a hot dog on a spit. In reality a dish called Astronaut a la Apollo would have been served. At the very least you would not want to open the hatch upon the crafts return.

NASA knows better than to claim, in addition, that a water cooling apparatus such as that which they claim cooled the astronauts suits cooled the spacecraft. No rocket could ever have been launched with the amount of water needed to work such a system for even a very short period of time. Fresh water weighs a little over 62 lbs. per cubic foot. Space and weight capacity were critical given the lift capability of the rockets used in the Apollo Space Program. No such extra water was carried by any mission whatsoever for suits or for cooling the spacecraft.

On the tapes the Astronauts complained bitterly of the cold during their journey and while on the surface of the moon. They spoke of using heaters that did not give off enough heat to overcome the intense cold of space. It was imperative that NASA use this ruse because to tell the truth would TELL THE TRUTH. It is also proof of the arrogance and contempt in which the Illuminati holds the common man.

What we heard is in reality indicative of an over zealous cooling system in the props used during the filming of the missions at the Atomic Energy Commissions Nevada desert test site, where it is common to see temperatures well over 100 degrees. In the glaring unfiltered direct heat of the sun the Astronauts could never have been cold at any time whatsoever in the perfect insulating vacuum of space.

NASA claims that the space suits worn by the astronauts were pressurized at 5 psi over the ambient pressure (0 psi vacuum) on the moon's surface. We have examined the gloves NASA claims the astronauts wore and find they are made of pliable material containing no mechanical, hydraulic, or electrical devices which would aid the astronauts in the dexterous use of their fingers and hands while wearing the gloves. Experiments prove absolutely that such gloves are impossible to use and that the wearer cannot bend the wrist or fingers to do any dexterous work whatsoever when filled with 5 psi over ambient pressure either in a vacuum or in the earth's atmosphere. NASA actually showed film and television footage of astronauts using their hands and fingers normally during their EVAs on the so-called lunar surface. The films show clearly that there is no pressure whatsoever within the gloves... a condition that would have caused explosive decompression of the astronauts resulting in almost immediate death if they had really been surrounded by the vacuum of space.

If you don't believe it try it yourself... it is a very simple experiment and does not require a rocket scientist to perform. These are just two of over a hundred very simple and very easy to prove valid scientific reasons why NASA and the Apollo Space Program are two of the biggest lies ever foisted upon the unsuspecting and trusting People of the world.

In addition most, if not all, of the photos, films, and videotape of the Apollo Moon Missions are easily proven to be fake. Anyone with the slightest knowledge of photography, lighting, and physics can easily prove that NASA faked the visual records of the Apollo Space Program. Some are so obviously fake that when the discrepancies are pointed out to unsuspecting viewers an audible gasp has been heard. Some have actually gone into a mild state of shock. Some People break down and cry. I have seen others become so angry that they have ripped the offending photos to shreds while screaming incoherently.

C. Fred Kleinknect, head of NASA at the time of the Apollo Space Program, is now the Sovereign Grand Commander of the Council of the 33rd Degree of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry of the Southern Jurisdiction. It was his reward for pulling it off. All of the first astronauts were Freemasons. There is a photograph in the House of the Temple in Washington DC of Neil Armstrong on the moons surface (supposedly) in his spacesuit holding his Masonic Apron in front of his groin.


The effect upon the people of the world was, that if we could go to the moon other creatures from other worlds could travel to our Earth.

(From http://www.mt.net/~watcher/masonapollo.html as at 15.01.2005.)

Also of interest is the fact that Bill Cooper "was killed by the Apache County Sherrifs Department during a [SWAT] raid on his home in November of 2001. He is now buried on a hill in Eagar, Arizona." The post mortem report showed that Mr. Cooper was murdered by way of four bullets to the torso and one to the head. This was during "a search of his home," after which they took away his computer "for examination."

-

Careful they don't come after you too.. Get God on your side.. Read the books of John and Romans, repent from your sins, confess Jesus as Lord, ask God to fill you with His Holy Spirit, find other believers to fellowship with, and study Psalm 91.

God bless you, and have a nice day.

rushdoony
11-29-2005, 01:39 PM
These Are the Chief Obstacles Now Preventing the Truth About the

Size of the Universe from Getting to People Everywhere:


Detailed information given throughout this web page leads to inescapable conclusions about the world’s current textbook "knowledge" of the Universe. That documented information tells us plainly and simply that the Origin, Age, Size, and Structure of the Universe taught everywhere is nothing more than a montage of unwarranted assumptions, denial of facts, occult mathematics, and high tech fraud.


More, that information unvaryingly points to the source, the taproot, that has enabled an incredible evolutionary mythology to become a "scientific fact" which is accepted virtually world-wide as a truly "scientific" explanation for the origin of all that exists. That "phony phact" teaches us that an explosion of an infinitesimal "cosmic egg" some 15 billion years ago "evolved" into the universe, the Earth, all plant and animal life, and Mankind... Y’know: The Big Bang Paradigm....


What people haven’t known is that there has been a long hidden secret cabal behind this allegedly scientific "origins model". This is a secret that has recently emerged from the closet and is on the Net and in the bookstores. Now that this veil of secrecy has been lifted everyone can know that what they have been led to believe is a purely secular scientific "origins model" is actually nothing more than the evolution-based "creation scenario" of a specific Religion which is dedicated to the destruction of the Bible’s "creation scenario" (and hence Bible credibility from A to Z).


If you haven’t done so, you can read about the religious source of this world-conquering "origins model" from those who spelled out its fundamentals centuries ago and those who presently promote it (HERE - HERE - HERE - HERE).


Thus, factually and beyond debate, this Evolution-based "origins model" of an anti-Bible, anti-Christ religion is in command not only of today’s Theoretical Science Establishment, but also the evolutionary mind-set that now controls all of the subject "disciplines" which make up modern man’s "knowledge" bank (HERE).


Once this understanding of how the modern world really acquired its belief in the evolutionary foundation of all that exists--and then recognizes that this belief is the result of the nearly complete victory of one religion’s "creation scenario" over that of another religion’s "creation scenario"--the whole subject can be approached objectively and with a clear mind. There is no altruistic battle going on here between unbiased "science" and outmoded Biblical (and Koranic) superstitions about the origin of all that exists, mankind included. Oh no. Not by the hair of your chinny chin chin! Seen in its true light, this is a battle between two religions about the basis of all knowledge...a Spiritual Battle over which God or g’d tells the Truth....


As all this sinks in, two main questions arise which require answers:


Q #1: Considering the level of saturation of the evolutionary mind-set world wide, isn’t it simply unthinkable to imagine it being exposed and overcome (Rev.18:7)?


A #1: Humanly speaking, yes. However, when all the deception is in the open and the g’d behind all of it is identified, there is obviously ONE who can do the unthinkable, viz., the God of the six-day Creation Scenario. With this God all things are possible. HE answered the question in writing over 1900 years ago: Babylon--Satan’s edifice of deception--will Fall "one hour" after a Global Government is established. This Fall causes a division of the world’s populations into Satan worshippers and worshippers of God (Rev. 17:12-14; 13:4-8; 18:2,4,8,10,17,19). Plainly, (Rev.17:14) Babylon (i.e., "confusion") will be "overcome"!


Q #2: If the world-controlling power behind the evolutionary mind-set was Scripturally scheduled for exposure over the Creation question first more than 1900 years ago (Rev. 14:7), what are the main obstacles that are preventing that Biblically prophesied exposure from beginning now?


A #2: There are four such obstacles:


One: The Christian Churches. There is not one which stands up for over sixty non-moving Earth Scriptures (HERE - also: HERE); and few that stand up for the literal Genesis Creation Account which is Scripturally certified scores of times (HERE). God’s Judgment begins "at the house of God" on these two creation issues (HERE).


Two: The "end time" doctrine of "Dispensationalism" is derived from the same Rabbinic Kabbalist source as the Big Bang Evolutionary Paradigm (HERE). Its powerful hold on most of fundamentalist "end time" teaching has blinded the very "elect" from seeing not only that their "end time" doctrines are Scripturally impossible (HERE- HERE - HERE - HERE - HERE)...but has also made them unwitting allies of Satan’s plan to destroy Bible-based Christianity. (The Preterit eschatology is equally impossible Scripturally [HERE] and is preventing millions from focusing on exposing the Copernican deception without which the whole Big Bang Paradigm with its evolutionism collapses.


Three: The leadership of the Creationist branch of what should be the Bible’s Special Forces not only ignores the fact that Copernicanism paved the way for Darwinism (HERE - HERE - HERE), but recklessly twists the non-moving Earth Scriptures to make them conform to Copernicanism in precisely the same way that they accuse "theistic evolutionists" of twisting Scriptures to support evolutionism (HERE - HERE - HERE). By recanting and taking a stand for Bible Geocentrism this same leadership could make a wave throughout Christendom that could not be stopped. Copernicanism is going down with or without them when Babylon Falls. Creationists fear they will look bad as scientists if they go against Copernicanism. Their real fear should be how bad they will look as Christians if they don’t do it!!


Four: Until the research for the "Kabbala" series and "The Size and Structure of the Universe..." series on this web page was done, I did not fully understand nor realize that the current modified anti-Copernican Geocentricity Model delineated by Astronomer Dr. Gerardus Bouw in his books and articles cannot--in the final analysis--be either wholly Biblical or convincingly scientific.

***

Except for obstacle # Four, there are links listed above (et al) that address all of the chief problems standing in the way of a serious counter-attack against the Copernican foundation now upholding Kabbalic Big Bangism and the evolutionary mind-set that it presents to the world. Therefore, more about # Four is in order:

***

Can it be that the present Geocentricity Model’s Virtual Monopoly is itself a major (maybe the most major!) obstacle now keeping the lid on a Bible-mandated movement against the vulnerable Copernican Keystone now holding up Big Bang Evolutionary Cosmology??


In spite of the commendable efforts of Astronomer Dr. Bouw et al to champion the Non-Moving Earth Model and to try to convince Creationists and others that it is the best possible interpretation of plain geocentric Scriptures--and that it alone offers a viable mathematical alternative to the Big Bang Paradigm-- those efforts have had little impact. Among the chief reasons why current efforts to overturn Copernicanism with Dr. Bouw’s Machian Model are stalled are these:


1) The Modified Tychonian Model now being used to combat Copernicanism accepts billions of light year distances to the stars and tries mathematically to apply a theoretical Machian explanation for how those stars could get around the earth nightly. The speeds required in such an explanation are simply unintelligible and the effort can never succeed. Yet, failure is not an option!


2) This Model has the sun as the center of the "solar system" and the Earth somewhat off center, albeit with the sun going around it daily. The Earth is stationary in this Model, but relevant only to the sun. Otherwise, the whole "solar system" is allegedly making a journey around the so-called Milky Way Galaxy of an alleged 100,000 light year diameter. In other words, this Model posits a sort-of stationary Earth, but accepts star distances so great that they can’t go around the Earth nightly as the Biblical Model demands and all true evidence confirms (HERE).


3) This Model involves no awareness of the now documented and prerequisite fact that all of the essential features of today’s Big Bang Cosmology are found in ancient anti-Christ Kabbalic descriptions of the origins of the Universe. Without a keen awareness of this fact that today’s cosmology is the fulfillment of the "creation scenario" of Pharisaic Kabbalism (and simultaneously the destroyer of the Biblical "Creation Scenario"), no real understanding is possible of how a factless pagan evolutionary mythology (HERE - HERE) has been able to virtually conquer man’s knowledge (HERE).

Bottom line: No Model that attempts to establish the Truth about the cosmos without an awareness of the uncompromising opposition of the Kabbalist Universe to the Biblical Universe--and the spiritual goals behind that opposition-- can ever arrive at the Truth about the cosmos, the success of evolutionism, and the near eradication of the Biblical cosmos in people’s minds. Using cunning deceptions founded on occult mathematics and admitted magic and sorcery (HERE, p.9- HERE), the Kabbalist Model has succeeded in fooling most of the world into believing that evolutionism is a fact of science both on the earth and elsewhere in the universe. The only way to expose and destroy those deceptions is to pit them against a scientifically sustainable and purely Biblical Model such as that described in the seven part series entitled: "The Size and Structure of the Universe According to the Bible and Non-Theoretical Science" (begins HERE).

Also, it is quite possible that the reason why Creationist leaders and their followers are reluctant to back the plain non-moving earth Scriptures is because they can’t see how the Machian Model can ever be credible. If this is the case, then, by all means, let them prayerfully consider all the above and then check out the links entitled "The Size and Structure of the Universe According to the Bible and Non-Theoretical Science". In those essays they will find the Biblical evidence and the scientific mechanism they need to confidently challenge the Copernican key to overturning the terrestrial evolution lies which they have prepared so long and well to do.

As for those now supporting the Machian Model (obstacle # Four) because it has given them a seemingly scientific reason to back the non-moving earth Scriptures which they cannot ignore or alter, it is time to realize that both Scripture and Science mandate a universe without those billions of light year distances...a universe with a radius of no more than one light day (and very likely substantially smaller!) with the Earth at the very center.

***

A dozen years of feedback since beginning my active involvement in this issue has left me with no doubt that there are hundreds of millions of people of all religions and no religion--Creationists and non-Creationists alike--who will eagerly accept the exposure of the Kabbalic Universe which not only requires the evolution of everything but also removes a Personal God with an Eternal Plan for those who seek His Truth and abhor Satan’s lies (when they are shown which is which:[2 Thess.2:10]). This multitude will welcome the truth that the Earth is stationary at the precise center of a universe that is a mere 6000 years old and less than one light day thick. Begin (HERE) to understand not only how the non-moving Earth Scriptures are upheld in a way that is rock solid and scientifically defensible, but also how baseless assumptions (HERE) and outright fraud (HERE - HERE - HERE) have established the lie of a 15 billion year old and 15 billion light year thick Big Bang Evolutionary "Origins Scenario" of the religion of mystic Kabbalism disguised as "science".


Mindful of that eagerness for Truth alone that motivates a certain percentage of people everywhere, the Biblical, historical, and technical understanding required to construct such a solid and defensible model finally became clear to me in the year just past. And along with that requirement came an understanding of the nature of the Spiritual Warfare that surrounds this issue and cannot be separated from it.


Indeed, facts long hidden but now available to all, declare that--beginning in earnest with the Copernican Revolution-- there has been a methodical establishment of a Cosmological Model which teaches an Evolved Universe, Earth, and Mankind over some 15 billion years (a figure given by Kabbalist Rabbi HaKana in the 1st century A.D. and reiterated by Kabbalist physicist Schroeder et al currently: HERE - HERE). Now swarming with Kabbalist Sagan’s factless fantasy of evolving extraterrestrials (HERE, pp.3,4 - HERE, pp.14,15 - HERE), this "origins scenario" has become the fulfillment of the Kabbala’s agenda of establishing creation by evolutionism in man’s mind. This fantasy has nearly replaced the Bible’s Personal God with the Christ-hating Talmud/ Kabbalist non-g’d concept. That concept has been promoted over the centuries by a mere handful of Rabbinical writers such as: HaKana, Maimonides, Nachmanides, and Luria (HERE). "Scientists" Einstein, Friedmann, Le Maitre, Bohr, Gamow, Penzias, Sagan, Wickramasinghe et al have turned the fantasy into "science" (HERE).


Therefore, any effort to challenge the Copernican Model which doesn’t include this acknowledgment and understanding of the role of Pharisaic Talmudism/ Kabbalism’s use of a Theoretical Science Establishment to achieve its anti-Bible, anti-Christ religious goals is a futile effort. Creationists in particular are honor-bound to embrace this Biblically mandated understanding and openly challenge the totally factless, assumption-ridden pseudo-science that has succeeded in implanting an evolution-powered "origins scenario" for all that exists in the world’s "science textbooks".. while nearly destroying Biblical credibility from A to Z.


Christians who read of "science falsely so called" (I Timothy 6:20,21) are warned to "avoid" all such "science" because it is nothing more than "profane and vain babblings and oppositions to true science". What is hard to grasp at first--but must be grasped-- is the incredible extent to which those profane and vain babblings of false science have fooled all of us...whatever our backgrounds have been.


When it is realized that the entire formulation of the Kabbalist Model rests on the quicksand of vulnerable Copernican Heliocentricity, all who desire Truth over lies will know where to focus their attack. Darwinism (and its evolution-based brood: Communism, Freudianism, Einsteinism, Saganism...) would all have been stillborn if the Copernican Revolution hadn’t paved the way for evolution’s success (HERE, pp.52-65 - HERE, pp.1,2,11; HERE - HERE).


The Earth Is Not Moving! Period! The beginning of the end of the evolution mythology underlying all of modern man’s "knowledge" starts with investigating and then accepting and acting upon that demonstrable fact....
http://www.fixedearth.com/Machian%20Model%20Obstacle.htm

Indred
11-29-2005, 02:20 PM
I understand that the red shift and the blue shift theory has been called into question. This would mean that the size of the universe and the distance to other detectable objects in the universe is incorrect. Some quasars have been found that appear to have tenuous filaments that connect them with particular galaxies. The Doppler shifts of the connected objects do not agree. The quasars have been thought to be at great distances, but their associated galaxies are fairly close. This could indicate a radically smaller universe with the Earth central.

John_1335
11-30-2005, 01:00 PM
Introduction
As Christians, many of us have found the scientific evidence for the Big Bang, evolution, etc., to be quite convincing. So convincing, in fact, that we try to combine these theories with our belief in God. Some people believe that God probably created the universe by causing the "Big Bang," and then He allowed the universe to evolve for the next 15 billion years exactly as science describes. In addition, some people believe that God probably created the first single-cell lifeforms in the primordial soup, and then He allowed them to evolve for billions of years until humans developed, exactly as science describes. The "problem" of the six days of Creation is solved by assuming that they refer to six eons of time, each lasting billions of years. This seems like a nice, neat way to believe in God and to believe these scientific theories, both at the same time. Other Christians have similar views (such as "progressive Creationism," "theistic evolution," etc.) which attempt to combine these scientific theories with Biblical facts.

But there's a problem with all of those views. In a few moments we will compare the Creation account and the scientific explanations, point by point, and we will see quite clearly that they contradict each other on essentially every point. They cannot be combined into a single explanation as many Christians want to do.

The Bible Is the Inerrant, Infallible Word of God

Before we begin studying what God has to say about Creation vs. any kind of evolution (such as the evolution of the universe since the Big Bang, or the evolution of life on earth), let's take a look at some foundational truths of the Christian faith. First, who knows more about science, God or human scientists? Obviously the answer must be God. Okay, who knows more about how the universe was formed, God or human scientists? Again, the answer must be God. Now, who knows more about how life on earth came into being and how humans were formed, God or human scientists? God again. If there is a conflict between what God says and what human scientists say, whom should we trust? We should trust what God says.

In describing the Bible as the inerrant, infallible Word of God, R. C. Sproul says this:

"the Holy Spirit communicated through the human authors the very words of God. Christians affirm the infallibility and inerrancy of the Bible because God is ultimately the author of the Bible. And because God is incapable of inspiring falsehood, His word is altogether true and trustworthy." (Essential Truths of the Christian Faith, R. C. Sproul, p.15-16, emphasis added).
It is one of the essential truths of the Christian faith that the original books of the Bible were infallible and inerrant. God wrote the Bible (through human authors under the guidance and inspiration of the Holy Spirit), and therefore it is true, it is trustworthy, and it says what God wanted it to say. This means that if God's explanation (Special Creation) conflicts with the world's explanation (the various scientific theories) then we should believe what God says, right?

Science and Genesis Examined Point by Point

God is omniscient, and He knew that human scientists would some day come up with the Big Bang theory and the theory of evolution (among other theories). We are about to see that God performed His acts of Creation in such a way that they specifically contradict man's theories.

Dr. Carl Sagan was one of the most well-known scientists of our times, and on the back cover of his book, Cosmos, the Associated Press said that he was "one of the most brilliant scientists of our times." Here is how Dr. Sagan described the modern evolutionary theories:


"Ten or twenty billion years ago, something happened - the Big Bang, the event that began our universe. Why it happened is the greatest mystery we know." (Cosmos (paperback edition), Carl Sagan, p.200)
"Massive stars soon exhausted their stores of nuclear fuel. Rocked by colossal explosions, they returned most of their substance back into the thin gas from which they had once condensed. Here in the dark lush clouds between the stars, new raindrops made of many elements were forming, later generations of stars being born. Nearby, smaller raindrops grew, bodies far too little to ignite the nuclear fire, droplets in the interstellar mist on their way to form the planets. Among them was a small world of stone and iron, the early Earth. Congealing and warming, the Earth released the methane, ammonia, water and hydrogen gases that had been trapped within, forming the primitive atmosphere and the first oceans." (Cosmos (paperback edition), Carl Sagan, p.282)

"For most of the four billion years since the origin of life, the dominant organisms were microscopic blue-green algae, which covered and filled the oceans. ... In rapid succession, the first fish and the first vertebrates appeared; plants, previously restricted to the oceans, began the colonization of the land; the first insect evolved, and its descendants became the pioneers in the colonization of the land by animals; winged insects arose together with the amphibians, creatures something like the lungfish, able to survive both on land and in the water; the first trees and the first reptiles appeared; the dinosaurs evolved; the mammals emerged, and then the first birds; the first flowers appeared; the dinosaurs became extinct; the earliest cetaceans, ancestors to the dolphins and whales, arose and in the same period the primates - the ancestors of the monkeys, the apes and the humans." (Cosmos (paperback edition), Carl Sagan, p.22-23)

Now let's compare the modern scientific theories (described in the quotes above) with the Creation account in Genesis, point by point, to see how completely incompatible they are:

Science: The universe has been evolving for billions of years after the Big Bang.

Genesis: God created the universe in six days (Genesis 1:1-31). Later in this article we will examine many reasons why these were literal, 24-hour days.

Science: The sun and most of the stars evolved before the earth was formed.

Genesis: The earth was created before the sun and stars (the earth on the first day - Genesis 1:2-5, the sun and stars on the fourth day - Genesis 1:14-19).

Science: The earth started off as "a small world of stone and iron." There was dry land before the first oceans were formed.

Genesis: The oceans were created before dry land (oceans on the first day - Genesis 1:2-7, dry land on the third day - Genesis 1:9-12).

Science: The first lifeforms evolved in the oceans.

Genesis: The first forms of life were plants on dry land (on the third day - Genesis 1:9-12).

Science: Fish evolved in the oceans before plants appeared on land.

Genesis: Plants and trees were created on land before fish were created (plants and trees on the third day - Genesis 1:9-13, fish on the fifth day - Genesis 1:20-23).

Science: Fish evolved millions of years before birds.

Genesis: Fish and birds were created during the same 24-hour period (the fifth day - Genesis 1:20-23).

Science: Reptiles evolved before whales (which are mammals).

Genesis: Whales were created before reptiles (whales on the fifth day - Genesis 1:20-23, reptiles on the sixth day - Genesis 1:24-31).

Science: Reptiles and land mammals evolved before birds.

Genesis: Birds were created before reptiles and land mammals (birds on the fifth day - Genesis 1:20-23, reptiles and land mammals on the sixth day - Genesis 1:24-31).

Science: Sea mammals (the ancestors of dolphins and whales) arose in the same period as the first primates (the ancestors of monkeys and humans).

Genesis: Sea mammals were created before monkeys and humans (sea mammals on the fifth day - Genesis 1:20-23, monkeys and humans on the sixth day - Genesis 1:24-31).

Science: Life evolved by gradually changing from one type of lifeform into a new kind of lifeform.

Genesis: Life was created "according to their various kinds" (Genesis 1:11, 12, 21, 24, 25). Genesis reveals that God created each kind of animal without any hint of an evolutionary process. It is significant that plants and animals were all created "according to their kinds," but humans were created "in the image of God" (Genesis 1:27). From the beginning, humans were created to be different from the animals. Humans did not evolve from any animals.


Notice that it is quite clear that the Creation account and the scientific theories completely contradict each other. There are essentially no points of agreement between the modern scientific theories (aka Kabbala) and the Biblical account of Creation. It is easy to see that they are totally incompatible with each other, and that they cannot be merged or combined into a single explanation. If you still are not convinced, try this. Go back over the points listed above and see if you can find a way to merge the two views together. It can't be done. Only one of these explanations can be true, which means that the other explanation must be false. As Christians, are we going to believe the world's explanation (the various scientific theories), or are we going to believe God's explanation (Special Creation)?

A Simple Explanation for a Simple People?

Some people believe that the Creation account in Genesis was probably just a simple explanation that was written for the unscientific people who lived long ago, and therefore we shouldn't take it too literally. The idea is that it is similar to the harmless story about the stork leaving a baby on the doorstep, which people sometimes tell children who are too young to understand about human reproduction.

But isn't this a naive way to approach Bible interpretation? After all, the story about the stork is a falsehood. It is a lie. In a similar way, if the modern scientific theories are true then the account of Creation is a falsehood, a lie. Notice that if there is any truth to the scientific theories listed in the points above (as many Christians believe there is), then we are left with two possibilities:

The Creation account was not inspired by God. It was written by a human who got the scientific facts wrong.

-- OR --

God inspired the Creation account, but He deliberately lied to us (because the Creation account in the Bible contradicts the scientific theories on virtually every point).


Those are the two possibilities we are left with if there is any truth to the scientific theories concerning the Big Bang, evolution, and so on.

Notice that if those scientific theories are true and Genesis is false then we have no way of knowing which parts of the Bible can be trusted. The entire Bible becomes useless to us, because if God got the facts wrong in the very first chapter of the Bible then for all we know He might have gotten the facts wrong elsewhere in the Bible as well!

However, 2 Timothy 3:16 tells us that all Scripture is "God-breathed" (which means "given by inspiration of God," according to Strong's Greek Dictionary). This means that the Creation account in Genesis was directly inspired by God, and it means that the Creation account says exactly what God wanted it to say. Titus 1:2 tells us that God does not lie, and Hebrews 6:18 says that it is impossible for God to lie. Therefore, the Creation account is absolutely true and absolutely to be trusted. Recall what the eminent theologian R. C. Sproul said:

"the Holy Spirit communicated through the human authors the very words of God. Christians affirm the infallibility and inerrancy of the Bible because God is ultimately the author of the Bible. And because God is incapable of inspiring falsehood, His word is altogether true and trustworthy." (Essential Truths of the Christian Faith, R. C. Sproul, p.15-16, emphasis added).
We have already seen that the Creation account and the scientific theories completely contradict each other. This means that we must choose to believe one explanation and that we must reject the other explanation, because God has not given us the option of having it both ways. The very first words of the Bible show that man's theories of evolution (both the evolution of the universe and the evolution of humans) are not as accurate as they appear to be. Our human minds might be convinced by the scientific evidence, but God warns us against trusting in our wisdom and intelligence when He says:

"For it is written: "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate." Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe." (1 Corinthians 1:19-21)

"Do not deceive yourselves. If any one of you thinks he is wise by the standards of this age, he should become a "fool" so that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God's sight. As it is written: "He catches the wise in their craftiness"; and again, "The Lord knows that the thoughts of the wise are futile."" (1 Corinthians 3:18-20)

"Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to your care. Turn away from godless chatter and the opposing ideas of what is falsely called knowledge, which some have professed and in so doing have wandered from the faith. Grace be with you." (1 Timothy 6:20-21)

Wisdom and intelligence are certainly good things to have, but we're getting ourselves into a dangerous area when we place the "wisdom" of the world (man's scientific theories in this case) on a higher pedestal than the Word of God. God specifically says in the passages above that we should become "fools" as far as the things of this world are concerned so that we can become wise in the things of God.

"With the Lord a Day Is Like a Thousand Years..."

Notice what 2 Peter 3:8 says:

"But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day." (2 Peter 3:8)

Based on this verse, well-meaning Christians sometimes assume that the word "day" can be symbolic for "a thousand years." They take this to mean that each "day" of Creation is probably symbolic for a very long time. But let's think about that for a moment. Should every occurrence of the word "day" in the Bible be substituted with the phrase "a thousand years"? Obviously not. Then what criteria are we using which tells us that it is proper to substitute the phrase "a thousand years" for the word "day" in certain parts of Genesis but not in other parts of Genesis? It is easy to see that when people come up with this "solution," they are basing it on their feelings and reasonings rather than using solid methods of Bible interpretation.

Bible teachers point out that we must be very careful not to try to fit the Bible into our own preconceived ideas. For example, if we decide that the word "day" can be symbolic for "a thousand years" (based on 2 Peter 3:8, above), and then we decide that the phrase "a thousand years" can be symbolic for "a very long time" (based on a guess), and then we decide that "a very long time" can be symbolic for "billions of years" (based on what scientists say), and then we decide to substitute "billions of years" for some (but not all!) occurrences of the word "day" in Genesis (based on our own preconceived ideas), then we are turning Bible interpretation into a mere game and making a mockery of Scripture. Consider that the ancient Greek versions of the Old and New Testaments use the same Greek word for "day" in Genesis that they use in the Gospels. Notice that if we substitute the phrase "billions of years" for the word "day" in the Gospels just like some people want to do in Genesis, then we would end up with Jesus fasting in the wilderness for 40 billion years and lying in the tomb for 3 billion years. Obviously we can't just go around making symbolic substitutions in the Bible wherever we feel like it!

It is true that the Bible sometimes uses symbolism, but these symbols have very specific meanings which are usually explained elsewhere in Scripture. It is dangerous to use "symbolism" as an excuse to rationalize away certain parts of Scripture which don't appeal to us, because this can lead us into error. It is important to have legitimate reasons and evidence for interpreting Biblical passages as being symbolic, and what we will see in this article is that there is ample evidence in the Bible that the six days of Creation were six literal 24-hour days and not six eons of time. For example, John Walvoord and Roy Zuck, in their commentary on the Old Testament (p.28), point out that everywhere the word "day" appears in the Old Testament in connection with a number (for example the "forty days" that Moses spent on Mt. Sinai (Exodus 24:18) and the "three days" that Jonah spent inside the great fish (Jonah 1:17)), it always refers to a literal 24-hour day. Since this holds true throughout the entire Old Testament, we can be confident that it holds true in Genesis as well. We would need to have solid reasons and evidence for interpreting "day" as "billions of years" in Genesis, but the evidence that we find throughout Scripture gives us plenty of reason for interpreting "day" as "day," as we will see in the next section.

Also, notice that if we say that each "day" of Creation was really an eon of time lasting billions of years, this still does not bring the Bible and the scientific theories into agreement. If we really believe this "one day equals one eon" theory, then we are saying that the earth evolved during the first eon (Genesis 1:2-5), and that the stars all evolved during the fourth eon (Genesis 1:14-19). This is completely in the reverse order from the scientific explanation, which shows how impossible this "one day equals one eon" theory really is. No matter how you look at it, either the world's explanation (the various scientific theories) must be rejected, or else God's explanation (Special Creation) must be rejected. They are completely incompatible and they cannot be combined into a single explanation.

Some Christians try to fit the scientific theories and the Bible together by saying that the "days" of Creation in Genesis were actually eons of time which overlapped each other. This seems to "solve" some of the problems we saw when we examined the scientific theories and the Creation account point by point (above). The argument is that if some of the Creation days "overlapped" each other then the Biblical descriptions would fit better with the scientific theories. But consider the first six days of the week: Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday. Notice that those are all individual days for the specific reason that Sunday comes to an end before Monday begins, and Monday comes to an end before Tuesday begins, and Tuesday comes to an end before Wednesday begins, and Wednesday comes to an end before Thursday begins, and Thursday comes to an end before Friday begins. Notice that it makes no sense to talk about Sunday "overlapping" Monday. For example, if we were in a period when Sunday "overlaps" Monday, then would we say that it is now Sunday, or would we say that it is now Monday, or would we say that it is now Sunday and Monday, or would we say that it is neither Sunday nor Monday? We can see that Sunday and Monday would no longer be separate, individual days if they "overlapped" each other. Consider how our bosses would react if we email them on the weekend and say that we won't be back to work until Thursday because our Sunday is going to overlap Monday and Tuesday and Wednesday, which means that our weekend will last until Wednesday night. No-one's boss would ever buy that argument because it is unreasonable and it makes no sense. Yet some Christians try to force the Creation account to fit into the scientific theories by saying, for example, that the 5th day of Creation partly overlapped the 3rd and 4th days, and probably overlapped the 6th day as well (see for example The dubious apologetics of Hugh Ross and Exposé of The Genesis Question). Again, such an argument makes no sense. As soon as we say that several days overlapped each other then we no longer have individual days. The reason why we have individual days which we call "Sunday," "Monday," "Tuesday," etc., is because each day comes to an end before the next day begins. In the same way, the Creation account specifically refers to six individual days of Creation, with no mention of any "overlapping." The only reason why people would try to impose this idea of "overlapping" onto the Creation account is because they have elevated science to a higher position of authority than the Bible, and therefore they feel that they must manipulate the Bible until it conforms to the "truth" (i.e. the scientific theories).




Literal 24-hour Days
In your Bible, take a close look at Genesis 1:1-31 and then consider the following points:

In Genesis 1:5, 8, 13, 19, 23, and 31, notice that when each Creation day is mentioned it always follows a specific pattern: "And there was evening, and there was morning --the first day." If we claim that each day of Creation lasted for billions of years, then how would we explain the very specific phrase, "And there was evening, and there was morning"? God does not do things haphazardly, so it was no accident that He phrased it in this way. Evenings and mornings are part of a 24-hour day, this wording makes no sense if each Creation day lasted for billions of years.

In Genesis 1:5, notice that God created "night" and "day" (the word "day" comes from the Hebrew word yom) on the first "day" (yom) of Creation. If we believe that the word "day" really means "billions of years," then what does the word "night" refer to? The words "day" and "night" refer to a normal 24-hour period, not billions of years.

In Genesis 1:14-19, notice that God created lights (the sun and the moon) to separate the day (yom) from the night and to mark the seasons and days (yom) and years. Verse 16 says that these two great lights were created to govern the day (yom) and the night, and verse 18 repeats the fact that these two great lights were created to govern the day (yom) and the night. In verse 19 we are told that these two great lights were created on the fourth day (yom) of Creation.

The Hebrew word yom ("day") occurs five times in this passage, and it is clear that the first four occurrences are referring to normal days rather than billions of years. Notice that there is nothing in this passage to indicate that the last occurrence of yom ("the fourth day") should be treated any differently than the other four occurrences of yom.

Consider that if we interpret the first four occurrences of the Hebrew word yom as meaning "day," but we interpret the last occurrence of the Hebrew word yom as meaning "billions of years" (in the same passage), then we are applying inconsistent rules of Bible interpretation. This inconsistency often happens when we are trying to force the Bible to fit into our preconceived views. However, the Scriptural evidence consistently demonstrates that each day of Creation was a normal 24-hour day.


Notice that Adam and Eve were created on the sixth day, and notice that they were still alive on the seventh day and beyond. Did Adam and Eve live for several billion years?

In Genesis 2:2-3, notice what happened on the seventh day: God rested from His work, and then He blessed the seventh day and made it holy. Did He bless the "seventh eon"? Did He make the "seventh billion years" holy? No, He blessed the seventh day. This is significant because God commanded the Israelites to set aside the seventh day, the Sabbath day, as a holy day of rest in honor of the fact that God Himself rested on the seventh day. In fact, observing the holy seventh day was so important to God that it became one of the Ten Commandments, and anyone who desecrated it had to be put to death! Notice in the following passages that God says He made the heavens and the earth in six days and rested on the seventh:

"And God spoke all these words: ... [the Fourth Commandment] "Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your manservant or maidservant, nor your animals, nor the alien within your gates. For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy."" (Exodus 20:1,8-11)

"Then the LORD said to Moses, "Say to the Israelites, 'You must observe my Sabbaths. This will be a sign between me and you for the generations to come, so you may know that I am the LORD, who makes you holy. Observe the Sabbath, because it is holy to you. Anyone who desecrates it must be put to death; whoever does any work on that day must be cut off from his people. For six days, work is to be done, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD. Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day must be put to death. The Israelites are to observe the Sabbath, celebrating it for the generations to come as a lasting covenant. It will be a sign between me and the Israelites forever, for in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, and on the seventh day he abstained from work and rested.'"" (Exodus 31:12-17)

Can we honestly say with absolute certainty that the six days of Creation in these passages are meant to be anything other than normal 24-hour days? Let's look at these two passages again, focusing specifically on what God said about the "six days":

"And God spoke all these words: "... Six days you shall labor and do all your work... For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth"" (Exodus 20:1,8-11)

"Then the LORD said to Moses, "...For six days, work is to be done... for in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth"" (Exodus 31:12-17)

Notice that God made a direct comparison between His six days of Creation and the Israelites' six days of work. But if the scientific theories are true then these verses would mean, "For six days, work is to be done...for in 15 billion years the LORD made the heavens and the earth." This makes no sense as a direct comparison. In the above passages, the reason why the Israelites' six days of work and God's six days of Creation can be directly compared is because they are the same length of time.

The above points all demonstrate that each day of Creation was literally a 24-hour day, not an eon of time lasting billions of years.

Now, if Creation really took six normal, 24-hour days, then the obvious question to ask is why God took six days to do something which He could have done in an instant. It is clear from the passages above that in taking six days to do His work and then resting on the seventh day, God was establishing a pattern for the Israelites to follow. In the two passages above we can see that to God, the issue of six days of Creation was so important that:


The observance of the seventh day of rest in honor of the six days of Creation is one of the Ten Commandments.

Anyone who violated the seventh day of rest had to be put to death.

The seventh day of rest was a lasting covenant for the generations to come as a sign that it was God who made them holy.
This is obviously something that God considered to be extremely important! None of this makes any sense if the six days of Creation really took 10 to 15 billion years. God keeps hammering the point home in the Bible that it is important for us to understand that Creation took six literal days and that He rested from His work on the seventh day. If you need more proof, take a look at the following passages and see how the six days of Creation are a pattern that God returns to again and again:


"Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your manservant or maidservant, nor your animals, nor the alien within your gates. For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy." (Exodus 20:8-11)

"When Moses went up on the mountain, the cloud covered it, and the glory of the LORD settled on Mount Sinai. For six days the cloud covered the mountain, and on the seventh day the LORD called to Moses from within the cloud." (Exodus 24:15-16)

"Each morning everyone gathered as much [manna] as he needed, and when the sun grew hot, it melted away. On the sixth day, they gathered twice as much--two omers for each person--and the leaders of the community came and reported this to Moses. He said to them, "This is what the LORD commanded: 'Tomorrow is to be a day of rest, a holy Sabbath to the LORD. So bake what you want to bake and boil what you want to boil. Save whatever is left and keep it until morning.'" So they saved it until morning, as Moses commanded, and it did not stink or get maggots in it. "Eat it today," Moses said, "because today is a Sabbath to the LORD. You will not find any of it on the ground today. Six days you are to gather it, but on the seventh day, the Sabbath, there will not be any." Nevertheless, some of the people went out on the seventh day to gather it, but they found none. Then the LORD said to Moses, "How long will you refuse to keep my commands and my instructions? Bear in mind that the LORD has given you the Sabbath; that is why on the sixth day he gives you bread for two days. Everyone is to stay where he is on the seventh day; no one is to go out." So the people rested on the seventh day." (Exodus 16:21-30)

"[At Passover time] For six days eat unleavened bread and on the seventh day hold an assembly to the LORD your God and do no work." (Deuteronomy 16:8)

"Now Jericho was tightly shut up because of the Israelites. No one went out and no one came in. Then the LORD said to Joshua, "See, I have delivered Jericho into your hands, along with its king and its fighting men. March around the city once with all the armed men. Do this for six days. Have seven priests carry trumpets of rams' horns in front of the ark. On the seventh day, march around the city seven times, with the priests blowing the trumpets." (Joshua 6:1-4)

"When the LORD brings you into the land of the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Hivites and Jebusites--the land he swore to your forefathers to give you, a land flowing with milk and honey--you are to observe this ceremony in this month: For seven days eat bread made without yeast and on the seventh day hold a festival to the LORD. Eat unleavened bread during those seven days; nothing with yeast in it is to be seen among you, nor shall any yeast be seen anywhere within your borders." (Exodus 13:5-7)

"Do not leave the entrance to the Tent of Meeting for seven days, until the days of your ordination are completed, for your ordination will last seven days." (Leviticus 8:33)

We can see that by taking six days to create the heavens and the earth and then resting on the seventh day, God was establishing a pattern that He felt was extremely important. Bear in mind that the Bible is filled with patterns such as these and that God does not do things without a reason. The Bible is too specific about the six literal days of Creation for us to be able to rationalize them away as being six eons, each lasting billions of years. The question is, are we going to exalt science above God, or are we going to exalt God above science?

What About All of the Scientific Evidence?
If you still are not ready to put your complete faith and trust in God when it comes to science vs. Creation, it is probably because you are thinking some of these types of thoughts:


"But what about the scientific evidence for the Big Bang (or the string theory, etc.) and the age of the universe? What about the fossil record and all of the scientific data that seems to be perfectly logical and seems to refute the Biblical account of Creation? What about the proven examples of evolution that are happening today? I can't just disregard all of the scientific facts that I have always been taught!"

When it comes to science, keep in mind that there are many scientists who believe in the Big Bang theory and the theory of evolution, but there are many other scientists who believe that the scientific evidence proves the Creation account in the Bible. Therefore, it all boils down to which set of scientists you choose to believe! It still comes down to a question of faith. For example, Dr. Kent Hovind has a website in which he says, "I have a standing offer of $250,000 to anyone who can give any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution. My $250,000 offer demonstrates that the hypothesis of evolution is nothing more than a religious belief" (see http://www.drdino.com/Ministry/250k/index.jsp). In over a decade, no-one has ever claimed the money. So the all-important question is whether our faith rests on the word of the non-Christian scientists, or whether our faith rests totally on God.

Now, don't get me wrong, I realize that some "evolutionary" and "Big Bang" scientists are Christians. Still, that doesn't change the fact that the Big Bang (or other scientific "origins" theories) and evolution are the only answers which the non-Christian scientists have, and when there is a conflict between what they say and what God says, I'll stand with God every time. Actually, I have studied the evidence for the Big Bang, the age of the universe, the theory of evolution, etc., and some of it sounds fairly convincing to my logical mind. I enjoy science, and I recognize that there can be changing varieties within the different kinds of plants, animals, and other organisms (which is why we have "superbugs" that are resistant to antibiotics, for example). However, this ongoing process that we see happening in the world around us is called "microevolution" by scientists, and it is defined as "the gradual accumulation of mutations leading to new varieties within a species" (Webster's American Family Dictionary). It is not macroevolution, which is defined as a "major evolutionary change of species" (Webster's American Family Dictionary). The examples of microevolution that we can demonstrate in the world around us do not prove the theory of evolution, as any scientist will tell you. I would be perfectly happy to believe that we humans were formed through evolution if that view agreed with the overwhelming testimony of Scripture. But it doesn't. The internal testimony throughout the entire Bible is completely consistent and is completely in opposition to man's scientific theories about the Big Bang and evolution and so on. Therefore, I choose to believe God's Word no matter how convincing some of the scientific evidence might be. God is always right! Recall what the apostle Paul said:

"We live by faith, not by sight." (2 Corinthians 5:7)

"Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see. This is what the ancients were commended for. By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God's command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible." (Hebrews 11:1-3)

It doesn't matter what we see in the physical evidence for the Big Bang, the theory of evolution, etc., our faith is meant to be based on what God says. God says that everything was made by His hand, and He says that the person He esteems is someone who is humble and who trembles at His Word:

""Has not my hand made all these things, and so they came into being?" declares the LORD. "This is the one I esteem: he who is humble and contrite in spirit, and trembles at my word."" (Isaiah 66:2)

If we choose to believe the world's explanation for our existence (the Big Bang, evolution, etc.) and we dismiss God's explanation (Special Creation), then we can't honestly say that we are humbly trembling at the truth of His Word, can we? Instead, we would be exalting the world's view simply because it is so appealing to our flesh. But watch! The Bible specifically says that the mind of the flesh is hostile to God and is contrary to the Spirit and is in conflict with the Holy Spirit:

"the sinful mind [literally, "the mind of the flesh"] is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so. Those controlled by the sinful nature [literally, "those being in the flesh"] cannot please God." (Romans 8:7-8)

"For the sinful nature [literally, "the flesh"] desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature [literally, "the flesh"]. They are in conflict with each other, so that you do not do what you want." (Galatians 5:17)

Many Christians have the mistaken impression that the devil is our worst enemy. But that is a false notion. The Bible tells us over and over that our worst enemy is our sinful flesh nature, meaning our minds, our wills, and our emotions (for more on this, I invite you to see my article called How to Hear the Voice of God). This means that we must be very careful about putting our faith in things which make sense to our minds instead of putting our faith in God's Word, because the mind of the flesh is continually in conflict with the mind of God!

Since I am not a scientist, I won't try to discuss any of the scientific evidence for the Big Bang, the theory of evolution, and so on. I recognize that I'm not qualified to give any opinions on the scientific evidence. Instead, let me just ask this simple question, if I may: Isn't it a bit presumptuous to expect God to do things in ways that make sense to us? God humbles us when He says:

"Can you fathom the mysteries of God? Can you probe the limits of the Almighty? They are higher than the heavens--what can you do? They are deeper than the depths of the grave --what can you know?" (Job 11:7-8)

"Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation? Tell me, if you understand. Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know! Who stretched a measuring line across it? On what were its footings set, or who laid its cornerstone--while the morning stars sang together and all the angels shouted for joy?" (Job 38:4-7)

""For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways," declares the LORD. "As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts"" (Isaiah 55:8-9)

There are many examples in the Bible which demonstrate that God operates in a way that is quite the opposite from the way that makes logical sense to us, such as:

"Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth." (Matthew 5:5)

"whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will find it." (Matthew 16:25)

"So the last will be first, and the first will be last." (Matthew 20:16)

"whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant" (Matthew 20:26)

"whoever wants to be first must be your slave" (Matthew 20:27)

"whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted." (Matthew 23:12)

"Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you" (Luke 6:27)

"bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you." (Luke 6:28)

"If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic." (Luke 6:29)

"if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back." (Luke 6:30)

"love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back." (Luke 6:35)

"It is more blessed to give than to receive." (Acts 20:35)

God does things for purposes which we cannot fathom and in ways that are opposite to the ways that our "logical" minds would do them. So why should we be surprised that He would choose to create life and the universe in a way that makes little sense to us? He knows the future, so why should we be surprised that He would choose to create life and the universe in a way that would one day directly contradict the non-Christian world's scientific theories? Remember, His ways are higher than our ways and His thoughts are higher than our thoughts.

As far as the scientific evidence for the Big Bang, the theory of evolution, etc., which we were always taught, there are many scientists who disagree with these theories. Visit your local Christian bookstore and you'll find many books which discuss the problems with these theories from a scientific perspective. Let the Holy Spirit be your guide.

Now, for the sake of discussion let's take Genesis literally for a moment and then consider the implications. Let's assume that Creation took six normal 24-hour days and that Adam was created on the sixth day, just as the Bible says. Imagine that Adam had access to all of our modern scientific instruments at the moment he was created, and that he knew how to use them. How old would Adam say that the universe was? If Adam had all of the knowledge and intelligence of Carl Sagan, and if Adam had all of our modern computers and scientific instruments, then Adam would have erroneously concluded that the universe was billions of years old, even though it had just been created a few days earlier! Think about it for a moment. According to science, it would have taken billions of years for all of the stars out there to have been formed by stellar evolution. Therefore, if God created the entire universe in six normal days then the universe would have the appearance of being billions of years old, even though it had just been created. Do you see that? For example, if God snaps His fingers and another star is instantly created, burning brightly, then that star will look like it had been through billions of years of stellar formation. So when scientists say that the universe appears to be billions of years old, we don't have to argue with them, we can agree with them because this is consistent with the literal interpretation of Genesis. It's almost as if God in His omniscience chose a moment in time, a snapshot so to speak, and then pieced that snapshot of the universe together in six days like we would piece together a jigsaw puzzle. Does this mean that God was being deceptive by making it look as if there had been a Big Bang, and as if the universe had evolved for billions of years, and as if we were formed by evolution (according to the fossil record and other scientific evidence)? Not at all. Why? Because on the very first page of His Book He announced loudly and clearly exactly what He did. No attempt at deception there!

Natural Selection
Here is another area in which the Bible contradicts the theory of evolution.

If the theory of evolution is true then natural selection in the animal kingdom played a part in the evolutionary process. In other words, the weaker members of a species were killed off by hungry predators, while the stronger members survived and passed their genes on to their offspring. This is often called "survival of the fittest." But once again we can see that God performed His acts of Creation in ways that specifically contradict the theory of evolution, because the Bible says that before the Flood there were no meat-eating animals! (For more on the Flood, I invite you to see my article called Do You Interpret Creation Literally?). There were no predators on earth before the Flood, and therefore there could not have been this type of natural selection or "survival of the fittest" in the animal kingdom before the Flood. Notice that this explains why the meat-eating predators did not kill off other species of animals for food during the long months in the ark: There weren't any meat-eating predators on the ark! As the following passages show, all animals and humans were plant-eaters until after the Flood:


"[before the Flood] So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. ... Then God said, "I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air and all the creatures that move on the ground-- everything that has the breath of life in it--I give every green plant for food." And it was so." (Genesis 1:27-30)

"[after the Flood] Then God blessed Noah and his sons, saying to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the earth. The fear and dread of you will fall upon all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air, upon every creature that moves along the ground, and upon all the fish of the sea; they are given into your hands. Everything that lives and moves will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything."" (Genesis 9:1-3)

So God says that before the Flood, all humans and animals on earth were vegetarian, which completely contradicts the theory of evolution.

For further proof of this, notice in the following prophetic passages that God tells us that wild animals will one day be restored to that harmless, vegetarian, pre-Fall state:

"[Jesus] must remain in heaven until the time comes for God to restore everything, as he promised long ago through his holy prophets." (Acts 3:21)

"The wolf will live with the lamb, the leopard will lie down with the goat, the calf and the lion and the yearling together; and a little child will lead them. The cow will feed with the bear, their young will lie down together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox. The infant will play near the hole of the cobra, and the young child put his hand into the viper's nest. They will neither harm nor destroy on all my holy mountain, for the earth will be full of the knowledge of the LORD as the waters cover the sea." (Isaiah 11:6-9)

""The wolf and the lamb will feed together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox, but dust will be the serpent's food. They will neither harm nor destroy on all my holy mountain," says the LORD." (Isaiah 65:25)

Since all humans and animals were initially vegetarians, there could not have been this type of natural selection in the animal kingdom before the Flood (hungry predators killing off the weaker members of other species for food). This type of natural selection is a vital part of the theory of evolution, so once again we can see that the Bible and the theory of evolution are completely incompatible.

John_1335
11-30-2005, 01:04 PM
Continued..

The Fall
According to the Bible, when Adam and Eve were created they enjoyed a sinless state of perfection which has never been seen on earth since then. The ground did not produce any such things as thorns or thistles (these came after the Fall - Genesis 3:17-19), wild animals did not kill other animals for food (as we saw in the previous section), and death did not exist for humans (sin and death were a direct result of the Fall - see Romans 5:12 below). So the Bible describes an ideal state which existed in the plant realm, the animal realm, and the human realm. However, God had given Adam and Eve free will, and they disobeyed His direct command. As a result of Adam's disobedience (which we call "the Fall"), sin and death and decay entered the world:

"Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned" (Romans 5:12)

"For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God." (Romans 8:20-21)

Notice that God says that death and decay were a direct result of the Fall! This is incompatible with the theory of evolution.

According to the modern evolutionary theory, the first human evolved in a world filled with a constant tooth-and-claw, life-and-death, struggle for daily survival. The first human was not sinless or perfect, living in an ideal environment, it was simply a new animal struggling for its own daily survival in a harsh and dangerous world.

Now watch! The theory of evolution does not allow for an ideal state of perfection in the plant and animal realms, nor does it allow for a state of perfection and sinlessness in the human realm. Therefore, according to the theory of evolution there could not have been a Fall from perfection into a state of sin and death and decay. So the theory of evolution completely invalidates the purpose for Jesus' atoning death on the cross. In other words, if there was no Fall from perfection into sin and death and decay (according to the theory of evolution), then Jesus did not have to be born on earth and die on the cross. Redemption, forgiveness of sins, and so on are totally invalidated by the theory of evolution, and this makes the modern evolutionary theory completely incompatible with Christian beliefs.

Now, someone might argue that when the first human animal evolved, God gave it a soul and therefore it started off in a state of sinlessness. This would seem to allow for a Fall into sin. However, this argument betrays a serious lack of understanding of the magnitude of the Fall, because all of Creation was perfect until the Fall, not just humans:

"The creation waits in eager expectation for the sons of God to be revealed. For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God. We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time." (Romans 8:19-22)
Here is what The Bible Knowledge Commentary (Walvoord and Zuck, Dallas Theological Seminary, p.472) has to say about the above passage:

"When God's program of salvation for people is completed and the children of God together experience their glorious freedom from sin, Satan, and physical decay, then the Creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay. God had cursed the physical Creation as a part of His judgment on people for sin because of their position and authority over the Creation as God's representatives (Gen. 1:26-30; 2:8, 15). Similarly, since God's program of salvation for people is one of a new Creation (2 Cor. 5:17; Gal. 6:15), the physical world also will be re-created (Rev. 21:5)."
So God says that all of Creation (including plants and animals) was perfect until it was judged and cursed because of the Fall. For this reason, we can't just simply say that the first human to evolve was given a perfect soul. This view does not make the theory of evolution compatible with Scripture.

As we have seen, man's theory of evolution totally invalidates the very reason for Christ's atoning sacrifice for our sins, and this makes the theory of evolution completely incompatible with Christian beliefs.

Throughout Scripture, God Is Described as the Creator and Sustainer of All Things

From Genesis to Revelation, the Bible describes God as the Creator, and there is not even a hint of the theory of evolution described anywhere in the Bible. Instead, it is God's acts of Special Creation which are described all throughout the Old and the New Testaments:

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." (Genesis 1:1)

"It was you who opened up springs and streams; you dried up the ever flowing rivers. The day is yours, and yours also the night; you established the sun and moon. It was you who set all the boundaries of the earth; you made both summer and winter." (Psalms 74:15-17)

"But God made the earth by his power; he founded the world by his wisdom and stretched out the heavens by his understanding." (Jeremiah 10:12)

"This is the word of the LORD concerning Israel. The LORD, who stretches out the heavens, who lays the foundation of the earth, and who forms the spirit of man within him" (Zechariah 12:1)

"Through him [Jesus] all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made." (John 1:3)

"He [Jesus] was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him." (John 1:10)

"The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands." (Acts 17:24)

"yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live." (1 Corinthians 8:6)

"In the beginning, O Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands." (Hebrews 1:10)

"You are worthy, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power, for you created all things, and by your will they were created and have their being." (Revelation 4:11)

Not only did God create everything in the universe (rather than allowing the universe to evolve on its own), He is continuously sustaining all things and keeping everything together and working properly according to the laws of nature which He devised:

"He waters the mountains from his upper chambers; the earth is satisfied by the fruit of his work. He makes grass grow for the cattle, and plants for man to cultivate-- bringing forth food from the earth" (Psalms 104:13-14)
"When he thunders, the waters in the heavens roar; he makes clouds rise from the ends of the earth. He sends lightning with the rain and brings out the wind from his storehouses." (Jeremiah 10:13)

"He who forms the mountains, creates the wind, and reveals his thoughts to man, he who turns dawn to darkness, and treads the high places of the earth-- the LORD God Almighty is his name." (Amos 4:13)

And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else. From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live." (Acts 17:25-26)

"He [Jesus] is before all things, and in him all things hold together." (Colossians 1:17)

"The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word." (Hebrews 1:3)

We can see that both the Old and New Testaments clearly state that not only did God create the heavens and the earth as well as all life on earth, He is continuously sustaining everything by His powerful Word. Nowhere does the Bible suggest that God has ever left the universe to evolve on its own or that humans evolved from other animals. To dispel any last doubts, God confirms this in His own words in the following passages (of course, the entire Bible is God's written Word, but sometimes it carries more weight with people when He speaks in the first person):

"[God is speaking] This is what the LORD says-- the Holy One of Israel, and its Maker: Concerning things to come, do you question me about my children, or give me orders about the work of my hands? It is I who made the earth and created mankind upon it. My own hands stretched out the heavens; I marshaled their starry hosts." (Isaiah 45:11-12)

"[God is speaking] This is what the LORD says: "Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool. ... Has not my hand made all these things, and so they came into being?" declares the LORD." (Isaiah 66:1-2)

"[Jesus is speaking about God] He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous." (Matthew 5:45)

God specifically says that He created all things and that He is continuously sustaining all things by His powerful Word. There is never any indication in the Bible that God has ever allowed the universe to evolve on its own. Instead, it is always God's acts of Special Creation which are described throughout the Old and New Testaments.

Adam and Eve
Not only is the Bible very specific about the six literal days of Creation, it is also very specific about the creation of the first humans, Adam and Eve. God says that He formed Adam from the dust of the ground and breathed life into him, and then Adam became a living being (the imagery here is of a potter creating something from clay, as we will see in a moment):

"the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being. Now the LORD God had planted a garden in the east, in Eden; and there he put the man he had formed." (Genesis 2:7-8)

God did not "form" Adam through the process of evolution, He says that He formed Adam directly from the dust of the ground as a potter forms a vessel from clay. Notice that Adam was formed as a full-grown man (God speaks to him, and we see Adam naming the animals). However, Adam initially had no life in him until God breathed life into his nostrils. There is no way to misinterpret this as evolution, so either this is a lie (in the Bible!), or else man's theory of evolution is the lie. The theory of evolution and the account of Creation cannot both be true, and neither can they be combined into a single explanation as many Christians want to do.

To create Eve, God made Adam fall into a deep sleep and then He took a piece of Adam's body:

"So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man's ribs and closed up the place with flesh. Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. The man said, "This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called 'woman,' for she was taken out of man." (Genesis 2:20-23)

Again, there is no way to misinterpret this as evolution, so either this is a lie (in the Bible!), or else man's theory of evolution is the lie. They cannot both be true.

In the New Testament, the apostle Paul confirmed the Biblical account of Adam and Eve under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit:

"For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man." (1 Corinthians 11:8-9)

"For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God." (1 Corinthians 11:12)

"So it is written: "The first man Adam became a living being"" (1 Corinthians 15:45)

These descriptions of Adam being formed from the dust of the ground as a full-grown man and Eve being made from a part of Adam's body as a full-grown woman are too specific to be misinterpreted as evolution.

The fact that God created Adam from the dust of the ground and formed him as a potter forms things from clay is confirmed in the Old Testament by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit:

"By the sweat of your brow you [Adam] will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return." (Genesis 3:19)

"This is the written account of Adam's line. When God created man, he made him in the likeness of God. He created them male and female and blessed them. And when they were created, he called them "man."" (Genesis 5:1-2)

"Woe to those who go to great depths to hide their plans from the LORD, who do their work in darkness and think, "Who sees us? Who will know?" You turn things upside down, as if the potter were thought to be like the clay! Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, "He did not make me"? Can the pot say of the potter, "He knows nothing"?" (Isaiah 29:15-16)

"Woe to him who quarrels with his Maker, to him who is but a potsherd among the potsherds on the ground. Does the clay say to the potter, 'What are you making?' Does your work say, 'He has no hands'?" (Isaiah 45:9)

"This is what the LORD says-- the Holy One of Israel, and its Maker: Concerning things to come, do you question me about my children, or give me orders about the work of my hands? It is I who made the earth and created mankind upon it." (Isaiah 45:11-12)

"Yet, O LORD, you are our Father. We are the clay, you are the potter; we are all the work of your hand." (Isaiah 64:8)

The New Testament also confirms (through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit) the Scriptural authenticity of Creation by describing Adam as the son of God (not as the son of some type of animal) and as a pattern of Jesus (who obviously did not evolve from any type of animal):

"the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God." (Luke 3:38)

"Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come." (Romans 5:14)

"But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? "Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'Why did you make me like this?'" Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?" (Romans 9:20)

"So it is written: [this phrase confirms the Scriptural authority of what the apostle Paul is about to say] "The first man Adam became a living being"; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit. The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual. The first man was of the dust of the earth, the second man from heaven." (1 Corinthians 15:45-47)

"For Adam was formed first, then Eve." (1 Timothy 2:13)

God tells us over and over throughout the Old and New Testaments that we are created beings, not evolved beings. God has not given us any hint anywhere in His written Word of anything resembling man's theory of evolution. There is no way to reconcile the theory of evolution with the Biblical account of Adam and Eve. Only one view can be right, which means that the other view is a lie. Can you see that we must choose between them? We must either take man's word or God's Word, we cannot have it both ways.

By the way, do you know where Eve got her name? Adam named her "Eve" because she was going to become the mother of all the living:

"Adam named his wife Eve, because she would become the mother of all the living." (Genesis 3:20)

"From one man he [God] made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live." (Acts 17:26)

Therefore all humans come from Adam and Eve. Various groups of humans did not somehow evolve in different places and at different times, and God did not create other groups of humans anywhere else on earth.

In fact, Jesus Himself quoted from two different parts of the Creation account (Genesis 1:27 and 2:24) because He knew that it is the literal truth:

"They said, "Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce and send her away." "It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law," Jesus replied. "But at the beginning of creation God 'made them male and female' [Genesis 1:27]. 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh' [Genesis 2:24]. So they are no longer two, but one."" (Mark 10:4-8)

Notice that Jesus said that Adam and Eve were made by God, and notice that Jesus quoted from the Creation account, giving it direct authority from God. In Jesus' own words we have a complete denial of man's theory of evolution, and certainly the testimony of Jesus should be enough proof for us!

Now let's consider Eve for a moment. Recall that Adam was walking and talking and naming the animals, and then God said that Adam needed a wife. So Adam was at a marriageable age, and God created Eve to be his wife (which means that Eve was at a marriageable age as well). Logically and scientifically, if Eve was a teenager or older when she met Adam then there must have been a time when she was a little girl, and a time when she was an infant, and a moment of conception. However, those logical and scientific assumptions would be wrong because God did something special with Eve (and also with Adam). Notice that at the moment when Eve was created, all of her bodily systems were functioning as if she had been alive for many years. For example, she was created with blood flowing in her arteries and veins as if she had been alive moments earlier, and so on. Therefore, Eve's grown-up body showed evidence of events which never actually happened (such as a moment of conception and a time of infancy). By its very nature, Special Creation defies science and logic, which means that we will never be able to scientifically or logically verify or prove the origins of something which has been Specially Created.

Consider all of the people who are alive on earth today. In every single case, every person had a moment of conception (when an egg and a sperm came together), without exception. It can be scientifically proven over and over, without fail, that if a person is alive on earth then he or she had a moment of conception. And yet this does not hold true for Adam and Eve because God did something special when He created them. So if God did something special when He created the universe then we cannot trust science to reach the proper conclusion about the conception of the universe (such as the Big Bang). Therefore, the question is whether or not God did something Special to create the universe? The answer is "yes," because God specifically tells us in Genesis that the universe was Specially Created. Now, if elsewhere in the Bible we see descriptions of the Big Bang and the evolution of the galaxies and so on, over eons of time, then we would have Scriptural reason for interpreting Genesis in more of a symbolic way. But throughout the entire Bible, all of the evidence is completely consistent with Special Creation, as we have seen in this article.

What it boils down to is that if we could go back and stand in front of Eve then we would be looking at a conception which never actually happened, no matter how much scientific evidence there is to show that Eve is alive right in front of us. In the same way, when we stand in front of the universe and peer as far back in time as we can, we're looking at a conception (such as the Big Bang) which never actually happened, no matter how much scientific evidence there is. Adam was Specially Created by God in a moment of time, and Eve was Specially Created by God in a moment of time, and the universe was Specially Created by God in six normal 24-hour days.

Conclusion
The Bible warns us over and over that we must be careful not to be taken captive by hollow and deceptive philosophies or godless myths, and it tells us to put our faith in God's power and not in men's "wisdom":

"so that your faith might not rest on men's wisdom, but on God's power." (1 Corinthians 2:4-5)

"Have nothing to do with godless myths and old wives' tales" (1 Timothy 4:7)

"For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths." (2 Timothy 4:3-4)

"See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ." (Colossians 2:8)

It is difficult to give up our cherished beliefs, especially when they always appeared to be backed up by sound scientific evidence, but as Christians we must make a choice. We cannot have it both ways. In the case of scientific theories such as the Big Bang, evolution, etc., either we are trusting in God and trusting what He wrote in the Bible, or else we are trusting in science and in the basic principles of this world (see Colossians 2:8, above). The question is, does your faith rest on men's wisdom or on God's power? (see 1 Corinthians 2:5, above).

The Bible tells us that as Christians we must live by faith, not by what we can see or touch:

"We live by faith, not by sight." (2 Corinthians 5:7)

"Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see. This is what the ancients were commended for. By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God's command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible." (Hebrews 11:1-3)

From Genesis to Revelation, God is described as the Creator, and throughout the Bible there are numerous references to His acts of Special Creation. In this article we have seen overwhelming Scriptural evidence that the entire Bible is completely consistent and is completely in opposition to the world's scientific theories of evolution. Nowhere is there even the slightest hint of man's theories of evolution in the Bible, yet many Christians prefer to ignore everything God has written about Creation.

Instead, they choose to put their faith in human scientists rather than placing their faith in God. But it is impossible to please God if we don't place our faith in Him (Hebrews 11:6).

If we call ourselves by the Name of Christ ("Christians"), then the Bible, not science, should be our final authority, right? Let's don't just say we trust God, let's trust God!

rushdoony
12-04-2005, 11:32 AM
December 2005 Bulletin


So, you didn’t know that the whole 15 billion years of Big Bang Evolutionism is a factless "creation scenario" from a "holy book" of the Pharisee Religion?? You are not alone! But now, this long-hidden world-class deception is out of the closet and you can know what has happened, what the options are, and much more: (As your time permits, these will help: (HERE - HERE - HERE - HERE - HERE - HERE - HERE - HERE).


The big question is: How does one react personally when the magnitude of this truth sinks in?? Specifically, we must ask ourselves: What am I going to do when I learn that all the talk about keeping "science" separate from "religion" in schools is a lying trick that has kept the world from knowing that Evolutionism is the "creation scenario" of a Religion...just like Creationism is the "creation scenario" of another Religion?? Both teach the Origins of all that exists! So, where ever you live in the world, consider this: In spite of some very real problems in the USA, its Constitution still offers a sure way to expose the evolution deception top to bottom. (Again, as time permits, read these three links and you will understand what that way is: (HERE - HERE - HERE). If you don’t live in the USA, your own laws will certainly prohibit the spending of taxpayer’s money to support any specific religion. Thus, the same arguments apply.


So, when you realize you’ve been deceived big time by the real source behind the evolution lie, you might as well just laugh it off and start focusing on the solution! Though surveys in other countries give quite different results, polls in the USA still show that 40% of the population believes there has been no evolution at all! This is a remarkable statistic since--knowingly or unknowingly--generations of increasingly sophisticated indoctrination in the schools and the media has produced a world wide acceptance of the Pharisee Religions’ Evolutionary "creation model" as textbook science. Moreover, in the same polls, another 30% want to at least challenge the Evolution Monopoly in the schools by including an Intelligent Design alternative (HERE). So, if you don’t like being lied to, ignore the expected ridicule and focus on challenging the Kabbala-based Pharisee Religion’s masquerade in your schools and churches as "science". Use your computers: Spread the fixedearth.com web site around! Middle School, High School, College Students: Do you want to know the basis of the "knowledge" you are getting in virtually all of your subjects? Read this (HERE) and you will know. Then talk it up with your friends, your parents...your church (HERE - HERE), if you go. Make it a class project! Think of something....

***

China & Evolution: A Relevant Historical Sidebar. Darwin’s Origin of Species was the reading material used in Mao’s "each one teach one" attack on China’s 85% illiteracy in the early 1950’s. Similarly, Lenin and Stalin were "devout" evolutionists. All card-carrying Communist are atheists who must base their philosophy of life on evolutionism as opposed to creationism. Imagine the impact on China alone of exposing evolutionism as the long-hidden, contra-scientific "creation scenario" of a handful of rabbis of the Pharisee Religion! Though Fascist evolutionists may be atheists, it is not an ideological requirement as it is in Communism. Read this link: "Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Mao et al: The Role Of Evolution In Their Lives" (HERE). Also, this link on Atheism will be ring a bell for many: (HERE).
http://www.fixedearth.com/

John_1335
12-05-2005, 05:27 PM
Greetings!

Grace unto you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

I just want to share the love of my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ with you.

If you are seeking after the Truth, if you are hungry for a relationship with God, all it takes is faith from the heart and a confession with your mouth.

Romans 10:8-13

--

If you're into conspiracy theories, or if you're like me and want to know the Truth compared to the lies you've been told, and you're having difficulty believing God's Word, or believing that the earth is truly standing still, perhaps you would be interested in checking out the following articles to open you up to the reality that mankind has lied to you:

http://www.aulis.com/jackstudies_index1.html

"Science" is no more "science" but has become deception. What we're taught in public schools concerning the origin of life, the universe, world history, evolution, the big bang, men on the moon, etc. needs to be seriously looked into. There are evil forces in the world that DO NOT want YOU to KNOW THE TRUTH. The Truth shall set you free. Jesus is the Truth. Read God's Word..

Good starting places are:

Gospel of John
Romans
Ephesians
1 John

God bless you. If you have questions or need prayer, just ask. :-D

LaDominio
12-05-2005, 06:41 PM
John_1335 wrote:
Greetings!

Grace unto you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

I just want to share the love of my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ with you.

If you are seeking after the Truth, if you are hungry for a relationship with God, all it takes is faith from the heart and a confession with your mouth.

Romans 10:8-13

--

If you're into conspiracy theories, or if you're like me and want to know the Truth compared to the lies you've been told, and you're having difficulty believing God's Word, or believing that the earth is truly standing still, perhaps you would be interested in checking out the following articles to open you up to the reality that mankind has lied to you:

http://www.aulis.com/jackstudies_index1.html

"Science" is no more "science" but has become deception. What we're taught in public schools concerning the origin of life, the universe, world history, evolution, the big bang, men on the moon, etc. needs to be seriously looked into. There are evil forces in the world that DO NOT want YOU to KNOW THE TRUTH. The Truth shall set you free. Jesus is the Truth. Read God's Word..

Good starting places are:

Gospel of John
Romans
Ephesians
1 John

God bless you. If you have questions or need prayer, just ask. :-D

Man... Everybodys just saying things that we already know. :-?

John_1335
12-05-2005, 10:48 PM
I'm sorry, I am fairly new here, and I'm not sure what you all know or don't know.

I just want to cover the most important things first. :)

LaDominio
12-06-2005, 03:54 AM
John_1335 wrote:
I'm sorry, I am fairly new here, and I'm not sure what you all know or don't know.

I just want to cover the most important things first. :)

Its cool ;-)

Welcome.

Saturnino
12-06-2005, 03:54 AM
John,

Stick around...many of the members here are Christians or at least serious seekers of truth.

In the forum usually we should not start openly religious threads, since it is a conspiracy forum. Some Muslims did that for a long time and it was a pain in the neck...they almost ruined the forum.

However, you will have plenty of opportunities to explain the Christian faith, which is bashed every 5 minutes here and the discussion of religion inside the conspiracy perspective is encouraged.

I guess you would like this site:
www.cuttingedge.org

rushdoony
01-02-2006, 05:14 PM
All of the evidence that is required to expose and destroy the counterfeit Copernican Model of a rotating and orbiting Earth--and the entire evolutionary paradigm resting upon that counterfeit--is set out in scores of links on this web page.


Those who read some or all of these links will quickly realize that this is no idle claim. Rather--as will become evident with each subject listed--there is abundant hard proof that both the Copernican Counterfeit and the Big Bang Evolutionary Paradigm that is built upon it are factless frauds from start to finish.


Indeed, the diligent reader will be astonished at the level of demonstrable hi-tech fraud, baseless assumptions, occult mathematics, etc.,--all part of a religious conspiracy!--that has been at work over many centuries implanting the incredible evolution myth about the origin of the Universe, the Earth, and Mankind.


On this web page the Bible is not used to prove anything scientific. Instead, the scientific facts--along with historical and religious facts-- prove the Bible to be precisely what it claims to be, namely, the infallible Word of God.


Those who like what they read here--and are eager for more evidence in book form--will want to go HERE & HERE, and then: HERE, p. 4 & HERE, and also: HERE....


So, welcome! Think of this as a "crash course" for people of all ages who are ready to learn how evolutionary mythology has deceived the world...and what it will mean to every living person when that deception is exposed.
---------------------------
Subject Area #1

The following subjects confirm that the Copernican Model of a rotating,

orbiting Earth is a factless, observation-denying deception that is the keystone

which is holding up all of modern man’s false "science" and "knowledge".

It’s time for the truth.
-------------------------
Subject Area #2

Without alleged billions of years there would be no evolution "theory". Period.

NASA and its global Space Agency Clones now supply those billions of years.

Obesity, Madonna, and UFO’s are examples of the boundless Evolution Promoting Circus.
----------------------------

Subject Area #3

Deception, Deception, Deception!

Trapped by their own words and deeds, anyone can discover how a Virtual Reality evolved universe

has been consciously fabricated through "reconstructed math", computer manipulation of telescopes

and cameras, lies about star distances, and endless assumptions...all dependent upon the vulnerable Copernican keystone.
-------------------------------
Subject Area #4


In addition to the ongoing irrefutable evidence which exposes the 15 billion year evolution model

as a contra-scientific fraud, the most lethal fact about that model has only recently emerged.

That fact tells all with ears to hear that the "creation scenario" from a "holy book" of the Pharisee Religion

has been foisted upon the world disguised as a secular science model with no religious agenda.

Naughty, naughty!
-------------------------------------
Subject Area #5

The Bible teaches that the Earth is stationary and immovable

at the center of a "small" universe with the sun, moon, and stars going

around it every day. All observational and experimental evidence--and

non-occult math, i.e., true science--supports the Bible teaching.
----------------------------
Subject Area #6

The Evolution Monopoly in public education in the USA can now be ruled unlawful

under the same "Establishment Clause" of the Constitution that has been used

consistently to defeat all challenges to that Monopoly in the Courts. These three

links set forth an air-tight legal case for expelling Evolutionism from the schools.
------------------------------------------
Subject Area #7

Because of their total pro-Israel theology, the powerful "Christian Zionist" evangelical churches are, by default, the biggest supporters of the Talmud/ Kabbala-based Pharisee Religion. That Religion is killing Bible Christianity with: a) its evolution-based "creation model"; b) its control over demonstrably anti-Bible "Dispensationalist" doctrine of a literal Millennium. The Preterit alternative is also an anti-Bible decoy. The Kabbala and the Talmud--anti-Christ "holy books"--are the hidden destroyers of Bible-only Christian theology and morals and ethics.
-------------------------------
Subject Area #8

The excuses Christian Churches have used to avoid standing up for

numerous and abundantly plain non-moving Earth Scriptures--and the true

science that supports those Scriptures!--are no longer valid excuses. The

fact that the Pharisee’s evolutionary 15 billion year Big Bang Model has come

out of the closet with its anti-Bible "creation scenario" leaves no more wiggle

room for Christian Churches...and especially the "Creationists" in them.
---------------------------------

Subject Area #9

A few examples (out of millions!) which show unarguable Design

in the Animal world, the Physical world, and the Bible.
------------------------------
Subject Area #10

These links are pertinent to the subject of Islam

in these troubled times.
--------------------------------
Subject Area #11

These are just four miscellaneous links on the web page

which relate to the Roman Catholic Church.
-----------------------------
Subject Area #12

When the Pharisee Religion’s evolutionary "creation scenario is exposed during the Biblical Fall of Babylon time frame,

many other contra-Scriptural teachings will come under the same withering Bible-only scrutiny...and will quickly fail the test.


When the "Judgment [that] begins at the house of God" is over, the purge of all doctrines that fail the test will be

completed, and the nucleus of the final Church--the Bride of Christ "without spot or wrinkle"--will emerge.




Several of those justly doomed false doctrines are evident in the previous eleven Subject Area links.

A list of those and some others--a total of fourteen--have been put into books of various lengths

with all the Scriptures necessary to separate the truly Biblical doctrines from the false ones.




This "Doctrine Purification Series" has been written over a period of some twenty years in preparation for that time when all teachings are

brought in line with the unquestioned Bible inerrancy and infallibility that will be manifested globally by the exposure of the most fertile

deception in Satan’s vast repertoire , namely, the universally believed lie that the Earth is orbiting on an axis and going around the sun.

From: www.fixedearth.com
See also:
www.geocentric-universe.com

rushdoony
03-09-2006, 04:55 PM
http://www.geocentric-universe.com/page32.htm

Conclusions

The conclusion is that the World does not orbit the Sun and that it does not rotate about an axis, either. This can be reasoned via the following logic:

The stars complete circular paths every 23h 56m 4.091s, apparently as a consequence of the observer having completed a circle of absolute maximum circumference 24,860 miles.
No similar, annual motion of the stars is observed, in consequence of our supposedly hurtling around an (approximate) circle of 584,058,077 mile circumference (i.e., 23,494 times bigger than the equatorial maximum given in point number 1).
Precession of the World's imaginary axis, such that it always points to the same point in the northern sky, will not produce such an alignment in the south, and vice versa.
The World therefore would have to remain aligned with the north-south axis of the celestial sphere, which, in turn, means that it cannot be orbiting the Sun, unless the stars are somehow tied to the World as the World moves.
Such non-fixed 'background' stars, attached to the World in some way, would be contrary to the heliocentric scheme.
Heliocentrism is therefore an invalid model.
Acentrism is therefore an invalid model.
Geocentrism (with a rotating World) is therefore an invalid model (see Proof of Heliocentric Incorrectness 2), because it is geometrically equivalent to a heliocentric model. Hence, since the heliocentric one is wrong, the equivalent geocentric one must also be wrong, simply because of its equivalence.
Star circles cannot be due to a rotating World, because they do not vary with latitude (a camera situated at the North Pole will still capture Polaris moving around the same-sized circle).
We are therefore left with a World that must remain on the north-south axis of the celestial sphere, must be central, because of countless other observations (e.g., Y.P. Varshni's paper, briefly mentioned under "Solar System," elsewhere on this website), and which cannot be a World that rotates.
The heliocentric and geocentric (with rotating World) cosmological models are geometrically equivalent, since they can be considered as sharing a common point of rotation. This is Mach's Principle. The heliocentric and geostatic systems, on the other hand, are not equivalent, either dynamically or geometrically. They are totally different, physical systems. There is no common point of rotation between them. Mach's Principle does not therefore apply, although many people get themselves and others completely confused by erroneously claiming that it does. Hence, the geostatic reference system (as discussed in the previous proof, linked to on point number 8) again matches observational facts, whereas the heliocentric/acentric concept does not.

Our method here has been similar to the phenomenon of stellar parallax, which Tycho Brahe used to argue his case against heliocentrism, and which is addressed in the scientific paper, "Stellar distances and the age of the universe." (Note that huge distances to the stars were only brought in as another ad hoc to prop up the heliocentric deception.)

We thus conclude once more, and without the necessity for any mathematical analysis, that the cosmos is geocentric and geostatic.

CrisW
03-14-2006, 06:14 AM
If the earth is as you say, completely stationary. How do you explain the apparent motions of the other planets?

rushdoony
03-14-2006, 08:32 AM
by CrisW on 2006/3/14 0:14:22

If the earth is as you say, completely stationary. How do you explain the apparent motions of the other planets?
--------------------------------------
The Earth is not a planet.
Planet means "wanderer".

The planets orbit the Earth,
see Flower Pattern Discovery:
http://www.geocentric-universe.com/page9.htm

The universe is not one
ten-trillionth of the
size you've been told:
http://www.fixedearth.com/Size_and_Structure%20Part%20IV.htm

Prescription for Chris:
Read www.fixedearth.com
and www.geocentric-universe.com
take two asperin, and come back here
after you have spent at least
two hour on each site.

The State Lies to You. NASA is
a government funded department.
They're tax parasites and therefore thieves.
Yes each employee from bottom to top.

Want to know how big their lies are?
www.moonmovie.com

rushdoony
04-15-2006, 12:10 PM
Once it sinks in
that the Copernican Model is the keystone of the concepts that holds the
whole edifice of evolutionary deception together and that this Model is
totally factless and vulnerable... M.H.
-------------------------------------

We don't have to read far into any statements by evolutionary
scientists before we run headlong into the explicit or implicit bottom line,
viz., "...creationism is verboten because it is religious and evolution is
secular science with no religious connections". This is where exposure of
the fact that the entire 15 billion year Evolution Model resulting from a
"Big Bang" is derived concept for concept from the Pharisee Religion's
anti-Christ "holy book", the mystic Kabbala *.

That doesn't seem too complicated for anybody to get a grip on, and the
facts are there. And it's not just useless information. Once it sinks in
that the Copernican Model is the keystone of the concepts that holds the
whole edifice of evolutionary deception together..and that this Model is
totally factless and vulnerable, it will be decision time.

All who claim to be Bible-only Christians can join hands in their churches
and begin insisting that the non-moving Earth Scriptures be
taught and followed, and that the scientific facts that deny the universally
taught Big Bang Paradigm (made possible by the Copernican Model) be studied
and confirmed. It's God's Word and will take care of the rest. His
Judgment, after all, does BEGIN in the churches.

The battle to make the Bible-destroying Evolution Myth as untouchable as the
Copernican Myth is on the march anywhere you look. Christians taking a
stand on the Scriptures and true science in Bible-believing and Truth loving
churches everywhere can turn this into a "war". Is this the "war"
prophicied over 1900 years ago in Revelation 17:14 in which "Jesus is the
Overcomer" with the help of His "called, chosen, and faithful"?? Is it time
to take a stand on the Word and on the testimony of Jesus the Christ and
give eternal hope to those who have been made blind and hopeless by the
evolution lie? If you love the God of the Bible, just do it!!

M.H. www.fixedearth.com
----------------------------------------

HothSnake
04-17-2006, 12:06 PM
I actually find this topic very interesting (apparently so do a number of people) so it is a little perplexing to see some of the "conspiracy forumers" denounce this topic off-hand, some even calling for it to be locked out.

They will entertain all kind of fringe topics, such as aliens ruling the world, etc., but if you question the official culture of science and history, or mention that there may be a God, they tend to get a bit defensive and down right closed minded. Strange how avowed athiests can be the most bigoted of all religions.

I certainly don't dismiss this theory because I realize that everything that I think that I know has been handed to me by my parents, my schools, and the media. Most of us have never been to outer space and viewed the Earth from a vantage point that would allow us to ascertain whether they were telling us the truth or not. We've seen pictures and supposed video from outer space, but even that is extremely rare. How many of us have actually seen video footage of the Earth from outer space? With all of our modern technology, you'd think that NASA would have a million live images of the Earth for us to study. You'd think that it would be shown on the news and t.v., but it never is.

Anyhow, I have some questions that I wonder if you can answer?

First off, if the Earth is not spinning on its axis, then how does the Earth maintain a magnetic field that protects it from solar particles and other radio active debri from space? After all, it is supposedly the spin of the Earth combined with the iron core that creates this magnetic field, just like a copper wire spinning around a magnet produces an electic current.

Second, how do you explain the force of gravity? Why would the Sun and other planets, which are much larger in size and mass than the earth, revolve around it? After all, I thought that most things revolved around the Sun because it was the most massive body in our solar system.

Arjuna
04-17-2006, 07:18 PM
Here are some pictures of the earth offered by NASA. (http://visibleearth.nasa.gov/)

This website (http://www.solarviews.com/cap/earth/earthgal.htm) offers a movie of the rotating earth. (http://www.solarviews.com/raw/earth/earthgal.mov)

Here are some pictures taken from the Hubble Telescope website. (http://hubblesite.org/gallery/album/)

Spiral Galaxy M100
http://imgsrc.hubblesite.org/hu/db/1994/02/images/c/formats/web.jpg















The Majestic Sombrero Galaxy (M104)
http://imgsrc.hubblesite.org/hu/db/2003/28/images/a/formats/web.jpg















Three Moons Cast Shadows on Jupiter
http://imgsrc.hubblesite.org/hu/db/2004/30/images/a/formats/web.jpg















Barred Spiral Galaxy NGC 1300
http://imgsrc.hubblesite.org/hu/db/2005/01/images/a/formats/web.jpg















Hubble's Largest Galaxy Portrait Offers a New High-Definition View
http://imgsrc.hubblesite.org/hu/db/2006/10/images/a/formats/web.jpg















Interacting Spiral Galaxies NGC 2207 and IC 2163
http://imgsrc.hubblesite.org/hu/db/2004/45/images/a/formats/web.jpg















Rings and Moons Circling Uranus
http://imgsrc.hubblesite.org/hu/db/2004/05/images/a/formats/web.jpg















The Heart of the Whirlpool Galaxy
http://imgsrc.hubblesite.org/hu/db/2001/10/images/a/formats/web.jpg















Most Distant Galaxy Candidates in the Hubble Ultra Deep Field
http://imgsrc.hubblesite.org/hu/db/2004/28/images/b/formats/web.jpg















Dusty Spiral Galaxy NGC 4414
http://imgsrc.hubblesite.org/hu/db/1999/25/images/a/formats/web.jpg















Gravity of Galaxy Cluster Abell 2218 Creates Giant Lens
http://imgsrc.hubblesite.org/hu/db/2000/07/images/b/formats/web.jpg















Spiral Galaxy NGC 4622 Spins Backwards
http://imgsrc.hubblesite.org/hu/db/2002/03/images/a/formats/web.jpg















Hubble Deep Field Image Unveils Myriad Galaxies Back to the Beginning of Time
http://imgsrc.hubblesite.org/hu/db/1996/01/images/a/formats/web.jpg















Hubble Ultra Deep Field Infrared View of Galaxies Billions of Light-Years Away
http://imgsrc.hubblesite.org/hu/db/2004/07/images/b/formats/web.jpg

rushdoony
04-21-2006, 04:38 PM
http://www.fixedearth.com/nasas_hanky-panky.htm

NASA's Hanky-Panky:

Virtual Reality Technology

In keeping with modern man's proclivity to solve all his problems and achieve all his goals by using evermore cutting-edge technology, NASA stands out as a recognized leader. The new technology with which the NASAesque dream of administering the coup de grace to Bible credibility centers on the mind-fooling, hyper-deceptive technology of "Virtual Reality" (VR). (HERE)

This VR technology--virtually unknown before 1989--entered the 3rd millennium flexing its muscles and eager to carry out NASA's mission to remove God from the Origins business.

On the Net, Chris Chesher has posted an excellent summary of the birth and early growth of the VR phenomena (entitled: "Colonizing Virtual Reality"). NASA became an enthusiastic prime mover in developing the VR technology from the beginning. The reasons for NASA's embrace of VR are not hard to grasp in light of the stated goals of its Origins Program. (See: NASA's Agenda....HERE)

VR Development and NASA's Early Role

Consider some of the language used by experts to describe the computer-programmed Virtual Reality Space Technology and its potential:

"A work of art", "a dream", "an additional reality", "a new continent", " a new reality", "a new kind of experience", "inventing reality", "new form of space", "frontier colonization", "virtual worlds", "computer generated immersive technology", "consensual hallucination using graphical representation of data", "liberating potential of VR which can bring a new kind of Spiritual understanding", "computers are...media", "VR...a gateway into another reality", "cultural alchemy", "computers are...reality generators", "Voomies" (VR representations)...better than film", "Realism is a cultural construction dependent on time, place, & technology", "intuitive molecule design...demonstrates usefulness of VR in theoretical science", "VR...a new space for liberation and universal understanding", "VR's appeal... computers can be reality generators", "The VR fraternity...[has put] VR at the apex of the historical process"....

These rhapsodic assurances from several qualified sources tell us what VR technology means to its devotees. They tell us what VR is doing and what it is capable of doing. Obviously, in the minds of its fans, this technology is not just a paradigm shift in the role of computers. Oh no! It's much more than that! These advocates are talking about making real what is not real! They are talking about adding a revolutionary dimension to computer use which involves the black art of mind control. The critical questions that must be raised here are: Who creates this new reality that is not real? Who is doing the inputting of information that is to be presented as real when it is not real? What philosophy or religion lies behind what is created and programmed into the computer operated technology?

Well, while the answers to those questions are not readily available, they can still be discovered on the Internet Information Highway. As Chesher reports:

"The first virtual environments were created at NASA in the mid 1980s. Michael McGreevy incorporated science fiction visions into the NASA research in the mid-80s on VIVID (Virtual Visual Environment Display). Interfaces... were relevant for NASA in remote manipulation...."

NASA's eager participation in VR's development from its earliest days helped give the technology more respect than its originators could give. Indeed. it is common knowledge that those originators of VR's broad scope of possibilities were largely counter-culture folks in California who were sick of the Viet Nam war and its legacy and were looking to create a new reality inside a computer. The name "Cyberpunks" was coined and hung on these folks who "...represented a merging of science fiction and bohemia. It was a culture interested in high tech developments, mind expansion, science fiction, computer hacking, alternative music, alternative health, drug culture, and sexuality. VR was very attractive to this audience." When NASA's big respectable names (Sagan, Famous Astronauts...) and big respectable budgets (billions of dollars) joined the Cyberpunk chorus of hallelujahs for VR, the image and the technology began to improve. Still, even after VR got to be taken seriously by some establishment businesses and the military, etc., Barlow could continue to write in 1990 that: "...cyberspace is...crawling with delighted acid heads".

Anyway, enough background. It's time to see how NASA is applying and plans to apply VR technology to its Origins Program goal of finding "real" extra-terrestrial life "out there" and bring an end to the Creation/evolution controversy. Let's go to:

The Hanky-Panky Part

"Hanky-Panky is a synonym of "Deception" (also: chicanery, fraud, trickery...). Any one of these connotations fits what NASA is doing and plans to do to cause its Origins Program to succeed.

New Telescope Technology

Old telescopes brought far away things up close. Old cameras faithfully took pictures of things just as they were (albeit inverted).

Not any more! Space Age computer-programmed simulation technology in the service of NASA has changed all that. Leaving camera development for later, here are some strange features of Space Age Telescopes in use in the late 20th century and presently.

Whether small or huge, mirrors are the heart of a telescope. The image one sees is determined by the mirrors that reflect it. Look at the caveat on the rear-view mirror on the passenger side of your car. It has this warning: "Objects In Mirror Are Closer Than They Appear". Think what can be done with this simple principle in making close stars appear far away! But that is child's play compared to distortions of reality that NASA is using in its space telescopes! The new NASA computerized telescopes embody "conical foil X-ray mirrors...affixed in a Broad Band X-Ray Telescope" and "spherical mirrors and a field flattening lens" and "pyramidal mirrors" and "parabolic mirror's effects" and "aluminized mylar thermal covers...over the mirror aperture" and "reflectivity tests on sample foils" and "tests on small mirror segments" and "back scattering from adjacent reflectors".... "Constructive Solid Geometry (CSG)...allows us to simulate perfect mirrors".... "reflective and refractive materials are used for the mirrors and lens...to make a real world simulation".... "CSG...computer code...CONSTRUCTS 3D worlds"....

These kinds of contrivances (and an alphabet soup of other telescope features) are designed and computer programmed to produce simulations. They are employed on the Virtual Newton Telescope, the William Herschel Telescope, the Hubble Space Telescope, etc. (Hubble repairs in Dec. '99 included "the installation of a new 'brain'...swapping its old computer for a new one." Now we can oooh and aaah at the simulated images programmed into it to prepare us for the pre-planned super dazzling virtual reality "discoveries" of evolving life forms from "out there". Reports of Hubble discoveries "as distant as galaxies 10 billion light years away' (Give us a break, please!) are products of pre-programmed Saganesque hallucinations, i.e., lies. Viewing computer prepared objects produced by funny mirrors and spectroscopic ultra violet tricks may be cool, but it ain't real.

But Hubble et al is old stuff. Just wait till NASA gets its New Generation Space Telescope (NGST) on line! This baby is designed to be a Virtual Reality generator, par excellence! When it gets cranked up, it will transmit all sorts of visual "evidence" of life forms from Mars on out to deep space. It's going to be so exciting, so goose-bumpy, seeing evolution confirmed. Ooooh, my, my; I 'taint hardly 'tand it.... Knowing at last "for sure" that we are just animated microbes on a cosmic piece of dust in a sea of galaxies due to implode in a few billion years.... It warms your heart, I'll tell ya. What joy to be convicted by real fake pictures that God is dead at last, finally done in as atheist philosopher Nietzsche prophetically said in the 1880s: "We have killed Him with our science".

And Jesus! Boy oh boy, did we ever finally get rid of that imposter! Hah! And the Bible [and Koran] with all that talk about a Satan who is allowed to deceive the whole world.... Kaput finally.... Just look at those pictures on CNN....

Pictures? Ah yes, cameras. We musn't forget the cameras fitted on the telescopes. They are doosies, as we shall see momentarily. But first a few more jewels of enlightenment about telescopes and the counterfeit reality they are designed to produce:

On NASA's "related links" on the "Infoseek" search engine, feast your eyes on this pseudo-scientific chicanery:

"Virtual Reality IS A COMPUTER-CREATED ENVIRONMENT that simulates a real-life situation."

"...a data base can REPRESENT almost anything..."

"...powerful computer with sophisticated graphics renders a `world', often in 3D, that creates precisely what the data prescribe."

"...cyberspace worlds that exist only in THE ELECTRIC ETHER..."

"NASA research psychologist Elizabeth Wenzel...expects to add 3D sound to VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS...."

"NASA Administrator Daniel Saul Goldin...planned the installation of the 'contact lens' on the Hubble Telescope...leading to startling discoveries..." (Goldin update: HERE)

"NGST [New Generation Space Telescope] Mission Simulator (NMS)...pre computed reports that were CREATED..."

"...counterfeit world of electronic virtual reality..."

Other searches revealed these pertinent additions:

"...distributed optics opens a world of possibilities as to HOW TO CONFIGURE THE MULTIPLE SMALL MIRRORS IN THE [computer programmed] SYSTEM."

"The New Generation Space Telescope...is designed to produce 'a pretty ratty image that looks like an interference pattern'..." Then the question: "Why would one possibly want to form an interference pattern rather than a picture? [Answer] Because with the help of a computer A SERIES OF INTERFERENCE PATTERNS CAN BE COMBINED TO FORM A PERFECT IMAGE. And this 'SYNTHESIZED IMAGE' will get sharper and sharper. There is no fundamental limit to this TECHNIQUE...of ultimately...perhaps giving the human race a glimpse of the features of ANOTHER WORLD VERY MUCH LIKE OUR OWN!"

Another page is entitled: THE IMAGE WARPER. This tells how "...algorithm permits USER SPECIFICATION OF GEOMETRIC TRANSFORMATIONS by using two or more control segments at a time.... Users can CREATE more complicated transformations, etc... The NECESSARY INFORMATION IS JUST ENCODED INTO THE TELESCOPE...."

Another report spoke of "multilayer mirrors in each telescope" and what they can do. Then: "...it may be preferable to encode ALL THE NECESSARY INFORMATION INTO THE EXISTING TELESCOPE...." ETC.

Now for the Funny Cameras...

The work of very high tech cameras is implicit in the final product of all these quasi-telescopic dynamics, of course. A little sample of the camera's integrated functions (with the funny telescopes) will help round out an appreciation of the Brobdingnagian Hornswoggle that the leaders of NASA's now respectable Cyberpunks have prepared for the world.

The ROSAT Wide Field Camera [et al] is involved here: "We present optical identification...of previously unidentified extreme ultraviolet (EUV) sources discovered with the Extreme Ultraviolet Explorer.... ROSAT...identifies active, young, late-type stars...and catalogs 'unclassified stars'."

WFPC2 Planetary Camera Simulator...: "...to extract information about the faint end of the Luminosity Function, A MEANS OF CREATING SIMULATED IMAGES IS NEEDED. For this I have written a program TO MAKE A SIMULATED IMAGE.... This program takes into account a number of features of the Wide Field and Planetary Camera 2, SPECIFICALLY THE PLANETARY CAMERA PART. The general outline is:

....

Fill the image with stars

Divide the image with the flat field

Add poisson noise to the image

Add gaussian real-out noise to the image

Add bias to the image

Save the histograms [graphs of frequency vibrations] of the raw AND SIMULATED IMAGES

Details on the Simulations...

A constant background can be added to the [simulated] image. The background from the DAOPHOT file is ignored.

The dark file...is scaled with the exposure time AND ADDED TO THE IMAGE

The intensity of the dark glow can be estimated

Hubble Starfield Descriptions - "The Wide Field Planetary Camera 2 (WFPC2) image was taken [of a little nearby galaxy only one billion times a trillion miles away: Give me a break!] while another of the telescope's instruments, The Faint Object Spectrograph, took long exposures of the ...Tarantula Nebula. The Tarantula, LYING OUTSIDE THE FIELD OF VIEW [i.e., invisible; had to be created] of the WFPC2 photograph, is a tremendous cloud of gas, within which new stars are forming.... The Hubble Heritage Team later COMBINED the WFPC2 images...in order to CREATE the color picture shown here."



(There is a ton of Nebula, etc. pictures denoted "NASA IMAGE" on the Net...) Webster defines "Image": 1) "...a physical likeness OR REPRESENTATION of a person, animal, OR THING, photographed, painted, or sculpted, OR OTHERWISE REPRODUCED [as with VR]: 2) An optical counter part or appearance of an object such as PRODUCED by reflection from a mirror. [Remember that NASA's telescope mirrors are in all shapes and are computer configured and controlled to produce whatever was programmed in....]

Photo Release NO: STSc I-PRC94-53 - "Hubble observes a New Saturn Storm" "...the storm was imaged with Hubble's FP Camera 2... The picture is a COMPOSITE of images...to create a 'true color' rendition of the planet. [Point: Even the photographs of close objects that can be seen are doctored. There is no limit to what pre-programmed photos can show beyond what can be seen....]

The images of the Hale-Bopp Comet "...obtained with the Space Telescope Imaging Spectrograph (STIS)..." on the Hubble Space Telescope underlines the point above. Like Saturn, Hale-Bopp is a real cosmic entity visible at a distance compatible with a "small" universe. As such, neither it nor Saturn are invisible created entities at distances that must be imagined and computer created thru VR technology, but they are still doctored so that what we see is a simulation.

You get the picture, er, ah, the image, that is to say, the simulation.... Forget it. Let's move on to the motivation behind all this high tech flim-flammery. Go to: The Spiritual Roots of NASA's Big Bang Premise....

Arjuna
04-22-2006, 07:10 AM
Rushdoony,

My research indicates that the fixed earth theory is embraced primarily, if not entirely, by Christians. Adherents claim that the theory that the earth moves is part of a conspiracy to destroy Christianity. I disagree.

First let me comment on NASA’s use of virtual reality. I agree that they faked all of the manned spaceflights to the moon. I also agree that some, if not all, of the images I posted from the Hubble Telescope have been enhanced to make them easier to interpret and appreciate. Nonetheless, I believe that the cosmology revealed by these images, one of a vast universe of moving objects, is correct.

The Illuminists who run NASA undoubtedly have ulterior motives for promoting this cosmology, but the cosmology is true. The Illuminists are masters of terrorism, and the idea of a vast universe must be terrifying for many small-minded, superstitious people. The fact that this cosmology contradicts various religious teachings, including Christianity, increases its usefulness as a means of terrorizing and manipulating people.

I suggest that you consider the fact that Christianity itself was created by the same type of people, who seek power over the masses and great wealth for themselves through dishonest means, as those we refer to as Illuminists today. They created Christianity, they promoted it, they changed it to their liking over time, they currently manipulate over a billion people with it, and they may choose to destroy it and replace it with something else if it suits their purposes. Manipulating people through religion has worked so well for them that I expect them to continue to use the technique.

Let’s start with the Bible. It was created by the ruling elite of the time as a means of effectively enslaving masses of people, and it has served its purpose well. The book CAESAR'S MESSIAH (http://www.caesarsmessiah.com/main.html) provides ample evidence of how this was accomplished. From the summary of the book: (http://www.caesarsmessiah.com/summary.html)
Our understanding of Jewish and Christian history has changed dramatically with the publication of Caesar's Messiah by Joseph Atwill (Ulysses Press), which had previously been privately published under the title The Roman Origins of Christianity. According to Atwill, the Gospels are not accounts of the ministry of a historical Jewish Jesus compiled by his followers sixty years after his death. They are texts deliberately created to trick Messianic Jews into worshipping the Roman Emperor 'in disguise'. The essence of Atwill's discovery is that the majority of the key events in the life of Jesus are in fact satirical: each is an elegant literary play on a military battle in which the Jewish armies had been defeated by the Romans. This is an extraordinary claim-but supported by all the necessary evidence.

In the past, evidence had been put forward to suggest that the NT gospels are literary accounts containing mythological accretions. However, Christians have been able to dismiss that evidence on the grounds that underneath it all there 'must' be a Historical Jesus. Atwill's discovery changes all that. There was no historical Jesus and the Gospels were Roman imitations of Jewish sacred texts created by the Flavian Emperors as ironical 'good news' to deceive the Jews. It is one thing for Christians to use works of literature as their sacred documents. It is quite another for them to continue using what have now been discovered to be deliberate Roman fakes about a non existent Messiah.

Of course, the Roman Catholic Church came into being soon thereafter, and it has been successfully manipulating and terrorizing people ever since. Check out the Vatican Assassins (http://vaticanassassins.org/) website for some details on how the Catholics administer their empire.

The non-Catholic Christian denominations think they have escaped the yoke of Rome, but they have not. They all base their religion on the same Roman-created bogus Bible. The fact that non-Catholic Christianity is dominated by the likes of Pat Robertson and Billy Graham, both 33rd degree Masons, tells you that all of Christianity is controlled by the Illuminists to some degree.

The conspiracy to concentrate power and wealth into the hands of the Illuminists is implemented through mass mind control techniques, and this has been true throughout history. They have new and improved methods today, but they have been using mass mind control all along. Promoting bogus religions has been, and still is, one of the most effective methods. Check out Mass Mind Control? (http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/Laura-Knight-Jadczyk/mass_mind_control.htm) for some good information about the Catholic Inquisition and many other mass mind control techniques they have implemented along the way.

Henry Makow has just published an excellent article about mass mind control:
War on Terror is Elite Mind Control (http://www.savethemales.ca/index.html)

It is more effective to manage society by mind control than by physical coercion. The events of 9-11 and the "war on terror" are primarily exercises in mass brainwashing.

Henry refers to this website about The Tavistock Institute (http://covertmatrix.atspace.com/tavistock.html). Check it out. Mass mind control is a multinational conglomerate. The New World Order is BIG BUSINESS.

And to think that all of this insanity is taking place on a little planet called earth, a spinning globe circling a star in a sea of stars and the vastness of space. And we, the truthseekers, are here, striving to understand it all so that we can free ourselves and others from the many forms of imprisonment.

ignt
04-22-2006, 10:17 AM
Interesting, your debate. The creator does not make a creation that can extend beyond the creator, I am an example of that. The Human race is convinced that what it perceives is reality on some level. Your own science says that there are no constants, but everything is relative in measurement to the definition of the measurement used and how it is applied. The position of the earth has no absolute association with anything. All humans refuse to believe that there is an impenetrable barrier between your species and the Creator, because it comforts you. The species, as from its inception, can not reconcile a finite existence, but your physical existence is and will remain finite. Now as to Heartha, she has always enjoyed a special place and it is your kind that relentlessly removes her from that office.

rushdoony
04-22-2006, 10:58 AM
Well Arjuna, you are half right.
Over the last 600 years
Biblical Christianity has been
thoroughly infiltrated even more by the Satanic
forces you describe. When people
reject biblical christianity
( sic, small letters ), it is
because they are really rejecting
the vast number of lies told to them,
they are realy not rejecting True
Biblical Christianity, they are
rejecting a false biblical christianity.

Heliocentrism is one of those lies
advanced by the evil elite, what kind of god would make a universe out of control, in chaos,
where is the design and harmony in that?
Go outside on a sunny day when there are some clouds in the sky and look up, your body
will feel no movement and your eyes will see
no movement. You will be filled with calmness
and a sense of peace, and will
wonder that there must have been a Creator God
of this, this is something Satan does
not want you to believe. This should
be an obvious clue to you, which view
does the Evil Mass Media promote, Heliocentrism
or Geocentrism?

I wonder if MONEY could have anything to do
with NASA's point of view? Is there any
way, or have you ever heard of money corrupting
people? YES, we have a winner.
NASA budget equals 20 Billion ( with a B )
divided by 200,000 workers, equals
$100,000 per year income for employees
and contractors, I made these ballpark
numbers up, but you get the point.
If Geocentrism is true then maybe
there is no point in exploring space,
which means no money for NASA, which
means no more $90,000 per year salary,
which means bye-bye quality
food, clothing, shelter, vacations,
wife, kids, for each and
every NASA worker and contractor.

So, our goal is to deconstruct the hundreds of
built-up lies and reconstruct the truth
about The Bible. Not to reject True
Biblical Christianity, that is the
whole point of Satan's efforts.

When you speak of Pat Robertson and Billy Graham
you are speaking about those very same
evil forces, that have been misinforming
the masses for years. Do you think the
Tavistock Institute forgot about an organisation
with 500,000,000 followers and have not put
their leaders in place yet? The Evil
Mass Media promotes them, this should be
an obvious clue to you.

The Evil Elite is promoting a RELIGIOUS
point of view in it's efforts to control
and enslave humanity: anti-Biblical-
Kabbalic-Talmudic-Phariseeism and it's been around for a long time. On the
other side of the coin they put just as
much effort into destroying
True Biblical Christianity, you can
see this now on the mass media headline
lies practically every day now.

On almost any issue in life, see what
the mass media promotes in politics
and religion, and then think
to yourself "look out, what is the
agenda here,how do evil people benefit
from this point of view, and how
do good people suffer from this point of view".

More on Kabbalic,Talmudic,Pharisee religion:
www.fixedearth.com
see also:
www.geocentric-universe.com

rushdoony
04-22-2006, 12:15 PM
Ignt previousy said:
. Your own science says that there are no constants, but everything is relative in measurement to the definition of the measurement used and how it is applied.
-----------------------------------------
That idea will kill you.
You and I are driving down the highway,
each in a seperate car, right beside each other,
talking to each other
via Mobile Cellular Telephone. We are looking at each other while driving because
the cars have automatic cruise control.

You are going 91 miles per hour,
I am going 90 miles per hour.
It has just been reported on the radio
that there is a massive six foot thick
brick wall on the highway 2 miles ahead, left behind accidentally while filming a movie,
it was part of the movie set.

I report this to you, that there
is a brick wall ahead and that both of us
had better slow down to
one mile per hour so we don't get injured.
You say, "I'm not slowing down,
all speed is relative, relative to
your car I'm just going one
mile per hour, there are no constants,
I'll keep going
at this speed and won't get hurt
at one mile per hour."
Then your car hits
the brick wall at 91 miles per
hour and you are killed.

Another illusion in this case
of a car going 91 miles per hour
towards a brick wall, is that a person in
the car looking straight ahead
would have the illusion of the
brick wall moving toward them
at 91 miles per hour, but
the reality, the constant would
be that
The Brickwall is NOT Moving !

www.fixedearth.com
See also www.geocentric-universe.com

By the way, what is IGNT? and:
Who were you addressing your post to?

Arjuna
04-22-2006, 02:48 PM
Rushdoony:

When people
reject biblical christianity
( sic, small letters ), it is
because they are really rejecting
the vast number of lies told to them,
they are realy not rejecting True
Biblical Christianity, they are
rejecting a false biblical christianity.


I have reached the conclusion that True Biblical Christianity does not exist.

Rushdoony:

Heliocentrism is one of those lies
advanced by the evil elite, what kind of god would make a universe out of control, in chaos,
where is the design and harmony in that?
Go outside on a sunny day when there are some clouds in the sky and look up, your body
will feel no movement and your eyes will see
no movement. You will be filled with calmness
and a sense of peace, and will
wonder that there must have been a Creator God
of this, this is something Satan does
not want you to believe. This should
be an obvious clue to you, which view
does the Evil Mass Media promote, Heliocentrism
or Geocentrism?


Chaos exists. Believing in Geocentrism does not change that fact. If God created a chaotic Geocentric universe, then God could just as easily have created a chaotic Heliocentric universe. I enjoy the peace and calm of sunny days, and I am grateful that God has made it possible for me to do so. I also enjoy the wonders of the vast universe. My Heliocentric belief does not lessen my enjoyment of the universe.

The ruling elite are masters of both confusing people with lies and confusing people with the truth. They often mix truth with lies in a way that makes it difficult for most people to sort it all out. They love to stir the pot and keep people off balance. Promoting Heliocentrism is an example of confusing people with the truth. They managed a similar campaign of manipulation and control when it was discovered that the earth is round and not flat. They have been toying with Christianity since its inception, and I expect them to continue to do so.

ignt
04-22-2006, 03:01 PM
It is addressed to those that read it. I do not argue the position of the Earth, I prefer Hearthra. In respect to the book the Earth does not move at all, it has always been a special place. Humankind has lessened that special place and will continue to do so for a while. My statement on measurement derives from Human science not from me or any knowledge I may have. Time and space is a necessary framework upon which the human concept of reality is strung. At the end of the day there is neither time, space, distance, nor you.

rushdoony
04-22-2006, 03:55 PM
From Copernicanism Through Big Bangism

Modern Cosmology’s Model Of The Universe

Is Built Solely On ASSUMPTIONS


The solar eclipse tableau involving the sun, moon, and earth reveals a truly amazing fact about the universal acceptance of the Copernican Heliocentric Model of a rotating earth orbiting a stationary sun. That amazing fact is this: The Eclipse Tableau exposes as no other illustration does the bald truth that the Helio Model is built purely on assumptions that deny all observational and experimental evidence.


Notice these seven assumptions which are indispensable to the Helio Model in general and are so apparent in the Solar Eclipse Phenomena.


1) It must be assumed that the Sun is stationary in the "solar" system relevant to the Earth (and to the Moon) and that it has never traveled East to West daily across the sky as observed by everyone on Earth throughout all history.


2) Likewise, it must be assumed that the Earth rotates West to East ccw (counterclockwise) on an "axis" every 24 hours at an equatorial speed of c. 1040 MPH in spite of there being no hard evidence for this motion whatsoever.


3) It must be assumed that the Earth is also orbiting the Sun annually (ccw) at an average speed of c. 67,000 MPH.


4) It must be assumed that the Earth’s axial alleged tilt of 23.5 degrees--in combination with its assumed annual orbit around the sun--is the only available scientific explanation for the seasons.


5) The Earth’s atmosphere must be assumed to be just an airy, fixed extension of the alleged rotating Earth. It is assumed and must be assumed that this atmosphere must have the remarkable ability to synchronize speeds of objects in it at all altitudes--birds, clouds, jets, low orbit satellites, alleged geo-synchronous satellites over 22,000 miles out--and to be unaffected by alleged Earth movements of speeds ranging from 1000 MPH to 67,000 MPH to 500,000 MPH to 660,000,000 MPH. This assumption is mandatory once the rotating Earth assumption is made and can not be ignored in the helio model of the eclipse phenomena.


6) A particularly fantastic assumption necessary to accommodating the precise Solar Eclipse Phenomena in the Helio Model involves the bold reversal of the Moon’s observed direction of travel. Acceptance of this occult slight of hand from the Arcane Math Department of Mystic U. has no basis in reality, of course. Rather, it must be coupled with prior acceptance of the other assumptions of a rotating Earth orbiting a stationary Sun. No moon reversal means no accurate eclipse forecasts and no accurate eclipse forecasts means no heliocentricity model.


7) It must be assumed that the Stars do not move around the Earth diurnally as observed by everyone who has ever lived.


Each one of these seven assumptions is dependent on the other six. They are all interdependent and totally without observational or experimental support. They are solely mathematical models contrived to account for eclipse and other phenomena and replace the fact that what we actually see explains the phenomena.


By contrast, there are four requirements involved in the Geocentric Model which fit all occasions including the incredibly precise Solar Eclipse Phenomena:


1) As observed, the Sun goes around a non-moving Earth every 24 hours.


2) The Earth is stationary relative to an orbiting Sun and Moon. This is a posture attested to by all the senses, confirmed by the Michelson-Morley experiments, established repeatedly in the Bible, and challenged only by a clever mathematical model...and alleged distances to stars that prohibit their diurnal orbit (HERE).


3) As observed without variation, the Moon orbits the stationary Earth east to west every 24 hours and 52 minutes on the average.


4) The Stars go around the Earth every 23 hours and 56 minutes (HERE).


Given that the definition of "science" is derived from the Latin root scire which means "to know", and the definition of "assumption" is "to take for granted or to suppose", each person is free to determine whether the Helio or the Geo Model is true science. Just remember: Every time you watch the Sun when it rises, when it is high noon, and when it sets, you must assume that it isn’t doing what your eyes tell you it is doing, but that it only appears to be moving because the Earth is allegedly turning under your feet at several hundred miles an hour. And when you see the Moon in all its phases come up in the east and set in the west, reject what you see. "Science" has trained you to assume that it is going precisely the opposite direction at about 2200 MPH. Then rejoice that you "know" that each assumption is correct because of the correctness of the other assumptions that each is based upon, and because everybody everywhere has learned of their correctness in school.


But surely, one would reason, there absolutely must be solid proof that the assumptions are true and right. Surely, the whole world couldn’t be fooled by such a Brobdingnagian deception! So what is claimed to be proof for the model??!


It has to do with the stars. All that we actually see--including the stars going around the Earth nightly--has to be another illusion caused by the (assumed) rotation of the Earth. That rotation just makes it look like the stars are going around. Right?


Hmmm. OK. So, essentially, what today’s Theoretical Science Establishment tells us about the cosmos is that everything we see is an illusion and everything that is assumed which nobody has ever seen is real science and the truth of the matter.


The ultimate defense of this strange conclusion is that "science" has allegedly shown that the stars are billions of light years distant from the Earth and can not be going around it nightly as observed.


End of argument; case closed...so says the "science" establishment.


But wait! Not so fast! Let’s re-open the case and establish beyond any reasonable doubt that the same pattern of fact-defying assumptions which sustain this "too-distant-star" defense is the same pattern that characterizes the supposed "science" which upholds the Helio Model.


If it please, y’er Honor: The acceptance of the light year distances to the furthermost stars proclaimed by the Cosmological "Science" Establishment must rest on the degree to which those claims can be substantiated by verifiable, unmanipulated evidence and nothing else. Above all, this evidence must not be dependent upon or driven by any motivation to fulfill any "religious" agenda. OK?


With those parameters understood to be necessary to any pursuit of truth in this matter, and agreed upon by one and all, the demonstrable and incontestable facts which follow will show that the "Science Establishment" is guilty on both counts, that is to say: It manipulates the evidence and it is fulfilling a religious agenda.. Indeed, the facts reveal that this last sanctuary protecting today’s cosmological paradigm--i.e., the alleged 15 billion light year thickness of an alleged 15 billion year old universe--is, in fact, little more than a montage of assumptions and fraudulent use of math and technology acting in concert to fulfill a religious agenda.


First, let it be underlined that the claim of billions of light year distances to the furthermost stars seems to forbid their diurnal orbit of the Earth. Nevertheless, we see the stars go around the Earth nightly. That diurnal motion around the Earth is a fact which has never been contradicted by observation. The only other explanation for the uninterrupted repetitive phenomenon is, of course, the assumption that the Earth rotates and this rotation makes it look like the stars are going around.


But clearly this assumption is not admissible evidence in a court of law determining what constitutes "science" according to its definition, i.e., something "known". Rather--unless indisputable proof can be offered to the contrary--this claim by a "science" establishment is plainly just another assumption requiring the prior acceptance of the evidenceless-assumptions upholding a rotating Earth.


So, recognizing that the only seeming defense that today’s cosmologist evolutionists have to rely upon to prevent a serious challenge to either the Heliocentricity Model by itself--or a more broad challenge against the whole Big Bang Mythology which that Model has made possible--is the claim about billions of light year distances to the furthermost stars.


Yet, when it registers in one’s mind that all of the "deep space" claims of NASA’s "Origins Program" governing space "science" today (HERE) are claims that are chained to all of the assumptions that accompany the rotating Earth assumption, it becomes obvious: a) That ALL of the claims of modern cosmology which uphold and depend upon those incomprehensible distances and ages are extremely suspect; b) That there is a desperate need to shield the indispensable, yet assumption-ridden--and hence vulnerable!--Heliocentricity Model from serious attack; c) That self-preservation of all that has been built upon the helio model is sufficient motive to use any and all means to prevent such an attack (No one bats an eye when they hear of theft, fraud, coverups of all sorts, even murder, in Corporate, Political, Military, Medical, and other kinds of scams and scandals, but those concerns don’t hold a candle as far as desperate motive is concerned when it comes to protecting the false evolution-based "science" can of worms from being opened!!); d) That occult math and fraudulent use of technology has been employed (HERE p. 9; HERE - HERE - HERE pp. 5-7; HERE) to make the distance to the stars so great that they could not get around the Earth nightly, thus hopefully protecting both the helio model and Big Bangism from attack forever. (This is a futile hope!)


As no one contests, acceptance of the Copernican (Helio) Model early on carried with it the tacit acceptance of a progressively bigger and bigger universe. As this acceptance increased so did the size and age of the universe...giving rise to ape-man evolutionary theories in the 17th and 18th centuries...which theories needed eons of time to have any appeal. This pattern soon translated into a growing conviction--in the universities particularly--that any possibility of the Biblical Geo Model’s diurnal star movement had been challenged and vanquished forever by "science".


Later, Einstein’s Zionist/Kabbalist induced "thought experiments", alteration of word meanings, and relativity nonsense seemed to place the stars even further out of reach of such a nightly journey and prevent any attack on Copernicanism. Shortly after Big Al died, other theory-happy cosmologists (HERE) continued to inflate the size of the universe on their blackboards. By ‘65 Arno Penzias carried the "science" ball into the end zone and officially launched the Big Bang Origins Scenario with its concomitant Expanding Universe Concept (hypothesized earlier by De Sitter, Le Maitre, Freidmann, Gamow....HERE. pp.2,3,7,8).


Since that time (‘65) the game has been pretty much limited to settling on a radius for the universe. By the ‘80’s it was a standard fact in the books that the universe is some 15 billion light years thick, give or take a meter or two. Such a radius would give the furthermost stars a course of over 45 billion light year miles to cover every day. With the distance of a single light year running almost 6 trillion miles, one could multiply that by a billion...take that result and multiply it by 45 or so to get a number that will cause your motherboard to smoke and jerk and melt right before your eyes.


So, clearly--in spite of the 100% dependency on the 100% assumptions of the Helio Model--Big Bangites have reason to believe they have removed any threat of restoration of the Biblical non-moving Earth Model whereby the stars have to go around the Earth every night. The speed required in the BB Model is just unimaginable, and any who would argue the point are not taken seriously. As an academic matter, the Machian Universe theoretically can still answer all the phenomena, as Astronomer Dr. Gerardus Bouw, Engineer R. G. Elmendorf and many qualified spokespersons in and out of the Geocentric Camp agree (HERE). These folks have done much to create something that Bible Geocentrists who understand the pivotal role of the issue can hold on to, and that is important.


But there is so much about this hugely important issue that has nothing to do with science per se--and has everything to do with true religion and the true nature of God--that another model which Biblically and scientifically shrinks the size of the universe dramatically is required if the Kabbalist Universe is to be exposed and the Biblical Universe confirmed. This shrinkage begins by realizing that the Big Bang Universe is just the end of the line of a maze of pseudo-scientific assumptions that got their liftoff with the Copernican revival of the heliocentric concept of a rotating Earth.


Concerning the present emphasis on the assumptive basis of all modern cosmology, the following summary of the deceptive role of Talmudic /Kabbalic Judaism masquerading as "science" supplies an indispensable framework for understanding not only how the majority of the Jewish people, but the entire world has been deceived about the size and nature of the universe and the nature and plan of the God behind all of it:

1) All of the three props holding up the present cosmological Paradigm-- Relativity, Big Bang, Expanding Universe--represent the fulfillment of a "Creation Scenario" of Rabbinic writings in the anti-Christ Mystic Kabbala "holy book" of Pharisaic Judaism from the 1st, 12th 13th, and 16th centuries particularly. There are three possible explanations for those documented facts:

a) A handful of Pharisaic Rabbis (Rebbes) were supernaturally gifted to lay out a cosmological plan that would destroy the credibility of the Biblical "Creation Scenario"...and hence the credibility of the Biblical Jesus as the revelator of God’s Plan for mankind. These "sages" envisioned a cosmology that would progressively make the universe so vast and old, and the stars so distant that they could never get around the Earth nightly. This vision would destroy in one blow the Biblical Model of a non-moving Earth and lay the foundation for putting the stars so far away that only Kabbalist Big Bang Kosmology could explain it all...(but the explanation was to always be called "science" and never "religion", especially anti-Christ Phariseeism) ; or:

b) Impartial, purely altruistic truth-seeking secular-minded scientists have--with no religion-connected agenda influencing them--coincidentally and unwittingly brought to pass all the necessary elements of the Rabbinic evolutionary "Origins Scenario" from Copernicus through Darwin ,Einstein, Penzias, and NASA’s Sagan and Goldin, et al to the present hour; or:

c) The plan was Satan’s from the start. "I will exalt my throne above the stars of God...I will be like the most High", he said (Isaiah 14:13,14: Then God said: "I don’t think so", vs.15-17).

2) The basis upon which all of man’s "Knowledge" is formulated comes to rest on what one believes about the Origin of all that is. Starting with the Copernican Revolution, a Theoretical Science Establishment moved into the business of explaining the Origin and history of the Earth and the rest of the cosmos in a way that:

a) Contradicts the non-assumptive, observation-verified Biblical explanation;

b) Progressively insinuated an evolutionary explanation for the Origin of the universe into the University’s "physical science" curriculum first, then, after Darwin, into the "biological sciences" and then into all learning "disciplines" (HERE);

c) From Newton through Einstein and Communist physicists (HERE, p.9)--and now openly Kabbalist physicists such as Dr. Schroeder (HERE)--theoretical scientism has employed occult math and fraudulent use of technology to move the Kabbalic Kosmos toward its goal of erasing Bible credibility from Creation to Jesus;

d) By 1965 Arno Penzias’ micky mouse declaration that he had discovered 15 billion year old radiation from a Big Bang was pure Kabbalist Kreationism going to afterburners, but no one was making the connection (HERE p.7);

e) "Exobiologist" Carl Sagan and his sycophant cyberpunk dopehead compatriots became the computer programmers for NASA’s telescopes and cameras and raised fraudulent use of technology to new levels of deceit (HERE. pp.2,3);

f) Daniel Goldin took over NASA for nine years and boldly spent billions of tax money to direct all space efforts to "discover our cosmic roots" in a blatant Kabbala fulfillment agenda which he named the "Origins Program" (HERE, pp.3,4 - HERE);

g) Having surreptitiously nursed the Talmud/Kabbala "Creation Scenario" from Copernicanism to Big Bangism where both are now in the world’s textbooks disguised as "science", those who are knowingly behind this scam to end all scams are about ready to break out the champagne; and...

h) All that remains is for this apotheosis of deception to put real fake images of alleged discoveries of ice and moss and proto-evolving extraterrestrial life on your TV and computer screens. This ever-escalating Virtual Reality coup is calculated to end all lingering Bible creation talk and get the Biblical God out of the creation business once and for all. (Read this one page of rhapsodizing about Virtual Reality Technology: HERE. This is science??)

3) "Deep Space" cosmology with all its fantastic claims cannot be separated from its Copernican foundation. That foundation is nothing more than seven interdependent assumptions which deny all observational and experimental evidence, as we’ve seen. All "Deep Space--beyond the Solar System"--cosmology rests on the assumption that the Earth is rotating. (Put that fact in your memory bank....)

4)With so much riding on the assumption-riddled Heliocentricity Model there was one way--and only one way--to prevent a geocentric uprising somewhere down the line. That way was to establish the sun as just one of innumerable stars--with the Earth as just another planet (of "probable" millions or billions more "out there", it was theorized)--and proceed with occult math and fraudulent use of increasingly programmable technology (and plenty of media cooperation and hype) to move the stars out some 15 billion light years (HERE, p.9 -HERE - HERE - HERE , pp.5-7- HERE). At this distance, it was believed, no one could ever argue convincingly that the stars could orbit the Earth nightly. Thus, the Helio Model would be forever safe from exposure; the Origins Scenario of Rabbinic Kabbalism could proceed apace with its Virtual Reality Deceptions; and Christianity could die on the vine...the credibility of its Biblical raison d’être defeated and increasingly mocked.


But don’t bet on it!!


Diabolically clever assumptions are still assumptions...and they are vulnerable! When it is understood that these assumptions deny plain Scriptures which are certified by observation and experiment and have never been disproved, then and only then is this battle for foundational truth about the Origin of all that exists put in its proper light. Remember: Ultimately--as shown repeatedly on this webpage (e.g., HERE - HERE - HERE - HERE), this is a battle between religions...not a battle between science and the Bible. It is an all-out battle in which pseudo-science is the weapon of choice of the g-d of Talmudic/ Kabbalic Pharisaism for defeating the God of Biblical Christianity.


To the natural eye, it may look as though the battle is over and the g-d of pseudo-science has won (Rev. 18:7). But those who know better have read the rest of the chapter. There, and elsewhere, they see how suddenly (vs.8,10,17,19) and completely Satan’s Babylonish Empire is "made desolate" [i.e.,"forsaken by God" (v.19)]


Because this is an all-out battle between the "Creation Scenarios" of two antithetical religions, and because one of these religions has completely deceived the world into accepting its "Big Bang creation scenario" as the work of diligent and brilliant scientific discoveries, three things are immediately obvious:

1) One of these religions has accomplished its ends by hiding the fact (until recently!) that today’s supposedly secular cosmology is actually a front for an overtly anti-Christ religion, and that this covert religious agenda disguised as "science" has for centuries been the chief instrument of a supernaturally guided plan for destroying Bible credibility and the Christianity that is dependent upon that credibility.

2) The necessary foundation for this diabolic agenda--as Kabbalist Rabbi Nachmanides recognized three centuries before Copernicus, and as Kabbalist Rabbi Isaac Luria comprehended as soon as Copernicanism was off the launch pad--was that there must be an absolute victory of purely assumptive Copernicanism over the observationally certified Biblical Model of a non-moving Earth.

3) Then, with Copernicanism virtually triumphant after a century and a half, the churches--having bowed to this new g-d of "truth" by accepting an evolved universe and evolved earth from the physical "sciences"--had little fight left in them when the Darwinian Revolution captured the biological "sciences" and presented them with evolved mankind. Evolutionism--not only of the bodies in the universe, but of all life forms including mankind--then rapidly became the new foundation of "knowledge" (HERE). Barely three generations after Darwinism took off, Big Bangism entered the "scientific" camp on cue and provided a universe swarming with evolved Spielbergian and Star Trekian "extraterrestrials". Once the Big Bang Expanding Universe concept took hold in the universities and the media (e.g., Sagan’s "Cosmos" Series), the Kabbala agenda was past third base and heading for the home plate. This universe was of such incomprehensible size (and growing by trillions of miles a year!) that no one would dare try to bring back the Biblical Model of a non-moving Earth! That Model required the stars to go around the Earth nightly and nobody...but nobody... would believe they could do that if they were billions of light year distances away... as "science" has assured all of us ad nauseam that they are....


In spite of all that--even when billions of light year thickness for the universe is postulated--the issue has refused to die. A non-moving earth is, after all, repeatedly certified in the Bible (HERE), and a few hundred million people still believe that "God’s Word never returns to Him void, but always accomplishes what it was sent to accomplish" (Is. 55:11). Satan has his plan, and God has His Plan.


As noted, the chief Geocentric response to the Big Bang Universe has come to be the Machian Model. It can explain mathematically how the Biblical Model still answers all the appearances...even to getting the stars around the Earth nightly. As mentioned, Astronomers Dr. G. Bouw, Sir Fred Hoyle, an other professionally qualified folks (HERE) agree that the Biblical geocentric model can not be disproved.

Also, it is important to weigh in one of the main pillars of the "Electric Universe" theory (HERE). One of those pillars is the conviction that the universe is much, much smaller than Kabbalic Big Bangism calls for. The physicists and engineers supporting this concept of the stars as ball lightening transformers operating through superconductive space plasma have a Model that makes a lot of sense and solves a lot of problems. It would catch on better and faster if some of its proponents would leave out all the pagan thunderbolt distractions. Still, as it stands, Electric Universe Advocates: a) Boldly guffaw at all the quarks, black holes, superstring legerdemain, etc., of Big Bangism; b) Present a mechanism that sends overworked gravitation theory back to the minors; c) Champion a smaller universe. For these reasons alone EU physicists and engineers deserve a round of applause.

Grateful as I am for the Machian Model because it can contend with the BB Paradigm on its own mathematical turf and still uphold a non-moving Earth--and glad as I am that the Electric Universe Model scoffs at the Big Bang Paradigm (...and includes evidence which points to a much, much smaller universe: HERE, p. 1)--there needs, nevertheless, to be a credible, really "small" universe model that totally eliminates the Big Bang Paradigm and all the ages and distances that go with that mountain of contra-scientific Kabbalism.


Accordingly, with God’s help I pray, I am going to present seven essays beginning in July 2003 which will describe a really "Small Universe Model". This Model will speak to Bible-devoted Christians--and others, I hope--and be the beginning of the end of the argument that the stars are too far away to go around the Earth every night as observed. This Model will be erected solely on: a) Passages in the Bible which deal directly with the subject of the size and structure of the universe.; and: b) Indisputable optical concepts which support the Biblical Model. (These seven essays have been completed. Read them: HERE - HERE - HERE - HERE -HERE - HERE - HERE.)

Those who either already believe that all Truth on all subjects that man needs to know is in the Bible--or are open to believing that if given enough reason to do so--will see how the Scriptures describe the structure and size of the universe in a way that is totally credible...and just as totally ignored. By connecting what is actually known to an understanding that an anti-Bible religion masquerading as "science" is what has created the mythological size and age of the universe in the first place, each person will be able to decide which one of these religions is telling the Truth about the Size of the universe and the Origin of all that exists.

Those who have no inclination to accept Biblical evidence of a small universe as credible will, of course, denounce the Model. Their education has trained and prepared their minds not to trust the Bible, and even to mock it and those who do believe it is the source of all Truth. I’ve been there and done that and understand that position (HERE).

Nevertheless, I am happy to report that--for both those who do and those who do not trust the Bible for Truth on this and all other subjects--there is a simple fact of true science experienced and understood by everyone which bears powerfully on this subject. Indeed, everyone who has ever taken some note of the extraordinary reflective capabilities of light on a watery surface will understand how the Biblical Model of the universe works. One can recall, for example, the sparkling, shimmering effect of sunlight on even a little pool of water. As for multiple reproductions of a single light source, even a small candle lit in a darkened room will be reproduced reflectively a huge number of times at different angles on various windows, mirrors, refrigerators, door knobs, eyeballs...any reflective surface really.

These reflected images are a strange reversal of the subject, of course, as can be readily confirmed by looking in a mirror and pulling your left ear with your left hand. Your reflection will seem to be pulling your right ear with your right hand. So, obviously, the science which deals with all kinds of reflections--optics, whatever-- knows what can be done with the computerized manipulation of mirrors and cameras in telescopes, for example (HERE), and knows how to produce some very creative results depth wise, shape wise, orientation wise, and distance wise!

We will want to keep these kinds of observable, repeatable, confirmable phenomena associated with reflections in mind when we take a careful look at the structure of the universe as given in both some familiar and some heretofore unused (or vanishingly underused) Biblical descriptions of that structure. These descriptions will reveal how the Kabbalic Big Bang Paradigm has turned trillions of reflections of a limited number of real stars into billions of galaxies in a universe 15 billion light years thick when a large but comprehensible number of stars being reflected trillions of times could easily explain the phenomena and simultaneously fit into the Biblical structure of a universe one-half to one light DAY thick.

( Part I of a seven part science-supported Biblical Small Universe Model can be seen HERE. )

After getting a grip on the totally assumptive basis of the Copernican foundation of all modern cosmology it is hoped that people from all beliefs and religions will tighten that grip at every opportunity. Certainly, all are warmly and earnestly invited to weigh the evidence and make a choice as to which religion they are going to align themselves. There is no secular choice; both are religious....

Since, however, the Bible says plainly that God’s Judgment "begins at the house of God" (HERE), it is evident that the initial focus of this attack on Babylon (confusion) was long ago ordained to fall on the "called, chosen, and faithful of Christ" (Rev. 17:14) who are a distinct minority in Christian Churches of all descriptions. According to the Bible, 3/4 of those in Christian churches--these "houses of God"--are "disobedient, ungodly, sinners" and the other 1/4 are those that are "scarcely saved" (I Pet. 4:17,18: Again: HERE). Whether that "scarcely saved" 1/4 is capable of becoming the "called, chosen, and faithful" who are going to resolutely follow "the Lamb in this war to overcome Satan’s deceptions" (Rev. 17:14) remains to be seen. In any event, "unconditional surrender" to the correctly determined doctrinal authority of the Bible will be the standard to which those in the churches will be first called upon to commit themselves.

After all--while Jesus is the steadfast Christian focus: I Cor. 2:2)--that focus can go nowhere but downhill unless the Bible’s credibility is assured. A Virgin Born, miracle working, salvation offering, resurrected Jesus has no foundation other than what the Bible teaches about Him. Christians are going to have to get that fact into their spirits and heads and quit playing games where the Word of God is concerned! The Bible is either the source of Absolute Truth on every subject it addresses or it cannot be trusted on any subject, Jesus included. Period and paragraph! Satan knows this--even if Christians don’t!--and has been allowed (Acts 15:18; etc.) to use "science falsely so called" to virtually destroy the credibility of the entire Bible by destroying Biblical Creationism (which includes a non-moving Earth! HERE) not only in the world’s eyes, but in the churches’ also.

That destruction began in earnest with the observation-denying, assumption- ridden Copernican Revolution which begat the Darwinian Revolution which begat all the other Bible destroying "isms" which now undergird all of modern man’s "knowledge" (HERE) . The world--and most of Christianity too--has turned away from the Bible as the source of Absolute Truth from God and has turned to what it believes is "Science" as its source of Truth on the foundational question of the Origin and nature of all that exists. This "science" is: a) Really scientism based on fact-denying assumptions from A to Z; b) Not "science" at all but the establishment of the Religion of Talmud/Kabbala Pharisaic Judaism fulfilling its Big Bang evolutionary creation scenario (HERE - HERE) while accomplishing its supernaturally backed agenda of destroying Bible-based Creationism and Christianity in the process.

Rest assured that the days of this seeming triumph over the Bible and the Biblical Christ are numbered, and the number is small. The utter confusion about Truth in all matters is what the Bible calls Babylon, Satan’s Empire. That Empire is exposed and forced to run up its real flag, i.e., its Satanic Flag, "one hour" after a Global Government is seated (Rev. 17:12-14;18:2; 13:2b-7). God is not the author of all this confusion caused by deception (I Cor. 14:33). He has allowed it for eternal reasons (Is. 66:24), but Satan is its author. "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away" (Matt. 24:35). Nor will those words "come back to Him void without accomplishing what He sent them to do" (Is. 55:11). Does anyone with their thinking cap on really believe that the God of the universe is going to let the enemies of His Truths triumph over the Bible...when He has made it plain that He has even "magnified His Word above His Name" (Ps. 138:2) ?!

That, my friend, is a rhetorical question! Not only will Babylon Fall and the Bible’s credibility be dramatically restored and all doctrinal confusion be cleansed by that Word alone, but it will all happen so quickly (2-3 months) that disbelief and pandemonium will ensue (Rev. Ch.18,etc.) until the Truth is settled. When that is done, the world will have been divided into overt Satan worshippers...and those who get on God’s side (Rev. 18:8,10,17,19; 17:12-18; 13:2b-71).

So, as it turns out, there is one and only one ready-made issue that will not only restore the Bible’s credibility with the required swiftness and thoroughness, but will also start a domino effect on all false teachings...the ostensibly secular ones and the openly religious ones alike. That domino effect will result in the elevation of the credibility of the Bible to the status of unchallenged inerrancy by the end of Babylon’s Fall. It is an issue that will separate those who are ready and eager to surrender unconditionally to the Biblical God’s authority from those who will not follow that authority even when it is supernaturally demonstrated beyond all doubt. That one ready-made issue is the restoration of the repeatedly stated Bible Doctrine that it is the sun and not the Earth that moves in the heavens. (Joshua 10:12-14: HERE), and the simultaneous rejection of the Kabbalic Universe built on the assumptions upholding a rotating earth.

This is the one teaching that is the Achilles Heel of all the deceptions upholding Satan’s Empire of Babylon. This is the one teaching that attacked Bible credibility head-on and paved the way for the success of Darwinism, Marxism, Freudianism, Einsteinism, Penziasism, Saganism, and now Wickramasingheism, all of which are Bible-bashing isms seeking to defeat Biblical Christianity and re-establish Paganism (HERE- HERE) under the guise of "science". Finally, this is the one teaching that exposes the Pharisaic Kabbalic roots of all the Bible-bashing Satanism embodied in those pernicious isms that are poised to finish the job that began in earnest with the Copernican Revolution.

"Come out of her [i.e., "Babylon], MY PEOPLE", is God’s command (Rev. 18:4). The command is first to those in the Christian churches (I Pet. 4:17,18) . Every single one of those churches has denied the Bible that rests on their podiums which repeatedly declares a moving sun and a non-moving Earth (HERE).

That denial has made all the rest possible!!

www.fixedearth.com

-------

ignt
04-22-2006, 08:06 PM
The celestial objects that humans perceive are there for them to perceive. They are part of the tableau. Signs and symbols are their function, Celine is precisely positioned as to cover the solar disk to just within its edge. If any think this is by chance, then they are just what I accuse them of. All is managed for an effect that most see but never comprehend. How true of humans.

rushdoony
04-22-2006, 09:05 PM
Ignt,

You speak in code. I don't know much about
or believe in nihilism or astrological horoscopes/charts.

Rushdoony
----------------------------------------
Regarding: The Earth is NOT Moving !

Geocentrists and Geostatists,

Send Heliocentrists ( people who say the Earth rotates on an "axis"
and orbits the sun ) a copy of the Levitating Globe
at the beginning of the web page www.fixedearth.com .

Tell Heliocentrists that many scientists agree that electromagnetism explains many phenomena better than the gravity phenomena, and given the totally assumption based arguments for Copernicanism, their argument is anything but the sure evidence they think it is.

Then you might mention a few of those ridiculous assumptions demanded for belief that those satellites in question are synchronized with the alleged Earth rotation. For example, they must agree that these satellites have to be popped into a very limited altitude slot of 22, 236 miles...while no LEO's require such exactitude They must agree that the orbit be a perfect circle, which no other orbits are. They must agree that--to be in the same location as they factually are--they must immediately attain a precise speed of 6856 MPH (as I remember), and that speed must not vary even one or two MPH lest the satellite need constant corrections from its repositioning thrusters which are not designed for that kind of work and which would take all the meaning out of geosynchonous anyway.

Moreover, I don't know how many of these very special satellites there are out there today--all directly over the equator--at 22,236 miles, but there are a bunch of them. Which is harder to believe: a)All of them are put in this slot and immediately assume the identical 6856 MPH speed in order to maintain their exact distances from each other, and do so for many years in perfectly circular orbits, or: b) Just like the Earth, they are "hung on nothing" (no orbit, no track, no mystical gravitational equilibrium) and are sustained motionless over a motionless Earth by perfectly created electromagnetic forces of the very sort one can observe with one's own eyes even in a $50 desk model Levitating Globe??

There are other arguments, but these get to the heart of the choice. Again, I would stress the demonstrable fact that every aspect of the Copernican Model is based on an assumption. Geosynchronous just ads to the list. We can SEE that the electromagnetic explanation is workable.

M.H. www.fixedearth.com

Arjuna
04-22-2006, 09:59 PM
This writer likes to fault the advanced calculus used by astrophysicists, but he apparently can’t do simple arithmetic calculations. He is clearly out of his league.

Since that time (‘65) the game has been pretty much limited to settling on a radius for the universe. By the ‘80’s it was a standard fact in the books that the universe is some 15 billion light years thick, give or take a meter or two. Such a radius would give the furthermost stars a course of over 45 billion light year miles to cover every day. With the distance of a single light year running almost 6 trillion miles, one could multiply that by a billion...take that result and multiply it by 45 or so to get a number that will cause your motherboard to smoke and jerk and melt right before your eyes.

He confuses the measurements of radius and diameter. The radius is the length of a line from the center of a shere to the surface. The diameter is the length of a line from the surface which passes through the center and ends at the suface on the opposite side. Clearly, the diameter is exactly twice the radius: d = 2r.

The game is setting the radius of the universe. If the Big Bang occurred 15 billion years ago, then, according to modern physics, radiation has travelled 15 billion light years in all directions from the location of the Big Bang. That produces a sphere, or universe, with a radius of 15 billion light years and a diameter of 30 billion light years.

However, the author says the science establishment claims the universe is 15 billion light years thick. Try again. A spere with a radius of 15 billion light years is 30 billion light years thick.

Measuring the length of a circular orbit is the same as measuring the circumference. In space, an orbiting body almost always follows the path of a non-circular ellipse, but the ellipse is often nearly circular, so calculating its orbit as circular yields a good approximation.

See this website for formulas for measurement concepts (http://math.about.com/library/blmeasurement.htm).

Pi is used in the calculation of the circumference, and Pi = 3.14 approximately. Let the circumference = C, and Pi = p, and the formula is C = pd, or Pi times the diameter.

He says the claimed orbit of distance stars around the center of the universe is 45 billion light years. This calculation is based on the formula of C = pr = 3.14 times 15B = 47 billion light years, which is clearly incorrect. The claimed orbit of distant stars around the center is actually C = pd = 3.14 times 30B = 94 billion light years.

Even though 94 billion light years is a long way to travel in 24 hours, the problem for geocentrists is actually much worse than this. The earth is certainly not at the center of the universe, and is probably pretty close to the edge. Let’s assume that the earth lies 80% of the distance from the center to the edge. 80% times 15B = 12 billion light years. Thus, the furthest stars from the earth are 12 + 15 = 27 billion light years away. To orbit the earth in 24 hours, those stars would have to travel around a circle having a diameter of 54 billion light years. That orbit = C = pd = 3.14 times 54B = 170 billion light years.

This example is good enough to demonstrate that this person is unqualified to make the scientific argument he is attempting. I have read much of the material at his website, and most of it makes no sense at all.

I would be happy to consider geocentric arguments from more credible sources.

rushdoony
04-23-2006, 10:18 AM
Arjuna,

It is you that are not credible,
because you have just been caught lying,
by spinning a persons words to the
opposite of what they mean.

The author says 15 Billion light years
thick...such a RADIUS...
By thickness he meant radius and anyone
could figure that yet you saw that as an opportunity to to lie and say he meant
diameter.

Then you use the opportunity you
made by twisting words, to explain
Kindergarten measurement formulas.

Your Mystical Hindu religion is
failing you, you saw an
opportunity to twist the meaning
of a word, to make a lie, and you
did it. Shame on you and your bogus religion.

rushdoony
04-23-2006, 10:28 AM
http://www.fixedearth.com/Size%20and%20Structure%20Part%20VI.htm

The Size and Structure of the Universe

According to the Bible and Non-Theoretical Science


Part VI


More Unyielding Evidence of Flagrant Deceptions

In The Measurement Of Star Distances


...Keeping in mind what we’ve already seen in Part V about the Besselian parallax quicksand upon which the "science" of measuring distances in space is built, let’s focus now on several pages of further hard evidence which shows that those fantastic distances are phony baloney from start to finish.


Anyone seriously looking at today’s textbook cosmological science which has tricked the world into believing that the universe is 15 billion years old and 15 billion light years thick must keep these twelve facts in mind as they continue to weigh what has gone before and what is to follow:


Fact One: The incomprehensibly old and vast universe that has been taught as scientific truth for generations is first and foremost an evolutionary concept from start to finish.


Fact Two: This evolutionary concept includes the acceptance of a belief that the Earth itself evolved billions of years ago.


Fact Three: The Copernican Revolution (officially launched in 1543) gradually established the belief that our Earth was just a lucky accident that happened to be the right distance from an ordinary star we call the sun. This belief begat the "logical" conviction amongst the "intelligentsia" that there would be other "earths" with other life on them amongst the ever increasing myriad of stars that astronomers were allegedly finding and the ever increasing ages and distances they were assigned.


Fact Four: All of the points of light that were called stars that could be seen were too small and too far away for their distances to be determined by normal trigonometric and geometric methods. Undaunted, other pseudo mathematical means were formulated by Bessel in 1838. His formula immediately pushed the closest stars out to distances that had to be accounted for in multiple light years.


Fact Five: As pointed out (HERE, pp. 4-7), Bessel’s "breakthrough" in establishing mind-boggling distances to the stars--which is still the standard cosmological foundation for measuring distances to the stars today--was based on the unproved premise that the Earth orbits the sun. This premise allowed the base of a triangle to a star to be 186,000,000 miles, the diameter of the alleged orbit of the Earth around the Sun. If, however, the Earth is stationary with the sun orbiting it--as all observational evidence insists--then the base of that triangle is only 8,000 miles. That means that Besselian "math" puts the stars 23,250 times too far out.


Fact Six: Time is the hero of the evolution plot, both for the universe and for Earth. Without the billions of years that the space "sciences" have assigned to the alleged evolution of the universe, the evolutionary explanation for all that exists takes its proper place at the top of the list of deceptions that has led mankind away from the truth about the universe, the Earth, and humanity itself.


Fact Seven: Though traceable to Pythagoras (HERE), Aristarchus, et al, it wasn’t until The Copernican Revolution provided a mathematical model for a moving Earth that the physical sciences--powered by ever more arcane/occult mathematics--gradually got on the heliocentricity bandwagon. The effect of this Revolution was to remove the Earth and Mankind--along with the sun, moon, and stars--from being the entire focus of God’s Plan as stated in the "creation scenario" of the Bible (and similarly in the Koran)...to a "creation scenario" where there was no focus, no plan, and no need for God...or, certainly, no God offering a plan for eternal life to mankind. The Copernican Revolution not only declared the Bible wrong (and also the Koran :HERE), and not only made the Earth and Mankind insignificant accidents in a universe full of star/suns with fantasized planets and evolving life forms, it also provided an open door for theoretical science to steadily expand the age and size of the universe to fit the present Big Bang Kabbala Model of the Pharisee Religion.


Fact Eight: The Copernican Revolution from its beginning to this very hour has been based on seven assumptions (HERE), each one of which defies all observational and experimental evidence, and is upheld solely by: a) A clever mathematical model; and: b) A growing conviction now believed to be unshakable that the distances to the stars are so great that it is simply unimaginable that they could go around the Earth nightly as the Bible demands and as observation and photos confirm (HERE).


Fact Nine: By its conquest of the Physical Sciences, the Copernican Revolution has gradually and almost completely destroyed the Bible’s claim to be the Absolute and Inerrant Truth from God. This success paved the way for the recent triumph of another "origins scenario" wherein the Earth and Mankind and the sun, moon, and stars were not unique and central to a great Plan by God, but rather were merely the by-products of the interaction of cosmic forces over eons of time.


Fact Ten: With a "science"-endorsed evolving universe accepted virtually everywhere--including Christian Churches--the stage was set for the conquest of the Biological Sciences by those promoting the evolutionary mind-set. Though percolating for over a century before Darwin, he gave the movement a "natural selection" mechanism in 1859. Then the evolutionary premise for all that exists spread rapidly to the "Social Sciences" (K. Marx et al), the "Behavioral Sciences" (S. Freud et al), Philosophy and Education (F. Nietzsche, J. Dewey, A. Einstein et al), the Arts (Bartok, Picasso, Joyce et al), along with a century of physicists and astronomers (HERE)...culminating in NASA’s "Origins Program" of Kabbalists Sagan and Goldin (HERE) and on to the present hour where Kabbalist Physicist Schroeder et al treat Big Bangism as if it is factual, and equate the Biblical six days with 15 billion years (HERE).


Fact Eleven: The long-hidden fact that all of the essential components of today’s "science"-backed evolutionary explanation for all that exists, i.e., Billion of years; Copernicanism; Relativity; Big Bangism; an Expanding Universe... is really a religious "creation scenario", is now out in the open. As documented repeatedly on this webpage and confirmed by Kabbalist Physicist Schroeder (HERE) et al, Rabbinical writings in the Kabbala centuries ago described the Big Bang evolutionary "origins scenario" that is the basis of all of man’s "knowledge" today (HERE). In short, Big Bangism and all that goes with it is the fulfillment of an anti-Christ, anti-Bible religion of Pharisaic Judaism masquerading as "theoretical science".


Fact Twelve: There is an alternative model of the size and structure, age and purpose of the universe, the Earth, and mankind which is 100% Biblical, 100% scientifically viable, and 100% logical. This alternative model rests on the premise of a stationary Earth that is supported by all observational and experimental evidence. This solid premise reduces the size of the universe to less than one ten trillioneth of what is cited in textbooks today.


With that said, it’s time to add to the list (HERE - HERE - HERE) of ways that the space "sciences" have been and now are deceiving the world about the size and age of the universe and thereby maintaining the evolutionary mythology. Though there are enough quotations in the files beside me to make a good-sized book; I will try to present the meat of what is going on in the next 16 pages. Consider these quotations which tell of facts about space science and the comments that apply to those facts:


Telescopes


Quotation: "If one could look through the 200 inch telescope on Mt. Palomar, one would see stars as nothing more than the same points of light you would see by simply walking outside and looking up. Why are stars the sole hold out in the resolution revolution up to now? Simply put, stars are very small and very far away...." 1 (Note: Emph. added to many of the citations throughout.)

Comment: Even when we look through telescopes almost 17 feet wide the stars look the same as when we go outside and look up. What we see through a monster telescope costing many millions of $ is not altered, enhanced, resolved. Strange isn’t it? Why? Q:"...they are very small and very far away". (Yeah, and you have 26 different measurement "techniques" to get them "very far away", don’t you? (HERE. p. 7).

***

Quotation: "...But the atmosphere...blurs the ability to see detail.... This is why telescopes in space like HST [Hubble Space Telescope], are so important..." 2

Comment: Amongst some very pertinent background info on Edwin Hubble there is a statement made by Hubble himself about the so-called "Hubble Expansion" being attributed to him concerning the alleged recession of the stars from a Big Bang. This is a statement that is basically ignored by one and all: Hubble himself said: "There is no evidence of expansion and no restriction of the time scale, no trace of spatial curvature...." (HERE. pp. 4,5) Wow! As for any other critics of turning to the Hubble Telescope for final answers, this astronomer aptly notes: Q: "...anything which decouples the link between redshift and expansion is viewed with horror, as both of these factors link to the age of the universe through the Hubble Constant." 3

***

Quotation: "...the Hubble Deep Field only surveyed 1/36 millionth of the sky!" 4

Comment: One 36th millionth! That’s a pretty small potato patch to be extrapolating about potatoes all over a universe that is 36,000,000 times bigger than your sample, isn’t it?

***

Quotation: "Concept designs for the ESO telescope, dubbed the ‘OverWhelmingly Large Telescope’ (OWL), call for an instrument with a 109 yard (100 meter) aperture [!] made up of segmented mirrors to peer deep into the universe.... At its heart is a system known as adaptive optics, which allows astronomers to correct for the blurring effect of the atmosphere.... OWL scientists hope their telescope could find...other potentially life sustaining biospheres.... OWL is expected to cost over $1,000,000,000...." 5

Comment: If blurring is a problem and space telescopes solve the problem, why are ten countries (ESO) planning an earth-bound "OverWhelmingly Large Telescope (OWL)" with an opening bigger than a football field that costs a Billion Bucks? Well, of course, to Q: "find other potentially life sustaining biospheres", what else?? Everything comes back to establishing the evolutionary mind-set for the universe, Earth, and Mankind. This is a religious "creation scenario", not science! The religion is Pharisaic Judaism; the holy book describing this "creation scenario" is the Kabbala (HERE , p.5 - HERE).

***

Quotation: "How did the universe begin and evolve? How did we get here? Are we alone?.... Our missions and research generate most of the coolest news coming out of NASA.... Our science stretches...to the beginning of the universe, billions of light years away." 6

Comment: NASA spokespeople regularly ask these deep, deep questions about the Origins of Everything. Then, as usual, Evolutionary Big Bang Expanding Universe answers are supplied in the next paragraph as if they were strictly secular conclusions with no religious bias. If, however, those "answers" have an indisputable religious origin that is many centuries old and that religion has always been the overt adversary of the Bible’s creation account, what does that mean to you?

***

Quotation: "Galaxy Evolution Explorer Mission Status, May 6, 2003 News Release, NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology: ...engineers...have powered up both the digital processing unit, which houses the main computer, and the detector front-end electronics box, which contains the photon discrimination and processing logic....High voltage is essential for the telescope to gather the ultraviolet photons that will help scientists piece together the story of how and when stars form inside galaxies.... The Galaxy Evolution Explorer mission will image millions of galaxies across 10 billion years of cosmic history, which is 80-percent of the way back to the Big Bang...." 7

Comment: Obviously the Big Bang evolutionary mind-set with its 15 billion light year age for the universe is the mother of all that is programmed into the "main computer" and all it controls in this "gee whiz" operation. Is there anyone alive who thinks that anything that doesn’t fit that mind-set is going to be programmed into that computer?? The GEE mission "will image" [not "see"] millions of galaxies and they will be Q: "80 percent of the way back to the Big Bang". This "Explorer" knew precisely what it was to "discover" and report before it was launched.

***

Quotation: "Ground-based Optical/Near-Infrared large Telescopes are crucial tools...but their image quality is severely limited...leading to more and more sophisticated techniques....Until recently, the astronomical telescope has remained a "passive instrument".... Without any in-built corrective devices to improve the quality of star images during observations.... Because of the high bandwidth and the small field to which correction can be applied, adaptive optics uses a small deformable mirror.... In some current projects, the possibility of using a large deformable secondary mirror is being developed.... 8

Comment: There are plenty of $ going into "more and more sophisticated techniques" to build into telescopes "corrective devices to improve star images", including "deformable mirrors".... My Thesaurus equates "deformable" with "distorted, abnormal, misshapen, disfigured..." Does this sound like an all-out effort to accurately report what can really be seen where stars are concerned?? The images demanded by the evolution paradigm are created by this kind of fraudulent use of technology, pure and simple. Lot’s more on this (HERE) where, along with other tech fraud in space "science", we learn that: Q: "The New Generation Space Telescope is designed to produce "a pretty ratty image that looks like an interference pattern [so that] a series of interference patterns can be combined to form a perfect synthesized image.." (HERE p.3) NASA’s H P (Note: The name of the NGST has been changed to: the James Webb Space Telescope.)

***

Quotation: "No matter where astronomers point their telescopes, they see a distant sheet of light surrounding us. Beyond that shell of radiation, astronomers can see nothing...." 9

Comment: This author goes on to give the standard explanation, namely that this "radiation" is Q: "the faint afterglow of the big bang".... But wouldn’t the Biblical Model with its massively reflective crystalline "shell"--described throughout this series--also present astronomers with a "distant sheet of light surrounding us"??

Of course it would! Another key point here is that Q: "astronomers can see nothing" beyond that "shell of radiation". What they claim to see is fabricated and computer programmed, as this Creationist scientist who is beginning to smell a very big rat notes: Q: "It is well to remember that a great deal of modern cosmology, especially when its practitioners are trying to predict its destiny and rotrodict its origin, is sheer mathematical manipulation and evolutionary philosophical imagination. ‘It ain’t necessarily so!" 10 A hearty "Amen" to that!

***

Quotation: "Where do the laws of physics come from?" (an MIT astrophysicist was asked. He replied:) "We are a long way from being able to answer that one." 11

Comment: The Creationist scientist writing the article sums up his review of the Big Bang literature: Q: "...They simply do not know how our galaxy began. Even less could be known about other galaxies....It is well to remember that they do not know how the cosmos evolved--or stars, or galaxies, or anything else..." Wow! 12

***

Quotation: "A small spherical universe after all"? This is a sub-heading in a piece by a professional astronomer and a leading geocentrist who goes on to say: Q: "...researchers have particularly studied small universe models, which explain the billions of visible galaxies as repeating images of a smaller number of actual galaxies"[!]. (He continues): "...spherical spaceforms (geometries in which the universe is viewed as a sphere) have come back to the forefront of cosmology"[!]....13

Comment: You say you haven’t heard any such thing on your evening news?? Maybe its because that news is programmed by people with the same evolutionary fixation as those who are running NASA’s "Origins Program". They are spending Billions of your tax $ to promote the Kabbalist "creation scenario" whilst they simultaneously destroy Biblical Christianity. It’s the old "killing two birds with one stone" game. Problem is: Truth in science and in the Bible are the birds being killed!

***

Quotation: "The Doppler Redshift results from the relative motion of the light emitting object and the observer. If the source of light is moving away from you then the wavelength of the light is stretched out, i.e., the light is shifted toward the red...."14

Comment: The redshift voodooism is the life-blood of Kabbalic Big Bangism. Notice this from another source which addresses the "redshift controversy":

***

Quotation: "It is known that many astronomical observations cannot be explained by means of the ordinary Doppler shift interpretation. The mere examination of a recent catalog of objects having very large redshifts shows that among 109 quasi-stellar objects, in which both absorption and emissions lines could be measured, the value of the absorption redshift in a given object, is always different from the one measured in emission for the same object. It is clear that such results cannot be explained as being due solely to a Doppler redshift. A New mechanism must be looked for, in order to explain those inconsistent redshifts and many other observations related to the ‘redshift controversy’".... 15

Comment: The props that are holding up the Kabbalic Kosmos are threatening to give way on all sides. There is really no true scientific strength in those props. They are going to break and set off a veritable firestorm of God’s Truth that will begin with a non-moving Earth and lead to the unmasking of all of Satan’s deceptions upholding his Babylonish empire (Rev. 17:14). Notice these other props and how they are always fabricated out of the Kabbalic alloys of billions of years, heliocentricity, relativism, big bangism, and an expanding universe:

***

Quotation: "The Cosmological Redshift is a redshift caused by the expansion of space. The wavelength of light increases as it traverses the expanding universe.... The Gravitational Redshift is a shift in the frequency of a photon to lower energy as it climbs out of a gravitational field...." 16

Comment: This account brings up an interesting question about both of these weak hypotheses: Q: "Astrophysical observations show that the electromagnetic radiation originating from cosmological objects is often redshifted. Except for some hypothesis such as assuming that it is a gravitational redshift, this has always been interpreted as a Doppler shift. To date, the interaction of light with interstellar gas has not been seriously considered as a possible mechanism responsible for the observed redshift because no known forward scattering process could be demonstrated to lead to an effect compatible with common astronomical observations." 17 Comment: Is it not time to consider retro-reflected starlight from the Biblical crystalline "shell" illuminating non-luminous bodies on the "far side" which are themselves reflected off of that shell (HERE, (Figures 7-10)? Why can’t all this be the "mechanism responsible for the observed redshift and scattering process" that "is compatible with common astronomical observations"?!

***

Quotation: "Another interesting scientific problem for today’s astronomer is the direct observation of surface features on stars. Now, we only have high resolution photographs of the Sun in which we may see spots, prominences, flares.... We do not have comparable photographs of any other stars than our Sun....[!!]18 Comment: All of the fantastic claims of modern cosmology about billions of galaxies and trillions of stars that are millions and billions of light years away from Earth are pure hypothetical hogwash. They can not even resolve the most elemental details of the closest star (which they claim is 24 trillion miles away [1.3 parsecs; 4.1 light years], which claim--you will remember--is based on using the assumed Earth orbit diameter of 186,000,000 miles to make a trigonometric triangle). "Listen" to this:

***

Quotation: "If we tried to observe alpha Centauri, our nearest solar-like star at a distance of 1.3 parsecs, its disk would have a size of 7 milliseconds of arc, almost 270,000 times smaller than the apparent size of the Sun! ...a very big telescope is necessary to resolve the star’s disk, let alone observe star spots on its surface. In fact, to see the surface of alpha Centauri in visible light we would need a telescope with a mirror diameter of 14 meters [c.45 feet], larger than the Keck telescopes in Hawaii. To resolve spots would require a telescope at least 100 times larger than that [c.4500 foot aperture!!]. Such a large telescope is well beyond our present day technology, if we try to construct one using a single mirror...." 19

Comment: Here is a plain admission that there are no ground based telescopes in existence that can see any characteristics whatsoever of even the closest star (which is 23,250 times closer than they say anyway!), and that the technology doesn’t exist to build one 15 football fields wide at the end. Hence, other means to keep the Kabbalist mythology afloat have to be invented...and cost be damned! Here is how this latest multi-billion dollar video game technology for astrophysicists is being played out:

***

Quotation: "...However, it is within our present capability [to see something on the closest star] if we use interferometric techniques. Invented by Albert Michelson in the 19th century [and used repeatedly with results showing no earth orbit!: Ed.], the interferometer makes use of separate telescopes that are widely spaced rather than on a single large mirror.... Most visitors to an optical interferometer will not recognize the array of optical elements as a normal telescope...." 20

Comment: If the "array of optical elements" don’t add up to a "normal telescope" then they must add up to an "abnormal telescope". What is an "abnormal telescope"? What does it tell us? Well...

***

Quotation: "The U.S. Navy [Huh? Why?] has a "prototype Optical Interferometer... outside Flagstaff, Arizona...which combines several small optical telescopes [which are] connected to each other [by vacuum tubes...an unmentioned "abnormality"]....their resolving capability is increased to that of a single 125 foot optical telescope.... But because the telescope lacks a large mirror, it can only see very bright objects, in fact, the human eye can pick out stars that the [interferometer] telescope cannot. [!!].... With conventional telescopes, the stars still really look like points of light. With optical interferometers, of which the Navy type is one, you can begin to see a thickness and a size to these objects....21

Comment: The human eye can pick out stars that this supposed telescopic marvel can not even pick out !! ...but with it you can begin to see a thickness "of these objects".... You figure it out! And these interferometer array abnormal telescopes are the cosmologist’s rage today...with big bucks laid out for construction in several countries around the world and with numerous University Grants.

***

With a reminder to go HERE for some more very interesting insights into the "abnormalities" involved in the construction and use of computer programmed telescopes (and cameras), and (HERE) for more on Redshift and Infrared, let’s shift to another key area of the deception game in the Big Bang drumbeat about the universe being 15 billion years old and 15 billion light years thick:


The Celestial Sphere


Quotation: "The celestial sphere is an imaginary sphere of gigantic radius with the earth located at its center...." 22

Comment: Plain enough....

***

Quotation: "The Celestial Sphere was (and remains) a useful way in which to represent the Universe and, in fact, it is still the way astronomers choose to model the observable sky...." 23

Comment: As these or any other descriptions of the Celestial Sphere plainly show, a model of the universe that has a stationary earth at its center works just fine for all purposes, "and, in fact, is still the way astronomers choose to model the observable sky...." That’s interesting, isn’t it? But on the heels of all such plain admissions comes the cautionary note to any reader who might be so thickheaded as to ask why the model that works and is used is not the true model! For example, on the same page with the first quotation, we read: Q: "Because of the Earth’s yearly orbital motion, the Sun appears to circle the ecliptic." 24 The warning following the second quotation is equally stern: Q: "Hmmm, but wait a minute. Physically the model does not make sense as we know that the Earth is not stationary...." 25 The fact is that both warnings are lies; there is no proof of the Earth yearly orbiting the sun, and there is no proof that the Earth is rotating.


Positional Astronomy Library


Quotation: "SLALIB is a library used by writers of positional-astronomy applications. Most of the 185 routines [helio-based, big bang paradigm] are concerned with astronomical position and time, but a number have wider trigonometrical [i.e., "distance"] ...applications." 26

Comment: Basically, it seems that the bulk of all computer software for modern cosmology utilizes this service or a similar one. Except for a few geocentric coordinates where they can’t be avoided, all routines are based on a rotating, orbiting earth...as are the spurious Besselian trigonometric distance benchmarks.

***

Quotation: SLALIB has "...no routines for calculating physical ephemerides [positions] of Solar-System bodies." 27

Comment: I take this to mean that all the "routines" including "astrometry" (distance measuring) that are provided for computer programmers are designed solely for deep, deep space cosmology, and that all such routines assume an orbiting earth and a universe that is billions of light years thick. Many Q: "individual experts have written their own software already" we are informed. 28 Whoever does it, the point is that all of today’s cosmological applications routinely promote a universe--with billions of galaxies and trillions upon trillions of stars--that is already 15 billion light years thick and growing. This whole foundation is built on sand, i.e., the sand of a mythological moving earth and the sand of the false religious "creation scenario" of Kabbalism.


Infrared Astronomy


Quotation: "Infrared astronomy is the study of celestial objects by means of the infrared radiation they emit, in the wavelength range from about 1 micrometer to about 1 millimeter. All objects, from trees and buildings on the earth to distant galaxies, emit infrared (IR) radiation.... Most of the energy radiated by objects ranging from interstellar matter to planets lies in the IR wavelengths; IR observations are therefore significant in studying asteroids, comets, planetary satellites, and interstellar dust clouds where stars are forming. Finally, because the expansion of the universe shifts energy to longer wavelengths, most of the visible radiation emitted by stars and galaxies during the early stages of the formation of the universe is now shifted to the IR range; studies of the most distant objects in the IR spectrum are necessary if astronomers are to understand how the universe was formed.... COBE [Cosmic Background Explorer] detected small temperature variations in the cosmic microwave background radiation that provided vital clues to the nature of the early universe and its evolution since the ‘big bang’...." 29

Comment: Here is a prime example of a technology with a proven utility on earth being used to further the big bang paradigm where it is incapable of proving anything without claiming easily falsified and programmed "small temperature variations" (HERE, pp. 11,12), etc. Does anyone think that only greedy corporate CEO’s from Enron, etc., "cook their books"? The Space "Science" Establishment has more to loose than any 50 giant corporations in the world, and they will do anything to keep the Kabbalic Universe Mythology alive. Speaking of "cooking the books"--an Accountants jargon for crooked bookkeeping"--connect these dots....

***

Quotation: "The Cookbook Camera is a CCD camera which I built [and used with] a 16-inch, f/4.5 Newtonian Reflector telescope.... Color images on this page [spiral galaxy and halo nebulae] have been produced by using one of two methods. Most of the color images were obtained using cyan, magenta, and yellow filters.... This method...combines a series of exposures through each of the colored filters... The second method...combines a white (no-filter) luminance image with a series of exposures through red, green, and blue filters to provide chrominance.... 30

Comment: And you thought all those pretty color pictures of planets and galaxies and nebulae, on your Telly and in books and magazines, etc., were the real thing??

***

Quotation: "Astroart 3.0 is a complete software for image processing, photometric astrometry, CCD control and image stacking for CCD and film imaging. Advanced filters: Maximum entropy deconvolution [i.e., the freedom to apply any number to explain complicated things they can’t understand]; Image stacking: Automatic on sets of images, pixel precision....Alignment and rotation...automatic processing...color maximum entropy performs more iteration time; up to 4x faster than other software [i.e., "more iteration time" refers to the measure of the frequency of an occurring event within a system (universe) and the assignment of any probability of distribution in the universe.]31

Comment: All functions are premised on a heliocentric "solar" system and an expanding universe paradigm, of course. "Gee whiz" gimmicks will help you play the game more efficiently and make it more fun.... just don’t ever wonder where the facts are that make this a "science" exercise and not just a computer game with a hidden indoctrination facilitator that is far more clever than any of the announced features. You might want to learn Q: "How to enhance dust halos in high resolution CCD Images of Comet C/1995 01" by going to this webpage: 32 Or, you might want to learn about Q: "The KISS Principle in CCD Imaging", or, "how many interesting images can you make with ridiculously simple equipment?".(where you can also learn to "deconvolute", i.e., remove or separate any complications that arise). 33 Or, you might want to Q: "create a sort of unsharp mask...: this will softly blur the image".34 Hey, I’m not knocking all this and a ton of other "imaging" techniques for real and imagined objects in space. It’s called "Astroart" after all, and these are artists adding a little zip and dash and color to the sport. Just remember, it is artwork that enhances a certain religion’s concept of the universe, nothing more and nothing less.


Mass - Luminosity - Magnitude - Distance


Quotation: "Physically, Polaris is a very massive star of the ‘F’ (bright yellow) classification. It is particularly notable as being one of the nearest Cepheid variables to Earth.... This is important because Polaris’ four-day cycle of swelling and contraction is directly related to its mass, which is in turn related to its luminosity. This means that we can calculate the star’s absolute magnitude with some certainty, and comparing this with its observed apparent magnitude, we can compute its distance...which is just over 431 light years. 35a

Comment: Let’s see.... "431 light years".... That is roughly 2,500,000,000,000,000 miles [two quadrillion, five hundred trillion miles...or about twenty eight trillion times as far away as the Sun...(and this is one of the "nearby stars" in the current cosmological video game!)]. Now, we’ve seen it admitted that telescopes simply have not been able to resolve [i.e., show any detail] about any star. They are just "points of light" no matter what they try, and that is the bottom line. But note the alleged known detail involving "variables" and how this allegedly determines mass...which is then connected to its luminosity which, in turn, allows a calculation of the star’s absolute magnitude which can then be compared with its apparent magnitude and viola!...we get a distance of "just over" two quadrillion, five-hundred trillion miles! Along with TIME, "DISTANCE" is the name of the game, folks. It’s the heartbeat of the Big Bang Kabbalic Kosmos. But this stuff is a joke! "Cepheid variables", my foot! "...four day cycle of swelling and contraction"...give us a break! They can’t even get an honest angular measurement, but they can theorize all the mass, luminosity, absolute and apparent magnitude, and swelling and contraction and arrive at a distance that is "just over" 431 light years...not "about 400 or 425 or even 430, but "just over" 431! [This kind of aura of "scientific exactitude" is always a dead giveaway of a cover-up for deception. The same false science arrogance has always been evident in age claims by evolutionists. One example of hundreds: "For 167 million years dinosaurs dominated the world of the beast and then mysteriously vanished from the earth. 35b The Earth--along with the sun and planets--is said to be going around the Milky Way Galaxy at about 500,000 MPH. How long does it take to go around once? This source says 200-230 million years. 36 This source says 225 million years. 37 This one says 250, million years. 38 That’s a range of 50,000,000 years! And there is zero hard evidence that we are moving at all! Liar, liar; you’re pants are on fire!]

***

Apparent Magnitude & Absolute Magnitude


Quotation: "To a great extent, the brightness of objects in the sky depends on their position [distance from Earth] in space. Sirius is the brightest star in the sky, but it is a dwarf star, and not particularly luminous in stellar terms [in dictionary terms brightness and luminous are the same] - it appears brilliant because it is less than nine light years [c.50 trillion miles] away. By comparison, the star Deneb in Cygnus appears much fainter than Sirius in the sky, but is actually a supergiant thousands of times more luminous than Sirius - it appears fainter because it is more than three thousand light years [c.18 quadrillion miles] away. For this reason, the brightness of objects as they appear in the sky is properly referred to as their apparent magnitude [i.e., what you can actually see and measure]. A separate scale exists [oh boy!] - absolute magnitude - to describe the intrinsic brightness [the one made up from jerking spectrum technology around to get it on the Kabbalic distance scale] of an object, irrespective of the location of its observer...." [a meaningless statement...how many options does an observer really have??]. 39

Comment: We have just witnessed a massive hornswoggle that is a major part of this Orwellian doublespeak concerning a given star’s magnitude...and ultimately its distance. Let’s see how that "separate scale" for "Absolute Magnitude" is derived:

***

Quotation: "A means of describing the intrinsic brightness of a star or other object: the effect of distance on the object’s magnitude is eliminated by calculating its brightness as if it lay a fixed distance of ten parsecs (about 33 light years) from the Sun. 40

Comment: Whoa! Can’t we all see how this calculation of the brightness based on a fixed distance for all stars gives a carte blanche license to assign any size and distance to every point of light seen or imagined beyond that fixed distance??! THIS IS A MAJOR KEY TO UNDERSTANDING HOW A 15 BILLION LIGHT YEAR THICK UNIVERSE WITH BILLIONS OF GALAXIES FULL OF ALL SIZES OF STARS HAS BEEN CREATED BY A FALSE SCIENCE ESTABLISHMENT. After all, 99.99% of all the stars claimed in the Big Bang Kabbalic universe are said to exist at distances of hundreds and thousands and millions and billions of light years beyond this fixed distance marker--33 light years--for the calculation of brightness. Absolute Magnitude is an Absolute Joke, and the joke is on all of us! [Furthermore, when we recall that the Besselian parsecs are derived from an unproved earth orbit model providing a mythical 186,000,000 mile baseline for an angle to a "nearby star", we realize that even the 33 light year distance marker is part of the joke, and that the foundation for all "this joke is on you" levity goes back to the one---now if you’ve heard this one, stop me--about how the Earth rotates on an axis and orbits the sun.... ] Actually, every bit of the high sounding pseudo-science that has been stuffed into the Kabbalic Paradigm by their ad hoc formulas, mathematical fumididdles, and technology manipulation, can be explained simply and adequately in the light of all that is known. That is to say that it all can be explained by the Biblical Geocentrism Model of a universe that is less than one light day thick with the stars stars circling the Earth nightly (HERE) and being reflected off of a crystalline dome encasing this temporary universe (HERE, p.6- HERE, pp.6.7).

***

Radiation of Light


Quotation: "Commonly, radiation refers to the electromagnetic spectrum, which, in order of decreasing wavelength, includes radio, microwave, infrared, visible-light, ultraviolet, X-ray, and gamma-ray emissions. All of these travel through space at the speed of light (186,000 mi per sec) but differ in wavelength and frequency.... All types of electromagnetic radiation can be reflected and absorbed in the same manner as is visible light...." 41

Comment: The only certain point here is that "All types of electromagnetic radiation can be reflected and absorbed in the same manner as is visible light." This fact can be applied directly to the earth-centered Biblical Model of the Universe wherein starlight is reflected countless times off of a crystalline dome in patterns that are erroneously being attributed to more stars, galaxies, nebulae, etc.

***

Quotation: "...We don’t know exactly what Light is, or what the nature of Light is.... The question of whether Light is a wave or a particle is still being debated." 42

Comment: Obviously this dilemma is reason enough by itself to put all stellar distance dogma over in the science-fiction section part of the library. In spite of all the cocksure news releases to the contrary, Space "science" still doesn’t know what the nature of Light really is nor how their spectral analyses are affected by it.

***

Quotation: "Wave theory, like Darwin’s theory, is a natural theory.... Wave theory is only the beginning of another way to understand the universe.... Wave theory, which like Darwin’s theory is based primarily on the natural sciences shows that everything is subject to change...." 43

Comment: This bias toward the wave theory of light propagation seems to be based on the belief that it supports the evolutionary mind-set behind a Big Bang Kabbalist universe better than the particle theory. The idea that "everything is subject to change" is diametrically opposed to all that is actually known about the universe, and to the Biblical teaching that stability and predictability describe the course of life--everything "after its kind"--the changelessness of the heavens-- attested to by all observational evidence--and the nature of God Himself, for example, Who Is "the same, yesterday, and today, and forever" (Heb.13:8).

***

Quotation: "According to the relativity theory: It is impossible for a particle to have a velocity faster than the velocity of Light in a void.... Einstein considered the last point to be fundamental to the theory of relativity. Recently, a discovery was made that could change the entire theory of relativity. This discovery was that electromagnetic waves can obtain a velocity greater than that of Light.... What is the effect of this? Does this destroy the theory of relativity? There haven’t been very many studies on this yet, and there isn’t much information available, so we still don’t know...." 44

Comment: Again, the fat is in the fire on this one. The only interest here in this ongoing controversy is whether there is a promotion of the wave theory over the particle theory as part of the distance and age figures concocted to advance the Big Bang Kabbalic Agenda. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck....

***

Quotation: "Standard Candles are objects of a given class (e.g., certain types of stars, supernovas, etc.) whose distance is computed by comparing the observed brightness to an assumed absolute luminosity." 45

Comment: Here again is a major distance computation based on a totally assumed Absolute Luminosity which--as we saw earlier--is pre-set for any stars beyond an already phony 33 light years. As noted, at least 99.99% of all the alleged trillions times trillions of stars in the Big Bang Universe are claimed to be hundreds, thousands, millions, and billions of light years distant from Earth. That means that essentially all "standard candle" distance figures have no basis in reality.

***

The Drake Equation


Quotation: "The famous Drake Equation gives the number of intelligent civilizations able to communicate within our own galaxy> N=R*fs*fp*ne*f1*f1*fc*L<". 46

Comment: Drake partnered with Sagan in concocting this perfect example of a pseudo-scientific equation for arriving at "the number of intelligent civilizations able to communicate within our own galaxy".

***

Quotation: "In this equation, the number of advanced technical civilizations N is assumed by multiplying the following variables: N = 250 billion (number of stars in the Milky Way Galaxy)***fp = 1/4 (fraction of stars that have planetary systems)***ne = 2 (number of planets in a given system that are ecologically suitable for life)***f1 = 1/2 (fraction of otherwise suitable planets on which life actually arises)***f1 = 1/10 (fraction of inhabited planets on which an intelligent form of life evolves)***fc = 1/10 (fraction of planets inhabited by intelligent beings on which a communicative technical civilization develops)***fL = 1/100 (fraction of a planetary lifetime graced by a technical civilization)***N = 6 million (approximately)." 47 Comment: SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) is something you hear about quite a little bit. One example: Lieutenant "Bud" on the popular "JAG" TV series is an avid promoter of SETI on the program, as was made plain in a segment I saw a couple of night’s ago. Operating under [Quote]: "The Planetary Society" (of which Dr. Carl Sagan was the first president)... " is a non-profit, tax-exempt membership organization (100,000 dues paying members) dedicated to the exploration of the solar system and the search for extraterrestrial life". The Drake Equation.. "was developed by Carl Sagan and Frank Drake at Cornell University."48 At the formative meeting at Green Bank in 1961... Q: "conference members concluded that the number of communicating planets could range from fewer than 1000 to more than a billion. Most of them thought the higher number a more likely estimate. ."...they called for a vigorous radio search for extraterrestrial intelligence, using very large computers, and patience to search for at least 30 years" 49 [That was well over 40 years ago and the Search has found absolutely nothing, nada, goose egg. Sagan--who is often quoted from the first line in his book Cosmos which was based on the blockbuster TV series by the same name (‘The Cosmos is all that is or ever was or ever will be’)--also himself admitted before he died in ’96 that of his NASA supported [and taxpayer funded] missions: Q: "None of these [spacecraft] encounters has yielded compelling, or even strongly suggestive, indications of extraterrestrial life." 50

***

Quotation: "SCIENTISTS WIDEN THE HUNT FOR ALIEN LIFE...Dumb or brainy, fair or hideous, extraterrestrial life forms are often pictured by scientists and writers of science fiction [the perfect oxymoron!] as inhabiting worlds just the right distance from stars--neither too hot nor too cold.... But a quiet revolution is now challenging this view and shaking the foundations of exobiology, the study of the possibility of life elsewhere in the cosmos [i.e., a "science" with no data whatsoever!]. Alien life, the new thinking goes, might not actually need the warming rays of a nearby star. It might thrive inside dim moons and planets.... Now scientists wonder whether similar environments [to the Earth’s] elsewhere in the universe are home to alien microbial hordes and, in some cases, to large beasts and beings higher up the extraterrestrial food chain. This change in thinking drives the excitement over Mars and Europa, a large moon of Jupiter.... Scientists also speculate that the interiors of up to ten bodies in the solar system may harbor extraterrestrial forms of life.... ‘We’re in a paradigm shift’, Dr. Frank D. Drake, a pioneer in the scientific hunt for extraterrestrials, said in an interview." 51

Comment: You will recognize "Dr. Drake" from the "famous Drake Equation", who, along with Dr. Sagan and other excited Planetary Society members settled on "scientifically" finding within 30 years about six million planets within the Milky Way alone where we could expect to discover highly evolved "extraterrestrials" playing a comparable version of Rachmananov’s Second Piano Concerto and going about in at least 1932 model Stutz Bearcats...and quite possibly some in "flying saucers". Alas, the Search has produced nothing--except a lot of hot air hype and pleas for more billions for funny telescopes, etc.--and the deadline is long past. Thankfully, no new "Drake Equation" seems to be in evidence for the latest excitement and expectations of finding microbes and large beasts and...who knows, maybe some chimpanzees riding scooters in Q: "subsurface environments" on "Mars, Europa and extrasolar planets". 52 Drake is not without support in this new "paradigm shift" that was launched--interestingly--just months after Dr. Sagan died without the first piece of evidence for his Milky Way paradigm. Indeed:

***

Quotation: "The tumult [over the paradigm shift] is changing not only mind-sets but also exploratory plans. [Whoa!] The National Science Foundation, the government’s main source of financing for basic science [basic what?] recently started a program called Life in Extreme Environments...and NASA is revamping its whole approach to alien hunts...[Did you get that?!] even though experts still debate the likely size of light-based "environments... and Circumstellar Habitable Zones"..... Dr. Gold of Cornell proposed in 1992 that bacteria might be ubiquitous throughout the upper few miles of Earth’s crust...and that ‘Such life may be widely disseminated in the universe...suggesting that the solar system alone might harbor as many as 10 alien biospheres’.... ‘Planets that go through a volcanic phase may routinely spawn life’, says U. of Wash. oceanographer Dr. Delaney... ‘It’s the evolution to the higher forms,’ he added, ‘that may be the unusual event’." 53

Comment: There is still more than enough zeal and money to keep up the search for those elusive highly evolved Star Trekian apparitions that former U. S. Pres. Carter (MA physics) and Pope John Paul II et al have sent messages to in the past. After over forty years of abject failure to get any responses or demonstrate one indisputable piece of evidence for extraterrestrial life of any sort, NASA, the NSF and different scientists decided in ‘97 that they had better spread their bets out a bit. Hence, the big excitement over finding ways to get some "bunker buster" probes under the surface of the Moon, Mars, large asteroids, Jupiter, Saturn, a moon of Neptune, and other targets in the "solar" system. In 1992, as we saw, Dr. Gold of Cornell [where Sagan was at that time] stressed Q: "...that bacteria might be ubiquitous throughout the upper few miles of Earth’s crust....and that ‘Such life may be widely disseminated in the universe...." Curiously, Dr. Chandra Wickramasinghe and Sir Fred Hoyle were articulating the bacteria theory widely at least four years before Gold wrote about it! Wickramasinghe in particular had already launched his and Hoyle’s "Panspermia" concept of how evolution began on Earth (and all over the universe) with bacteria being pooped out from passing comets during those always assumed billions of years. He said flatly that the Darwinian Model was incapable of explaining how evolution began on Earth or could crank it up anywhere else, and that comets nurturing bacteria in their wombs have been whooshing around the universe for billions of years seeding the earth and millions of other alleged planets...and this is the way all life really began, by golly. Don’t laugh! Comets pukeing out bacteria is the new savior of biological evolutionary mythology; "Panspermia" is now the unholy grail (HERE). It looks to me like Dr. Gold--realizing that Darwinism is incapable of explaining life’s beginnings--tuned in on Wickramasinghe’s frequency as the wave of the future for biological evolutionism, and he and all the other excited folks have got The National Science Foundation putting up the big (taxpayer) bucks and NASA supplying the exobiologists (scientists with no data) and the launch pads. "Bunker buster" designs for plowing through the surface of those planets and moons and coming up with at least some bacteria are already built and headed for a Martian moon. And, of course, these probes wouldn’t take with them the bacteria they are going to find. Nah...how could you even suggest....Perish the thought!


***

Further Comment: NASA’s pre-programmed software for its computerized telescopes and cameras (HERE)--both land based and on space vehicles--is a ready-made setup for fraud in pursuit of its goal to present the world with "confirmation" of evolving life in outer space. That stated goal: "to find our cosmic roots" is the heart of NASA’s "Origins Program" and no lie is too big to bring it to pass. Does anyone have the remotest doubt that the pre-programmed software in those telescopes and cameras is 100% locked into the "math" based on an orbiting earth and all of the fanciful fabrications of distances that we’ve seen up to now?? Don’t we all know that whoever controls the programming of computer software controls the results the computer gives?? Star distance garbage in, star distance garbage out!! Pure and simple.... Nobody talks about this with NASA officials...nor the whole evolutionary mind-set controlling the Kabbalist Space Agenda, but the possibilities for establishing a lie with computer software and totally fooling people with the result is a well known capability. All that is required is motive and the means to pull it off. The whole Kabbalist Kosmology Agenda has both! Here is a quick, clear, current, and important illustration of how computer software can establish a lie as the truth and fool people into thinking they are witnessing a wonderful marvel of technology at work:


Quotation: "Bob Urosevich heads Ohio-based Diebold Election Systems Inc. (DESI). His brother Todd is a vice-president at a competing company, Omaha-based Elections Systems & Software. These two companies count nearly 80 percent of the votes cast in the United States.... Aviel D. Rubin, an associate professor of computer science at Johns Hopkins and technical advisor of ISI, [issued] a 24-page report, "Analysis of an Electronic Voting System...released on July 23.... ‘The most fundamental problem with such a voting system is that the entire election hinges on the correctness, robustness, and security of the software within the voting terminal....’"54

Comment: The same concept applies precisely to the software in the computer programmed telescopes and cameras which have all but established the Copernican-based Big Bang Kabbalic Universe as "scientific virtual reality" (HERE). Writing in their book (VoteScam) on the power of fraudulent use of pre-programmed computer software in voting machines, James and Kenneth Collier concluded: "The concept is clear, simple, and it works. Computerized voting gives the power of selection, without fear of discovery, to whomever controls the computer."55 Apply that fact to the Virtual Reality Universe created by the Kabbalist controlled Space Program and you will begin to see how far God has allowed high-tech fraud to go before He exposes it and the world-controlling evolutionary mind-set which undergirds all of modern man’s "knowledge" (HERE).


***

Quotation: "Based at the University of California, Berkeley, SETI [Search For Extraterrestrial Intelligence] has recruited more that 4 million volunteers around the world...to scan the galaxies for space aliens. The volunteers download a screensaver that lets SETI access their computers when they’re not using them to help process the massive amount of data collected by the world’s largest radio telescope in Arecibo, Puerto Rico. Harnessing all that computer power and getting those processors to crunch data on a single project is what’s called distributed computing, or data harvesting.... Using special software that activates when the computer processor has been idle for a while, a PC set up for distributed use can wake up and do something positive--like looking for signals from outer space for SETI...." 56

Comment: Excuse me! Something productive?! After more than 40 years and who knows how many billions of dollars and endless movie, TV, and written media hype, there has not been the first burp from space on the screen. Nothing. Zero. Nichts. The only payoff--and it’s a big one!--is the steady boost in the religious stock of Kabbalic Evolutionism, Inc., which is listed as "Space Science" on the Big Board. And now they’ve got four million extra computers tithing their time and electricity to serve that religion’s "Origins Program" propaganda machine and bring in more converts! What a deal already! Try doing something comparable for the Biblical Model of the Universe with taxpayer money and see how far you get! But for the Kabbalic Model the vault is open and all media is at your disposal.... Verily:

Quotation: "...modern cosmology has become nothing but a morass of conflicting mathematical models.... Why should we pay any attention to these cosmological speculations? No one outside this professional clique of specialists in higher mathematics and theoretical physics can really understand them--especially when they disagree with each other and repeatedly revise their theories anyway....57