Sunday, January 17, 2016

... on an Important and a Less Important Issue


Important issue:
6:54 Actually, I was thinking on lines that Heliocentrism and Evolution Theory are, along with Psychiatry and a few related, what II Thessalonians is speaking of.

Stupid theories, well, Flat Earth is so complicated to debunk effectively that one cannot totally call it stupid.

BUT what about the kind of people who shout "stupid" after Flat earth, Geocentrism, Creationism?

Have they been taught to think? Or just to identify "intelligent" = with = "what my schoolmaster said in class"?

Unimportant or less important issue:
I am Geocentric, NOT flat Earth:

Correspondence of Hans Georg Lundahl : With James Hannam on Whether Bible and Fathers Agree or Not on Shape of Earth

Before you present your theories, 2:17 - here is mine: some people have been following me, have been very sceptical or rejecting of my geocentrism the last 10 or more years, and have associated it with flat earth. They have then, most of them gone on, but last year a lot turned just around and found that geocentrism cannot be debunked. They then go what they consider "the whole hog" and go flat earth as well.

Many have rejected the idea that traditional cosmologies of ANY religion stand up to modern astronomy. BUT, once they do find this latter unsure, they are, many of them, rather Jewish than Catholic (very many are 7th Day Adventist, which, except for being just Christian, is closer to Judaism than to Catholicism in many respects). So, if they think "Biblical astronomy works" in their tradition that means flat earth geostationary, not just geostationary. To make matters worse, James Hannam (see link above) has tried to show Church Fathers were not Biblical literalists by pointing out they were Round Earth many of them. This means that a Catholic has gone out of his way to stamp Round Earth cosmology of Church Fathers as un-Biblical, as a compromise with Pagan Philosophy.

You get the picture?

Why would flat earthers say that the Moon is flat? The Moon is not Earth, it is a luminary.

The Moon is in Heaven, Earth (surface) is between Heaven and Hell.

Now that latter point might to some seem clearer if Earth were a purely horizontal limit between these areas. The Moon doesn't have to be that for anything to work.

Note, I am not defending flat earth as a theory, but you are not arguing, so far, round Earth very convincingly.

5:13 You called this the "most obvious" proof?

No. The most obvious ones would be:

  • different stars seen from different hemispheres, celestial equator seen from both
  • Southern Hemisphere having a series of longitudes where days and nights get shorter and longer than further north, like on Northern hemisphere they get shorter and longer further than further south in winter, the completeness of these being South Pole which has 6 months day and 6 months night, like North Pole
  • and the old Magellan proof.

9:11 "that the Moon is a globe" - yes - "and that therefore also the Earth must be a globe"

True per se, but non sequitur from your argument. Unless you add a premiss "Earth must have same shape as Moon" which is simply not demonstrable.

+Hans-Georg Lundahl I did not make this video to present flat earth arguments but to show that this is a planned government psyop. Flat earthers have zero interest in spherical earth proofs. In fact the stupider they appear the better because they WANT you to associate their flat earth nonsense with Christians and 9/11 truthers.

& thirdeaglebooks
+Hans-Georg Lundahl The moon is the most obvious because it is visible to anyone, even the most uneducated.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
It cannot be "the most obvious" of the proofs, because it is in itself not a proof.

A Pyramid is more obvious than a manuscript, but that doesn't make the Pyramid the most obvious proof for Christianity, as if manuscripts weren't more relevant as proofs.

"In fact the stupider they appear the better because they WANT you to associate their flat earth nonsense with Christians and 9/11 truthers."

Most of all, perhaps, they want to associate Flat Earth with Geocentrism and therefore with defense of Magisterium of 1633, Church Fathers, and via disposal of distant starlight problem also a Young Earth, like created along with universe 7200 years ago.

No comments: