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:
“...I realized I had to gain more knowledge to protect against evil and to protect myself from not becoming evil myself. This is our major goal in life...\" Terry Lee
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.
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.
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:
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:
And when the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell upon Abram; and, lo, an horror of great darkness fell upon him.
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.
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.
And as he passed over Penuel the sun rose upon him, and he halted upon his thigh.
But Moses' hands [were] heavy; and they took a stone, and put [it] 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.
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.
If thou at all take thy neighbour's raiment to pledge, thou shalt deliver it unto him by that the sun goeth down:
And when the sun is down, he shall be clean, and shall afterward eat of the holy things; because it [is] his food.
And on the east side toward 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.
[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?
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.
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].
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.
At his day thou shalt give [him] his hire, neither shall the sun go down upon it; for he [is] poor, and setteth his heart upon it: lest he cry against thee unto the LORD, and it be sin unto thee.
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 the going down of the sun, shall be your coast.
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.
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?
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.
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:
So let all thine enemies perish, O LORD: but [let] them that love him [be] as the sun when he goeth forth in his might. And the land had rest forty years.
And Gideon the son of Joash returned from battle before the sun [was up],
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 [is] with him come out against thee, then mayest thou do to them as thou shalt find occasion.
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.
And they passed on and went their way; and the sun went down upon them [when they were] by Gibeah, which [belongeth] 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 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.
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:
Which [is] 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..
[[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.
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?
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.
From the rising of the sun unto the going down of the same the LORD'S name [is] to be praised.
The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose.
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.
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?
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.
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?
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..
She that hath borne seven languisheth: she hath given up the ghost; 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.
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.
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 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!
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, [It is] better for me to die than to live.
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.
Thy crowned [are] as the locusts, and thy captains as the great grasshoppers, which camp in the hedges in the cold day, [but] when the sun ariseth they flee away, and their place is not known where they [are].
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!
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.
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?
And when the sun was up, they were scorched; and because they had no root, they withered away.
And at even, when the sun did set, they brought unto him all that were diseased, and them that were possessed with devils.
But when the sun was up, it was scorched; and because it had no root, it withered away.
And very early in the morning the first [day] of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.
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.
Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath:
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.
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.
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).
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.
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.
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."
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.
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.") :
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."
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."
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.
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
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.