Geocentrism challenge
.Sungenis’s challenge is to prove heliocentrism, not to disprove geocentrism. He has declined to take up Randi’s challenge: “Unfortunately for you and Randi, we never claimed to have proof that the sun goes around the earth, so perhaps Randi is out for sensationalism to promote his website. We only challenge heliocentrists who claim they have proof of heliocentrism. So perhaps you can tell Randi that his offer is bogus.â€
He does not seem to be asking for the usual form of scientific proof, which, I thought, involves the attempted falsification of proposed hypotheses by repeatable observation or experiment. He excludes all but “direct†arguments (whatever that means), although scientist often rely on indirect evidence. His methods are modeled on the Inquisition, with himself as the sole Inquisitor, prosecutor, judge, and jury for all challenges. He makes several points:
1. He supports a Tychonic model, not a Ptolemaic model. He says the Earth is stationary, that the Sun revolves around the Earth, and the other planets revolve around the Sun.
2. He also denies that the Earth rotates. (I assume that the Earth at the center of a hypothetical geocentric model could rotate, but he seems to reject this). He says that “Foucault pendulums do not prove heliocentrismâ€: “they only prove that there is a force moving the pendulum in a parabola.â€
3. He says that “the General Relativity allow for the stars to travel at warp speed around the earth (sic)."
4. Repeated observations of stellar parallax since 1838 have shown that nearer stars appear to shift their positions against more distant stars at six-month intervals as the Earth circles the Sun. He says that “stellar parallax doesn't prove heliocentrism, since it also works in a geocentric system. All one need do is move the stars instead of the earth and one will get the same subtended angle as in the heliocentric system.†One is left to wonder how or why one would move those stars. Is it for the sole purpose of tricking Earth observers into thinking that they are in orbit around the Sun?
5. He agrees with the statement that “all working astronomers and astrophysicists (including all the Catholic ones) in the world are wrong.†Using the conventional scientific method, it would appear that the heliocentric hypothesis has not been falsified after 400 years of observation and experiment. This normally constitutes scientific proof, but not for him.
6. He seems to be something of an embarrassment to fellow Catholics, and his views have been vigorously attacked by Catholic scientists. Look at http://catholicoutlook.com/geocentrism.php, for just one example.
I don’t think Randi has much to worry about. Sungenis cannot accept the challenge because he admits that he cannot prove geocentrism scientifically, but as long as no one else can prove heliocentrism to his personal satisfaction, he will believe in it. This is too bad, because the challenge would have been very interesting to watch.
.Sungenis’s challenge is to prove heliocentrism, not to disprove geocentrism. He has declined to take up Randi’s challenge: “Unfortunately for you and Randi, we never claimed to have proof that the sun goes around the earth, so perhaps Randi is out for sensationalism to promote his website. We only challenge heliocentrists who claim they have proof of heliocentrism. So perhaps you can tell Randi that his offer is bogus.â€
He does not seem to be asking for the usual form of scientific proof, which, I thought, involves the attempted falsification of proposed hypotheses by repeatable observation or experiment. He excludes all but “direct†arguments (whatever that means), although scientist often rely on indirect evidence. His methods are modeled on the Inquisition, with himself as the sole Inquisitor, prosecutor, judge, and jury for all challenges. He makes several points:
1. He supports a Tychonic model, not a Ptolemaic model. He says the Earth is stationary, that the Sun revolves around the Earth, and the other planets revolve around the Sun.
2. He also denies that the Earth rotates. (I assume that the Earth at the center of a hypothetical geocentric model could rotate, but he seems to reject this). He says that “Foucault pendulums do not prove heliocentrismâ€: “they only prove that there is a force moving the pendulum in a parabola.â€
3. He says that “the General Relativity allow for the stars to travel at warp speed around the earth (sic)."
4. Repeated observations of stellar parallax since 1838 have shown that nearer stars appear to shift their positions against more distant stars at six-month intervals as the Earth circles the Sun. He says that “stellar parallax doesn't prove heliocentrism, since it also works in a geocentric system. All one need do is move the stars instead of the earth and one will get the same subtended angle as in the heliocentric system.†One is left to wonder how or why one would move those stars. Is it for the sole purpose of tricking Earth observers into thinking that they are in orbit around the Sun?
5. He agrees with the statement that “all working astronomers and astrophysicists (including all the Catholic ones) in the world are wrong.†Using the conventional scientific method, it would appear that the heliocentric hypothesis has not been falsified after 400 years of observation and experiment. This normally constitutes scientific proof, but not for him.
6. He seems to be something of an embarrassment to fellow Catholics, and his views have been vigorously attacked by Catholic scientists. Look at http://catholicoutlook.com/geocentrism.php, for just one example.
I don’t think Randi has much to worry about. Sungenis cannot accept the challenge because he admits that he cannot prove geocentrism scientifically, but as long as no one else can prove heliocentrism to his personal satisfaction, he will believe in it. This is too bad, because the challenge would have been very interesting to watch.
)