And the Evolution Believing Near Atheist Before That? - Extra on Helio / Geo

Conciliar Church · Why Catholic at All, Then? · What About an Inkling Reading Protestant, which I was · And the Evolution Believing Near Atheist Before That? · Extra on Helio / Geo

5 Lies Theists Tell About Atheists
Genetically Modified Skeptic | 27.XII.2018
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kuNOFH93GHA

One of my comments led to a dialogue:

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Romans 1:[18] For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and injustice of those men that detain the truth of God in injustice: [19] Because that which is known of God is manifest in them. For God hath manifested it unto them. [20] For the invisible things of him, from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made; his eternal power also, and divinity: so that they are inexcusable.

Up to Heliocentrism, this actually makes atheism rather awkward.

Demokritos doesn't seem to have studied astronomy very much, and Lucrece (his spiritual grandson) certainly didn't, since he attributed the complex Geocentric movements of the universe and single bodies as a whirl-pool phenomenon.

St. Paul may have made the point, if you take your eyes and inner ears for Earth being immobile, and your eyes for what happens well above Earth, you have to conclude someone with some talent of organisation is responsible for these movements. As well as lots of power. Note the litothetic statements.

Another question is of course, whether accepting Heliocentrism is a real excuse ...

Heliocentrism is not directly born out by what we see, and when I have tried arguing with atheists on why Geocentrism couldn't (on their view) be true and a true proof of God, I get versions of:

they : given the mass of the Sun, and of Earth, Sun could never circle Earth
me : what if angels moved it (speaking of yearly cycle) within an aether that is moved by God (speaking of the daily one)
they : God / angels don't exist.

One version is accusing me of circularity, or saying "prove God exists" / "prove angels exist" - but with Geocentrism I just did that (remains to ask which God and what angels, that's a matter for history).

I reply that it is circular to assume Heliocentrism as the true explanation doesn't need a God, when you cannot prove it is the true one except by starting out to exclude God.

fireandcopper

@Hans-Georg Lundahl have you ever worked with horses? Sometimes they kick, and they change people.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@fireandcopper I have fallen off one, what is this to the context?

Olivier Gaudet-Lanoie

first, the flat earth community and now this guy. smh

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Olivier Gaudet-Lanoie yes, this guy who is not flat earther ...

Olivier Gaudet-Lanoie

@Hans-Georg Lundahl im not saying you are a flat earther, but you do seem to belive the sun is rotating around the earth. which is equally stupid

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Olivier Gaudet-Lanoie Yes, I believe the Sun is rotating around the earth.

Why would you say it is equally stupid?

I am from Europe and have been to US (one day in Mééééééxico too). I know if you go east from where I am, across Germany and Poland, Bielarus and Russia, you come to China. I know California, not least San Francisco, has a lot of immigrants from China, so I know between Chine and Europe we have a circle closed either way.

How much proof like that do you have for heliocentrism? Han Solo and Luke Skywalker from a very far galaxy observed Earth rotating third planet from Sun?

I think you might have some trouble getting their affidavit on it, bc George Lucas' imagination is not a credible affidavit.

Olivier Gaudet-Lanoie

@Hans-Georg Lundahl because we have way more then goerge’s imagination for proof. i am not an expert and i do not claim to be but saying the sun rotate around the earth is overlooking ton of evidence. if the sun was in fact rotating around the earth, that would mean thousands of scientists, astronomers, physicists, astronauts and other people have lied over countless years just so you could think heliocentrism is real. like i said, your claim is equally idiotic has the flat earth conspiracies.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Olivier Gaudet-Lanoie " if the sun was in fact rotating around the earth, that would mean thousands of scientists, astronomers, physicists, astronauts and other people have lied over countless years just so you could think heliocentrism is real."

No. It would mean they have been incompetent. No conspiracy.

With Flat Earthers, there is of course a certain fringe who do think geographic information from Catholic countries is a conspiracy to hide their "flat earth" which doesn't have Biblical evidence (note, their most common Flat Earth map shows three corners!).

But when it comes to Heliocentrism, it just means, they are incompetent.

At least in a first round.

R E C E N T L Y, there is indeed a conspiracy to portray any objections to standard theories like Evolution and Heliocentrism as "conspiracy theories".

If they have no incompetence to hide, why do they hide from your likes that my likes think their likes plain simple incompetent?

Olivier Gaudet-Lanoie

@Hans-Georg Lundahl those people are experts in their domains. saying all of them made the same mistakes and none of them, even with today’s technology could figure out something so blatant is straight up comedic. do you know how many things we’ve sent in space? voyager1 has been sent to take photos of pluto and is now drifting away, soon to be leaving the solar system with the famous golden disk. one slight miscalculation (like, idk, the sun actually rotating the earth) and the device would have missed the used-to-be-planet by unimaginable length. surely, we would have figured it out if the sun was going around the earth.

are you going to argue with the color of the sky next? are you gonna say the sky is actually red but the government is trying to cover it up with holograms? im sorry if i sound rude but holy shit. even the most basic understanding of gravity is enough to disprove geocentrism.

just saying, thank you for being so polite (unlike some people on internet). it feels like we can actually debate without calling ourselves names. im sorry if i sound rude, it isnt my intentions. even if i find the subject of the debate kinda dumb (no offense)

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Olivier Gaudet-Lanoie "Hans-Georg Lundahl those people are experts in their domains. saying all of them made the same mistakes"

If the mistake is a part of their basic training (which is uniform) ....

"and none of them, even with today’s technology could figure out something so blatant is straight up comedic. do you know how many things we’ve sent in space?"

Oh - your real argument is what we sent into space ... if Tychonic Geocentrism holds true, exactly how would the orbits differ on your view?

"voyager1 has been sent to take photos of pluto and is now drifting away, soon to be leaving the solar system with the famous golden disk. one slight miscalculation (like, idk, the sun actually rotating the earth) and the device would have missed the used-to-be-planet by unimaginable length."

Simple inversion of what's moving and what isn't is NOT the same thing as miscalculating smaller parameters within either framework.

"surely, we would have figured it out if the sun was going around the earth."

We did for thousands of years, at least some of us (including, but not limited to Biblical hagiographers).

"are you going to argue with the color of the sky next?"

You are the one arguing against what is seen, directly, not I.

With the naked eye we see earth standing still, and the heavenly bodies moving around it each day, plus Sun and Moon doing longer-periodic turns around the zodiac. I believe earth is standing still, the heavenly bodies move around us each day and Sun and Moon do longer-periodic turns around the zodiac.

But as you take such an enormous pride in technology, would you mind telling me if it was microscope of telescope you turned on earth to see it moving? There is a reason I mentioned a far off galaxy (as per G. Lucas) - from there it would have made sense to turn a telescope on Sun and Earth and see which was moving and if Earth was turning.

Oh, and by the way, before you say we have observed Earth turning from the Moon, you can observe a tower, stuck in earth, turning around itself, you only need to fly around it with a chopper.

Tower : Earth = Chopper : Moon in this analogy.

"are you gonna say the sky is actually red but the government is trying to cover it up with holograms?"

As mentioned, that is more like your analysis of what is moving than mine.

"even the most basic understanding of gravity is enough to disprove geocentrism."

Well, on an atheistic and anangelic view, I suppose you are stuck with Heliocentrism, however anti-empiric it may be. But if God and angels exist, there are beings able to move objects and even - for God - the whole Universe by acts of will, and therefore to trump gravity.

You have two choices:
Tychonic Geocentrism = > needs supernatural movers.
Deny supernatural movers => needs Heliocentrism.

"im sorry if i sound rude, it isnt my intentions"

Nice to know now, I already answered you a bit as if you had been so!