Curiosity prevented me from summarily dismissing geocentrism just because at first it seems radical, especially when I did not even understand it. First I screamed about it. Then I had cognitive dissonance. Now I’ve asked for information. There’s a lot of it, and I’m still reading Galileo Was Wrong, The Church Was Right: The Scientific and Historical Evidence for Geocentrism, Robert A. Sungenis, Ph.D. & Robert J Bennett, Ph.D.
It’s far from the charlatanism some people would have you believe it is.
Rick DeLano and Robert Sungenis put the argument for geocentrism into ten points. I’ve summarized them as briefly as I could with their further input. These ten points are, hopefully, enough to give other inquiring minds an overview.
Ten Points to Geocentrism
1.For the first ~1600 years there was a unanimous consensus of the Church Fathers concerning geocentrism. Today many believe that the Fathers were ignorant of science, and so their spiritual consensus is now trumped by scientific fact.
2. Galileo challenged the consensus of the Church Fathers on scientific grounds, and promoted Copernican Theory, a mathematical idea that removed the Earth from the esteemed center of the universe and required it to orbit the Sun. The Ptolemaic system was also a mathematical construct, but one that agreed with Aristotelian natural philosophy. Galileo preferred the Copernican theory because (1) he saw sun spots and moon craters, showing that heavenly bodies weren’t perfect; (2) he saw phases of Venus, something Ptolemaic model didn’t account for; and (3) moons orbited Jupiter meaning that the Earth wasn’t the only body with objects rotating around it.
3. Cardinal Bellarmine rejected Galileo’s case because Galileo did not prove his conclusions, (1) Scripture said the earth did not move, and (2) the Fathers were in consensus that geocentrism was true, and since the Council of Trent said that whenever the Fathers are in consensus we must hold it as doctrine, we could not reject their consensus.
4. Galileo continued to advance Copernican theory anyway because he believed it to be correct.
5. The Pope convened, and accepted the findings of, the Holy Office in 1633. These findings contain two specific condemnations of Copernican Theory.
6. Certain scientific developments over the course of the next centuries were interpreted widely as conclusive evidence that the two specific condemnations of the Holy Office decree had been scientifically falsified. The top objection was Newton’s laws of motion that were interpreted to require the smaller body to orbit the larger one, just as Galileo claimed with the moons going around Jupiter. We now know that Newton’s laws do not require the Earth to orbit the sun, provided the Earth is the center of mass for the universe, otherwise, Newton is correct.
7. Barring any other proven solution, the Michelson Morley experiment (MMX) and related experiments of the late 19th and early 20th centuries showed prima facie evidence that the Earth wasn’t moving around the sun, and this continued to be the case with every repeat of an MMX-type experiment from 1881 to 1932 when the last one was done.
8. The theory of relativity was adopted precisely in order to explain the failure of all such MMX- type experiments to disclose the universally-assumed orbital motion of Earth around sun. Einstein himself admitted this in his 1924 Kyoto lecture, although he also claimed that Theory of Relativity was for the purpose of answering Maxwell’s electromagnetic conundrum of the induction coil and the magnet.
9. If Relativity is true, then the 1633 condemnation of Galileo stands vindicated, as a matter of revelation. Science, in this case, admits it cannot ever, even in theory, establish any absolute motion of the Earth.
10. If Relativity is falsified, then the existing results of the MMX and relayed experiments constitute an experimental falsification of the heliocentric theory, rendering the 1633 condemnation vindicated *both* as a matter of revelation *and* as a matter of science.
[learn_more caption="And If You Dare, Some Interesting Quotes:"]
Taken from the beginning of Galileo Was Wrong, The Church Was Right:
“I have come to believe that the motion of the Earth cannot be detected by any optical experiment.”
Albert Einstein, Speech titled: “How I Created the Theory of Relativity,” delivered at Kyoto University, Japan, Dec. 14, 1922, as cited in Physics Today, August, 1982.
“Briefly, everything occurs as if the Earth were at rest…”
Henrick Lorentz, Lorentz’s 1886 paper, “On the Influence of the Earth’s Motion of Luminiferous Phenomena,” in Arthur Miller’s Albert Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity, p. 20.
“There was just one alternative; the earth’s true velocity through space might happen to have been nil.”
Arthur Eddington, The Nature of the Physical World, 1929, pp. 11, 8, in sequence.
“The failure of the many attempts to measure terrestrially any effects of the earth’s motion…”
Wolfgang Pauli, The Theory of Relativity, 1958, p. 4.
“We do not have and cannot have any means of discovering whether or not we are carried along in a uniform motion of
Henri Poincaré, From Poincaré’s lecture titled: “L’état actuel et l’avenir de la physique mathematique,” St. Louis, Sept. 24, 1904, Scientific Monthly, April, 1956.
“A great deal of research has been carried out concerning the influence of the Earth’s movement. The results were always
Henri Poincaré, From Poincaré’s report La science et l’hypothèse (“Science and Hypothesis”) published in 1901, now published in Paris, Flammarion, 1968, p. 182, Ludwik Kostro’s, Einstein and the Ether, 2000, p. 30.
“This conclusion directly contradicts the explanation…which presupposes that the Earth moves.”
Albert A. Michelson, “The Relative Motion of the Earth and the Luminiferous Ether,” American Journal of Science, Vol. 22, August 1881, p. 125, said after his first interferometer experiment could not detect the movement of ether against the Earth.
“The data were almost unbelievable… There was only one other possible conclusion to draw — that the Earth was at rest.”
Bernard Jaffe, Michelson and the Speed of Light, 1960, p. 76. Jaffe adds this conclusion to the above sentence: “This, of course, was preposterous.”
“…nor has any physical experiment ever proved that the Earth actually is in motion.”
Lincoln Barnett, The Universe and Dr. Einstein, 2nd rev. edition, 1957, p. 73.
Category: Social Issues