North - South

[cikljamas]

Stanley Kubrick died 5 days after showing Warner the final cut of Eyes Wide Shut...

Stanley Kubrick and The Saturn Death Cult

The schizophrenia goes on:

Bob Johnson

Read more: The Simple Electric Universe | holoscience.com | The Electric Universe

[cikljamas]

Al, it seems that you think that my access to wikipedia is restricted... Well, it is not...

Al, tell me something that i don't know, something new!

[aljhoa]

@cikljamas start thinking 3D.


Celestial equator - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Celestial sphere - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



In astronomy and navigation, the celestial sphere is an imaginary sphere of arbitrarily large radius, concentric with a particular celestial body. All objects in the observer's sky can be thought of as projected upon the inside surface of the celestial sphere, as if it were the underside of a dome or a hemispherical screen. The celestial sphere is a practical tool for spherical astronomy, allowing observers to plot positions of objects in the sky when their distances are unknown or unimportant.



The axis of a planet remains oriented in the same direction with reference to the background stars regardless of where it is in its orbit. Northern hemisphere summer occurs at the right side of this diagram, where the north pole (red) is directed toward the Sun, winter at the left.
Axial tilt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Al

[cikljamas]

Al, now that you have mentioned compass again, next argument is going to be really painful for you:

Observational fact
The Sun in the sky during the summer in the Northern hemisphere (above the Tropic of Cancer) travels in a southern arc across the sky which is a West-West-South direction until noon and then a West-West-North direction until midnight as this illustration below shows:



Heliocentric theory:East-East-South until noon where it reverses and travels upwards East-East-North until midnight. The Sun is seen to travel in the sky in the opposite direction which is West-West-North until noon and then West-West-South until midnight. This is a northern arc, as the flipped illustration below demonstrates:



As we can see, this is EXACTLY opposite to how the Sun is seen to traverse the sky.

So much for heliocentric theory.

[aljhoa]

Flat Earth Hoax

Magnetic Shielding is NOT the Holy Grail - YouTube

Because the Earth's magnetic field's inclination and intensity vary at different latitudes, compasses are often balanced during manufacture so that the dial or needle will be level, eliminating needle drag which can give inaccurate readings. Most manufacturers balance their compass needles for one of five zones, ranging from zone 1, covering most of the Northern Hemisphere, to zone 5 covering Australia and the southern oceans. This individual zone balancing prevents excessive dipping of one end of the needle which can cause the compass card to stick and give false readings.
Compass - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Liquid Filled Ball Style Pin On Compass proves the flat earth hoax.



Al

[cikljamas]

You might want to go here:
There is glass in the sky - The Wild Heretic

You will find some very interesting information on the Thermosphere and the various temperatures at various altitudes.

Thanks zapzap, nice article, i like this comment (below the article) very much:

It is consistent with this:

Many more facts could be added to the foregoing collection, but already the number is sufficient to enable us to form a definite conclusion as to what is the real cause of the tides.

The facts 1 to 7 fully enable us to establish syllogistically the groundwork of the reply. All bodies floating in an incompressible medium, and exposed to atmospheric pressure, fluctuate, or rise and fall in that medium.

The earth is a vast irregular structure, stretched out upon and standing or floating in the incompressible waters of the "great deep."

Ergo--The earth has, of necessity, a motion of fluctuation.

Hence, when by the pressure of the atmosphere, the earth is depressed or forced slowly down into the "great deep," the waters immediately close in upon the receding bays and headlands, and produce the flood tide; and

when, by reaction, the earth slowly ascends, the waters recede, and the result is the ebb tide.

Facts 8, 9, 11, 12, and 16, show results that must necessarily follow this fluctuation of the earth. The velocity of the flood is greatest as it approaches land. If the waters were put in motion by the moon, the velocity would be greatest where the altitude was greatest or nearest the moon, and least the farthest from it or nearest the shores. The reverse is the case in nature.

The line of sight being at a given time above the pole-star, as shown in fact 16 (fig. 67), and in twelve hours afterwards below it, as shown in fig. 68, is exactly the result which must follow a slowly rising and falling earth.

Facts 11 and 12 are also consistent with and necessarily attach to a slowly fluctuating elastic mass like the earth.

In fact 10 we see the irregularity of time in flood and ebb, which arises from the irregular form of the bed of the waters. The submarine channels, banks, and depressions which exist in all directions, the action and reaction, mounting and "back-lashing" of the waters, produce the irregular times and altitudes of the tides observed and recorded in the hydrographic offices of different nations.

In fact 13 we see that out of the reach of the great bulk of the fluctuating earth the waters are but little disturbed; but if the waters were lifted up by the moon they would flow towards and flood the southern or antarctic lands as readily and to as great an extent as the land in the equatorial and northern regions.

In fact 14 we have a phenomenon which could not possibly exist if the tides arise from the action of the moon upon the water; for as the action would first be on the surface, that surface would be the first to show change of motion, and the bottom the last.

Read more: Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not A Globe: Chapter XII. The Cause of Tides

These conclude that, the Earth had never rotated since the first day of life. Consequently, the Earth should not revolve around the sun without a rotation. In this case, the Newtonian fellows are constrained to the garden of falling apples; yet, till we see what is the matter? Up to here, the heliocentric is gone, but we have five more chapters.

So if it is not gravity then GR and SRT are wrong:
A QUESTION OF TIME - General Relativity

[zapzap]

Thermosphere and temperatures

You might want to go here:
There is glass in the sky - The Wild Heretic

You will find some very interesting information on the Thermosphere and the various temperatures at various altitudes.

[cikljamas]

How old is the universe?

I THINK YOU'D SHOCK SOME CHRISTIANS IF YOU'D REMIND THEM THAT THE BIBLE SAYS THE SUN, MOON and STARS WERE NOT CREATED UNTIL THE FOURTH DAY OF CREATION!--Totally contrary to their theory! See, the Devil's whole idea is to try to disprove the Bible. And if we didn't pin you down to some of these things, you wouldn't even realise it! So you need to know these things so you won't swallow all that slop every time they dish it up, and they dish it up every single time they say anything about the Solar system or astronomy or stars or evolution.

You've heard that slop that they put out about the big ball of fire first, the sun coming first, and the sun threw off these planets, and you thought maybe that's the way God created it.--All pure evil imagination, that's all! It just isn't so! It just didn't happen that way. What did God make first?--The Heaven and the Earth! (Gen.1:1)

When I was young, they said the process of evolution had taken only a few million years. By the time I was a young teenager in high school, it had grown to a few hundred million. But by the time I got to college age, they were already hitting the billion mark! And I notice now they've gone up to 4-1/2 billion, because the further they can put it back, the more impossible it is to both prove or disprove.

I'm telling you, Man has gotten into things that are way too high for him, and much too old too. It's so ridiculous! Their theories of Creation and Evolution and the whole idea is to try to disprove God. And since the Devil can't prove his own lies, he does his damnedest to try to disprove the Truth! Because the more he can get you not to believe the Truth, like he did Adam and Eve in the Garden, then you'll have to believe his lies!

THE BIBLE DEFINITELY TEACHES THAT THESE ASTRAL BODIES INFLUENCE OUR LIVES HERE ON EARTH, that they were made to control the various life processes, balance of nature, etc. It must take a tremendous control system of some kind to keep it all in harmony and order and operating as it should! And why not? Why shouldn't God have put these things in control of the balance, of when is the time to be born? (Ecc.3:2)

There's not a single star that is more than 6,000 light years away! How can I prove that? Because time has only existed for the last 6,000 years, and the sun, moon and stars have only been around for the last 6,000 years! So if any of them are any further away than that, they just never existed! There's not a single star that is more than 6,000 light years away!

It says that on the fourth day He made the stars also. (Gen.1:16)--Do you think you could see them then? Well, we know from History that they've been seen for several thousand years, and it's my personal conviction that the stars were visible that very day. "Lights in the heavens" (Gen.1:15)--you must have been able to see them if they were lights! So if they saw them that same day, on the fourth day, they certainly couldn't have been more than 24 hours away.

Not even one light year away! Not even one light month away! They're not even one light week away! And they undoubtedly have to be less than one light day away, so they're only a few light hours away at the very most!--Not billions and trillions of light years, that's a lot of baloney! They are very far and they are very high, "Behold, the stars how high they are!"--They're far out, but they're not that far out!

BUT WHY DOES THE DEVIL KEEP HARPING ON THAT? Why does he keep inculcating students and children and big folks with those same lies about the distance of the stars? (James: Because if there were these great distances, it would imply that the whole thing's been around for millions of years!) A lot longer than 6,000 years! "So therefore the Bible isn't true, Creation's not only 6,000 years old, Man hasn't been here only 6,000 years!"--they say.

"The Earth ISN'T the most important planet, MAN'S not so important! After all, it's just a speck of dust, what the Hell does it matter what happens to us? We can blow the World up or kill our fellow man, it doesn't matter how we treat him or anything else!"--say the scientists. What a hellish Hell of a doctrine! All the Devil's devilish doctrines are damnable, fiendish, destructive, designed to destroy faith, designed to destroy belief in God and His Word and His Creation!

The discovery that the sun is shrinking may prove to be the downfall of the accepted theory of solar evolution. All accepted theories of the evolution of the stars are based on the assumption that thermonuclear fusion is the energy source for the stars. If this assumption is unjustified for our own star, the sun, it is unjustified for the other stars too. The entire theoretical description of the evolution of the universe is at stake. With the stakes that high, it is no wonder that the experimental evidence for the shrinkage of the sun is "explained away" by evolutionists. Evolutionists claim that the sun probably undergoes temporary shrinkages and expansions as small fluctuating oscillations on its overall regular evolutionary development. They point to other cyclic solar occurrences such as the 11-year sunspot cycle on the surface of the sun. This claim is made in spite of the evidence that the shrinkage rate of the sun has remained essentially constant over the past 100 years when very accurate measurements have been made on the size of the sun. Less accurate astronomical records spanning the past 400 years indicate the shrinkage rate has remained the same for the past 400 years.

The change in the size of the sun over the past 400 years is important in the study of origins. Over 100 thousand years these changes would have accumulated so much that life of any kind on the earth would have been very difficult, if not impossible. Thus, all life on the earth must be less than 100 thousand years (upper limit) old.

Those dates as upper limits rule out any possibility of evolution requiring hundreds of millions of years. However, the tiny change that would have occurred in the sun during the Biblical time since creation would be so small as to go almost unnoticed. Thus, the changes in the sun are consistent with recent creation.

The changes detected in the sun call into question the accepted thermonuclear fusion energy source for the sun. This, in turn, questions the entire theoretical structure upon which the evolutionary theory of astrophysics is built.

[cikljamas]

NASA and the Apollo Space Program are two of the biggest lies ever foisted upon the unsuspecting and trusting People of the world.

Would they have been instantly fried or turned into frozen dust? - I vote for the latter option!

First reflection:

[QUOTE]

There is so much evidence that points to the fact that we never even went to the moon,i wont bother getting into all of those well known details...

If that really was a hoax and a lie and i think it was,to say we beat the russians at something major and significant during the cold war,for funneling mega-bucks towards other directions and into other hands and also for more nefarious reasons...

And so why wouldn't our entire space program itself also be a hoax and a deception?

Intentionally designed and orchestrated to keep the vast majority of us,the mainstream masses, thinking and looking in the wrong direction,up there,instead of all around us. Because 95% of the earths mass is totally unknown to us and completely unexplored (same with space, same with space) by us,far below underground and deep within the ocean...

The van allen belt that surrounds the earth has been described as being impenetrable by humans and man made machines because of very large amounts of very deadly radiation...

Try going up far beyond the earths atmosphere and you'll be within temperatures that are -455 degrees below zero and you'll be instantly turned into frozen dust and nearly all molecular motion ceases at those kinds of extreme temperatures.Absolute zero is -459.67 degrees below zero...

Remember seeing roses and other man made objects being momentarily placed within those very same deep freezing temperatures,taken out and then lightly tapped against something,or gently squeezed within someones gloved hand and how those deep frozen objects instantly disintegrated into frozen dust like breaking glass?

And so the molecules that make up their spacesuits and their spaceships should also cease to move and those spacesuits and spaceships should also be instantly turned into brittle frozen dust, but they dont and they are not...

Why dont they? Why are they not? Are they even really up there? Were all the moon landings and our entire space program itself nothing more than a huge hoax and a massive deception?

What percentage of the human race has claimed to have actually gone up into outer space? Not even 500 people and thats about 1 in 10 million...

And so all the astronauts who claim to have gone to the moon,walked upon its surface and went into outer space,could actually be lying,high paid actors and actresses,sworn to secrecy...

Because all we really see are the rockets going up and then we see the capsules splashing down...

We see the space shuttles going up and then we see the space shuttles landing...

We see the satellite carrying rockets going up and then we see nothing coming back down...

That's all we really see,that's all we really know,because that's all we are shown...

And everything else they are showing us,are nothing more than visual displays of their power tripping psych-ops,their green/blue screen movies and their faked photographs...

Second reflection:

Any intelligent high school student with a basic physics book can prove NASA faked the Apollo moon landings.

If you doubt this please explain how the astronauts walked upon the moons surface enclosed in a space suit in full sunlight absorbing a minimum of 265 degrees of heat surrounded by a vacuum. NASA tells us the moon has no atmosphere and that the astronauts were surrounded by the vacuum of space.

Heat is defined as the vibration or movement of molecules within matter. The faster the molecular motion the higher the temperature. The slower the molecular motion the colder the temperature. Absolute zero is that point where all molecular motion ceases. In order to have hot or cold molecules must be present.

A vacuum is a condition of nothingness where there are no molecules. Vacuums exist in degrees. Some scientists tell us that there is no such thing as an absolute vacuum. Space is the closest thing to an absolute vacuum that is known to us. There are so few molecules present in most areas of what we know as "space" that any concept of "hot" or "cold" is impossible to measure. A vacuum is a perfect insulator. That is why a "Thermos" or vacuum bottle is used to store hot or cold liquids in order to maintain the temperature for the longest time possible without re-heating or re-cooling.

Radiation of all types will travel through a vacuum but will not affect the vacuum. Radiant heat from the sun travels through the vacuum of space but does not "warm" space. In fact the radiant heat of the sun has no affect whatsoever until it strikes matter. Molecular movement will increase in direct proportion to the radiant energy which is absorbed by matter. The time it takes to heat matter exposed to direct sunlight in space is determined by its color, its elemental properties, its distance from the sun, and its rate of absorption of radiant heat energy. Space is NOT hot. Space is NOT cold.

NASA insists the space suits the astronauts supposedly wore on the lunar surface were air conditioned. An air conditioner cannot, and will not work without a heat exchanger. A heat exchanger simply takes heat gathered in a medium such as freon from one place and transfers it to another place. This requires a medium of molecules which can absorb and transfer the heat such as an atmosphere or water. An air conditioner will not and cannot work in a vacuum. A space suit surrounded by a vacuum cannot transfer heat from the inside of the suit to any other place. The vacuum, remember, is a perfect insulator. A man would roast in his suit in such a circumstance.

NASA claims the spacesuits were cooled by a water system which was piped around the body, then through a system of coils sheltered from the sun in the backpack. NASA claims that water was sprayed on the coils causing a coating of ice to form. The ice then supposedly absorbed the tremendous heat collected in the water and evaporated into space. There are two problems with this that cannot be explained away. 1) The amount of water needed to be carried by the astronauts in order to make this work for even a very small length of time in the direct 55 degrees over the boiling point of water (210 degrees F at sea level on Earth) heat of the sun could not have possibly been carried by the astronauts. 2) NASA has since claimed that they found ice in moon craters. NASA claims that ice sheltered from the direct rays of the sun will NOT evaporate destroying their own bogus "air conditioning" explanation.

The same laws of physics apply to any vehicle traveling through space. NASA claims that the spacecraft was slowly rotated causing the shadowed side to be cooled by the intense cold of space... an intense cold that DOES NOT EXIST. In fact the only thing that could have been accomplished by a rotation of the spacecraft is a more even and constant heating such as that
obtained by rotating a hot dog on a spit. In reality a dish called Astronaut a la Apollo would have been served. At the very least you would not want to open the hatch upon the crafts return.

NASA knows better than to claim, in addition, that a water cooling apparatus such as that which they claim cooled the astronauts suits cooled the spacecraft. No rocket could ever have been launched with the amount of water needed to work such a system for even a very short period of time. Fresh water weighs a little over 62 lbs. per cubic foot. Space and weight capacity were critical given the lift capability of the rockets used in the Apollo Space Program. No such extra water was carried by any mission whatsoever for suits or for cooling the spacecraft.

On the tapes the Astronauts complained bitterly of the cold during their journey and while on the surface of the moon. They spoke of using heaters that did not give off enough heat to overcome the intense cold of space. It was imperative that NASA use this ruse because to tell the truth would TELL THE TRUTH. It is also proof of the arrogance and contempt in which the Illuminati holds the common man.

Is it possible to return to Earth?Enjoy reading the article and the links!

[cikljamas]

Al, do you remember this: http://www.energeticforum.com/254964-post74.htmlNASA and the Apollo Space Program are two of the biggest lies ever foisted upon the unsuspecting and trusting People of the world.

P.S. One thing that bothers a lot of people about freemasonry is the secrecy and the symbolism. After reading more than a dozen books by individuals who rose to the 33rd-degree level or higher, I strongly recommend that those involved should be running to the bookstore to get these first-hand stories and then re-evaluate whether they should stay in this world-wide organization, and again, this must be purely personal decision by each man. It does appear to me, however, that anyone below the 33-degree level has absolutely no idea what is going on at the highest levels.

[aljhoa]

You might find this video interesting, bullet trajectory east vr west.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jX7dcl_ERNs

They faked moon landing, why wouldn't they fake one stupid image which proves nothing?

Do you renounce God?

BILL COOPER IDENTIFIES SATAN, THE DEVIL HIMSELF - YouTube

Shaykh Abdul-Aziz Ibn Baaz, the supreme religious authority of Saudi Arabia, believes the earth is flat,[10][11] and so does Muslim Researcher on Astronomy Fadhel Al-Sa'd, who declared in a televised debate aired on Iraqi Al-Fayhaa TV (October 31, 2007) that the Earth is flat as evidenced by Qur'anic verses and that the sun is much smaller than the Earth and revolves around it.[12]

As devout Muslims, they have good reason to conclude the Earth is flat; the Qur'anic verses 15:19, 20:53, 43:10, 50:7, 51:48, 71:19, 78:6, 79:30, 88:20 and 91:6 all clearly state this and not a single verse in the Qur'an hint to a spherical earth.
Flat Earth and the Qur'an - WikiIslam

Do you believe in NASA?

Bill Cooper - Alien Agenda - Are Aliens Real? Nephilim, Mars, Moon, Pyramids - YouTube


Al

[cikljamas]

Man in black - ending HD - YouTube


Al

Al, you have to see this: Universe The Cosmology Quest Part 1 - BIG BANG IDEOLOGY AND MODERN INQUISITION

Here's a common tale about the meaning of Copernicus' discovery. By discarding the geocentric conception of the Earth's position in the heavens, Copernicus displaced humankind from the center of the cosmos. That upset the ancient theological conception for which geocentric astronomy was the ladder to belief that God created the world to culminate in the creation of Man as the apex of divine Providence (the Great Chain of Being).

The discovery stimulated Kepler, Galileo, and Newton to create modern natural science, whose fundamental postulate is that all natural phenomena obey discoverable universal laws. But this mind-expanding, culture renovating revolution was incomplete because living organisms seemed not to fall under physical laws, thus leaving to theology the explanation, by special creation, of the origin and purposive actions of living things. The schizophrenia was ended when Charles Darwin propounded natural selection as a law to explain living organisms. No more miracles needed, and the human species is definitely not the center of things.

Copernicus didn't discover the heliocentric system. He recycled the concept that originated with Aristarchus of Samos, who calculated the diameter and volume of the Sun to be much greater than Earth; hence (big leap) Earth circulates around the Sun, not vice versa.

The hypothesis didn't persuade other ancient astronomers because it wasn't consistent with observed planetary motion. Geocentrism was systematized by Ptolemy in his massive study, the Almagest, which described observed planetary motions more adequately. Copernicus' De revolutionibus (1543) eliminated all but one of Ptolemy's eighty epicycles, but his description of orbital paths was less accurate than Ptolemy's.

Copernicus didn't displace the Earth from the center of the universe, only from the center of the planetary system, which remained the center of the universe.

The Dominican visionary Giordano Bruno proposed the infinity of the universe, and argued, purely on the basis of the logic of heliocentrism, that the fixed stars are objects like the Sun. But he was also much involved in theological meandering and claimed that Christ was but a magacian, that the Holy Ghost is the soul of the world, and that the Devil will be redeemed. It was for these heresies, and not his defence of heliocentrism, that he was condemned to death by the Inquisition in 1600. Even so, Copernicus' book was placed on the Index in 1614.

And Newton, that celebrated champion of natural-laws-rule-all? For him the elliptical orbits of comets and planets meant that the solar system was unstable and required an Almighty fix-up from time to time. That's a miracle, and he knew it. And he liked it, for Newton was deeply religious.

Newton believed that the planets were inhabited by creatures like ourselves. Just about everyone did: Kepler, Bruno, Descartes, all the way down to Percival Lowell's attempt to prove that Mars' 'canals' were created by intelligent beings. (He established the Lowell Observatory in Flagstaff, Arizona to do his Moon work). Of course, Lowell didn't argue that Mars could presently support human-like life, but it once did.

This remnant of the old belief continues to this day. NASA vigorously touts the idea that there's 'life on Mars'. Promoting the idea rouses public support for NASA's ambitious project of creating a manned mission on Mars, which will in turn be the launch pad for the 'conquest of space'. And ... contact with extra-terrestrial intelligence! Enter here science pundit Carl Sagan and the SETI project for detecting signals of intelligent life 'out there'. We aren't alone!

The SETI caper would be only a theological gesture were it not for NASA's commitment to the 'conquest of space', a manned mission to Mars in the first instance. The practicalities of the mission are awesome. The flight would need 300 days, as against three days to reach the Moon. The mission would extend over three years and would cost, on one estimate, $400 billion. Since the human body can't endure weightlessness beyond about 100 days, an on-board g-force device would be required. Food and excrement would need to be recycled. How crew psychology would cope with confinement, sexual abstenance, and isolation is not known. Nevertheless, the Mars mission has been authorized by President Bush, at the urging of NASA, and with the strong support of the National Space Society.

So, after conning us with the faked Moon missions we are being conned again with coming faked Mars missions, after all black military projects are great devourers of money, and in order to be better monitored by our slave owners we have to provide them (NASA and co.) with stupendous amount of money so that they can establish absolute control over us!






Do you renounce God?

Do you believe in NASA?

[gene gene]

Hi cikl & Al,
Interesting debate, with much data supporting both views.
You might find this video interesting, bullet trajectory east vr west.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jX7dcl_ERNs

Gene

[aljhoa]

Answer to your first question: yes
Answer to your second question: The flat earth is the center of the universe, i will show some diagrams later...

May Allah bless us all. AMEN.

Man in black - ending HD - YouTube


Al

[cikljamas]

1669,8 km/h, is this the velocity of the sun "running" above the equator of the flat earth?

Is flat earth the center of the universe or is it located in the Milky Way galaxy?

Al

Answer to your first question: yes
Answer to your second question: The flat earth is the center of the universe, i will show some diagrams later...

Now it's time to make some conclusions here:

1. The Earth does not rotate on it's axis! - 100 % sure (proved) truth

2. The Earth does not revolve around sun! - 100 % sure (proved) truth

All geocentrists and flat earthers admit above truths!

Here are some important experiments which scientifically had established these truths:


3. Surface of the Earth is flat!

Here we have disagreement between ordinary geocentrists and flat earthers. We should now reconsider this issue just a little bit...

In post #4 we can read this sentence:

Similarly, i must admit that it's difficult to see how geocentrists can fail to see flat-earth implications of geocentrism?

In post #7 i put this question: In geocentric universe everything is spinning around Earth, how can it be?

In the same post i have answered to that question with these words: It can't be without great modifications of the geometry, and relations (distances) between celestial objects (and their sizes) in the universe as we generally perceive it on the basis of current fraudulent scientific dogma!!! That is why geocentrists are much lousier guys than heliocentists! Geocentrism without Flat Earth Hypothesis is just a disastrously preposterous idea, ultimate stupidity! Listen this excellent question, and then excellently stupid answer: Mic'd Up "The Principle: Is Earth Really the Center of the Universe?"

One of the best illustrations of the stupidity of geocentism without accepting flat earth hypothesis is here - this is how they explain the seasons on the earth:



If they wouldn't make any major changes in the geometry of the universe they would have to face insurmountable obstacles like these:

1. Instead of 3219 km/h (alleged speed of Moon's motion in orbit around the Earth) they have to accept preposterous speed of Moon's motion of at least 193 140 km/h!

2. Instead of 10 950 km/s (alleged speed of Earth's motion in orbit around the Sun) they have to accept ultimately preposterous speed of Sun's motion around the Earth of at least 39 420 000 km/h.

3. Maybe you still remember these words of mine: Geocentrists who are not flat earthers have to defend earth rotation hypothesis, otherwise they can't explain days and nights on Earth. But, if Earth doesn't spin (and it doesn't) then they have to get rid of earth tilt hypothesis because if Sun is orbiting TILTED and SPHERICAL Earth it can't produce 6 months of North Pole daylight, it can't produce even 24 hours continuous North Pole daylight. When you get rid of earth tilt hypothesis then you could still theorized geocentric Earth, but not in the context of The Earth as we know it, because Sun which daily revolve this time UN-TILTED but still SPHERICAL Earth could produce 6 months of North Pole daylight but during these 6 months, on SPHERICAL Earth such revolving Sun couldn't cast any light not just to South Pole but to much wider/larger part of southern hemisphere (Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, South America etc...)...So, if Earth is not spinning than it has to be flat.

In addition, according to above diagram during spring/autumn seasons (if the sun would be far enough from the earth) we would have midnight sun in north and south pole simultaneously...

4. http://www.energeticforum.com/256172-post44.html

So, we have to accept this model of the universe which is Flat Earth Model:






Cheers!