No, I Do Not Take My Views from Judaism

An Orthodox Who Believes the Infidel Lesch · Geocentrism Again : Sungenis and Coulombe · No, I Do Not Take My Views from Judaism · No, I Do Not Take My Views from Protestantism

Science or the Bible, Who is RIGHT? | Geocentrism & the Age of the Universe
Jewish Learning Institute | 24 Febr. 2021
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=olzXVs01VWQ

2:22 You feature Einstein.

"When two bodies are in perpetual motion, it's impossible to say which revolves around the other"

Well, the idea in itself actually involves Earth moving.

I feature St. Paul:

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: Because that which is known of God is manifest in them. For God hath manifested 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; his eternal power also, and divinity: so that they are inexcusable
[Romans 1:18-20]

We see Earth not moving and we see Sun, Moon, Stars and Planets move around us.

Thanks for showcasing we Catholics are more conservative than you Jews!

3:07 No, there are not very good reasons to believe the "Scientific" reasons for age of the earth, movements of cycles.

Even without the Torah, St. Paul said Pagans had no reason to be ignorant of God. Geocentrism reveals God, since the one mechanism understandable for moving the universe (as far as seen with human eyes, outside prophecy, while on earth) is an Omnipotent God moving it around us.

3:28 There is an important distinction between "can't disprove if false" and "can't disprove because true" ...

It's actually Heliocentrism that's incapable of being disproven if false.

We see the contrary "nah, it's the parallactic illusion" (or the illusion of the train rider, you know while seeing hills and trees fly by). It is a stretch, it has no motivation (we don't know stationarity of fix stars like we do with stationarity of hills or trees), but once you accept it, it cannot be disproven.

It pretends to be proven because of celestial mechanics. There is no gravitational mechanism that can make the Sun orbit Earth. (Sungenis says there is a gyroscope effect that keeps the Earth in place). Let alone put things in that rapid motions around Earth. We can reply God is adequate for moving all Heaven (below the throne room) around Earth, angels are adequate for moving individual bodies within that moving frame. "Nah, we can't bring in God or angels as explanations, until they are proven" ... namely by some other fact the One or the other ones explain, or both, on which they could also say the same thing. If there were hundred things, not that I could state one hundred things off the cuff, that kind of person would say of each "nah, we can't accept that until God is proven" ... basically like some Pharisees were asking for a sign after Jesus had already given signs. Always ready to find fault with the next one. Never proven wrong, even if actually wrong.

4:08 No, we do not know stars are light years away.

The Cosmic Distance ladder involves one step which isn't simply measuring and calculating, but measuring and calculating with a certain theory behind.

For instance, when I calculate that in 2556 BC, when Peleg was born, carbon 14 was 51 pmC, that's because I have the theory behind this that Babel was Göbekli Tepe.

Similarily, when Astronomers say "alpha Centauri is 4 light years away, Barnard's star is 6 light years away, Sirius is 9 light years away, 61 Cygni is 11 and a half light years away, Vega is 25 light years away" first of all they have assumed that an annual movement considered as "aberration" has a uniform movement of 20 or 25 arc seconds per year (forget which), so that any deviation from that value can be considered as a "measured" parallax, and then they also assume that "parallax" is the changing angle of the Earth, rather than of the star, so that an annual distane of twice the distance Earth to Sun can be taken as "known length" to make a triangulation. Scrap that, you have NO reason to think stars are further away than for instance one or two light days, so that Adam and Eve could have been watching the first light rays coming from stars at normal speed, or rather, those that came 24 hours after them, since certain fish and bird created a day before Adam and Eve have a kind of orientation on the position of stars, so, they should also have seen the starlight the day that they were created.

4:49 The world is arguably 7223 years.

Adam and Eve could find plenty of proof God had created no men before them. Genealogies in Genesis 5 and 11 are at least a historic argument for how long it took between Adam and Abraham — I go by a version of the LXX text. Then again, you "fixed" chronology after Daniel to make the weeks fit Bar Kokhba rather than Jesus.

There would be no proof outside history or sacred history for the exact number of years, but there are some proofs against a very old universe.