The Sun DOES revolve around the Earth?

reply to post by CyberTruth


Yes you are correct that the sun does revolve around earth. In fact just for mere purposes, lets use an example.

If a person is in the ocean lets say under 40 feet, and you can see the surface, but you are still, swimmming stationary according to your sense of sight and balance, then another person swims by you. Would you conclude that you were moving past this person, and they were standing still? No way, you can feel yourself in motion when you move, and you were not in motion, and therefore you would conclude that the other person was moving.

Now lets take this further. If us people on the planet, laying down or sitting feeling motionless as we lie there, then look into the heavens and see the sun, moon, and stars 'moving' around us, wouldnt we conclude that we are stationary, and that the other bodies in space are moving? This would be a logical conclusion, and to say that, "No your senses are screwed up and your eyes, balance and everything in your body is wrong" is pure nonsense.

It would make no sense to tell someone that the sun is still and the earth moves around it and that you were feeling no movement but really you are, sounds like someone is trying to trick you. Just listen to how people talk, it shows that they really dont believe the earth is in motion.

"Hey guys its getting late, the sun is 'going' down soon and its gonna be dark"
"Wow look at the sun 'rise' on the horizon"
"Well im not moving until the sun 'comes up' then ill go to school"

"Hey guys look a falling star" - Would you conclude the 'falling star' or meteorite is motionless but we moved instead? No....that would be completely stupid from what you saw.

And other examples show the words we even speak prove that the sun MOVES and the earth doesnt.
And to think NASA is telling us the truth and these so called scientists, is like believing Obama is pulling troops out and that killing people in the middle east are terrorists. Its just as stupid.

And how come NASA is the only organization that people trust in our space exploration. Its a MONOPOLY, they can tell us anything and nobody can refute it. They could tell us that mars is the center of our solar system , and that we have books, mathematics, photos all these diagrams with photoshop and maya and anything else, and no one can disprove it.

When you in a car, or a train, plane etc, you can feel that its moving. Even though the plane is moving at a constant speed with no acceleration or deceleration, you can still sense it. Think about it folks, does it feel like your moving right now reading this on earth? Nope. But yet you try to deceieve yourself into thinking, yes we are moving even though everything I can see and feel tells me otherwise because the scientist told me so!

Stop lying to yourselves, there is no proof that the earth revolves around the sun. Where is the gyrometers, motion detectors, gravimetric readers etc and all the crap to show that we are moving on earth without looking up to the sky. But somehow we look into space, at other moving objects with no point of reference, then to say we are moving around the sun? Comon its rediculous.

We should stop getting sucked into listening to everything we hear, and start deciding ourselves and teaching ourselves how to see things the way they are, not what we have been told.

Heres a couple sites to consider. I dont agree with everything on there, and dont totally understand it, but its enough for me to know that we have been lied to AGAIN by our government run space program NASA and its affiliates, and its time to put an end to this garbage information. Most information here is presented by Neville T. Jones, PhD.

Academic qualifications of Neville T. Jones, PhD:
* Ph.D. - Doctor of Philosophy in Physics
* D.I.C. - Diploma of the Imperial College
* M. Sc. (Phys) - Master of Science in Physics
* M. Sc. (Comp) - Master of Science in Computing Science
* B. Sc. (Hons) - Bachelor of Science, Honours in Physics and Computer Science
* Formerly of the Clarendon Laboratory, Oxford University, England

sites.google.com...

www.fixedearth.com...

sites.google.com...

reply to post by ignorant_ape


Just wondering, did you know that NASA uses a geo stationary earth to try send sattelites up into earth in their calculations?

I must say I am surprised to to see this post considering I wrote this almost 5 years ago. Even more surprising in that I do not regularly check ats. So i was quite shocked that i checked it tonite and there was my post on page one of recents. I appreciate your comments and I like what you have to say and what you have added. You made me think again about it in an even different way than i did 5 years ago. I couldn't remember my password so i had to create a new account just to comment.

reply to post by Seektruthalways1


ok - before we go any further - please supply your deffinition of " geo stationary "

i am not being rude - but i suspect you dont know what geo-stationary means in the context of orbital mechanics

reply to post by CyberTruth



I guess it is possible and might be the case even though it seems unlikely. Reality is relative and to all you peeps just saying its not possible.. Prove it..

reply to post by purplemer


i find it disturbng that you ask skeptics of geo-centricistm to " proove it isnt ture " rather than asking proponents of geo-centricism to "proove that its true "

but none the les as i am sat at home wating for some retard from a courior company to find my house - i shall humour you

PS - you did read my earlir reply in this thread didnt you ? no comment or rebuttal ??????????

It is good to think outside the box - How do you think so many accepted ideas of science came into being not that accepted ideas are always the truth.
Who says there is no end to space - I think there is.
Who says that the Universe we perceive through our technology is all there is - I think not
Consider that the Universe could well the base of something other.
We talk of dimensions and wormholes yet what if just what if you tuned the dials of our limited view of reality and came upon realms where matter/energy was of such a refined state that our science could not comprehend or measure or detect it.

reply to post by CyberTruth


I see where you are coming from here. I think that we are too eager to assume that what we have been told over the years as truth. Im sure geniuses like einstein and Tesla were thought of as nutcases but hey i think we can all agree that their way of thinking has brought some positive results.
However i am not saying that what you have brought here as fact but what i do say is that we should start looking at things and possibly find alternative theories.
Take our solar system for instance, how do we that we are not going there rather something coming here so to speak.
I like threads that actually make you think. Like your thread.
S&F From me for thinking for yourself.

People seem to forget that the only reason we know the majority of what we know is through selected education.
The interesting/mind boggling topics are generally added as a TOP SECRET title.

reply to post by ignorant_ape


A star to you for humouring me. I did read your other post and to be honest I did not understand it in its entirety. I did not know what you meant by fthe retrograde obervations of mars.
The only point I am trying to make is something like this. Imagine the universe was empty of matter and energy. Just \a big empty 3d void with the parameters of time.

If I hurled a brick in that universe at a speed of 100mph the brick would travel at that speed. But in another way that brick would not be travelling at any speed at all. The movement of the brick can only exist if there is another object in the universe to measure it against. Which brings us to the problem how do we know the odject we are calibrating against is stationary.

So in my eyes although the earth may appear to travel around the sun and logic dictates that is does. How do we really know.. That is why I said truth is relative.

Science only allows us to build up models of reality. The languages of maths are physics give us approximation of the universe. These are always models they are not the universe itself and I would guess there is far more to the universe than our limited science. You know science cannot prove you exist. The only thing you know for sure without using abstract knowledge. Cannot be proven.

I am not really trying to argue that the earth does not go round the sun. Really for all I know I dont really have a clue. But it is a good exercise for the fun of it.

Hope your courier has arrived...

reply to post by ignorant_ape


I am speaking of Geo-static earth. As like the earth is the center of the universe, and also does not spin.

I think its Geo-stationary which means the earth is the center of the universe, but it still spins. My typo it seems.

as there are multiple geocentrist threads - i have ellected to make a single rebuttal :

threrad link

reply to post by Seektruthalways1


Hi :

geostationary orbit

Is what I take geostationary to mean . Ie a geostationary communications satellite

As for geostatic ? I am ignorant of any use of the term in celestial / orbital mechanics

Geostatic pressure is a geological / engineering term for the pressure exerted by a mass of rock [ but I digress ]

However , I will sieze upon your statement :

As like the earth is the center of the universe, and also does not spin.

If the earth does not rotate on its N / S axis please explain the observations of :

foucalts pendulum an experiment independent of any celestial observations

reply to post by purplemer


appologies for the earlier reply - i was pissed off - when i said " humour you " - i actually meant i was writting a rebuttal of geo-centricism - which now occupplies the threrad i have linked too

sorry it took so long - but things are hectic

now to explain retrograted motion , can i be lazy and ask you to read the :

wikki entry

i will of course answer any questions you still dont understand having read that - but i dont have time to do justice to a dedicated answer to you - in my own words

lastly - relative motion


you are driving down a road at 200kph - and a car travelling at 200.1kph " rear ends " you - assuming you retain control of the car - negligable damage is done - right ?

but if you run into a strationary object at 200kph - its a mess

what i am trying to say is that relative motion - is just that relative

2 objets travelling > > can be travelling at ANY speed is only the difference between the 2 velocities that has any efect [ assuming they do not interact with any object traveling in a diferent vector

but 2 objects travelling > < are going to have an influence equal to the sum of thier velocities

imagine you are on a plane travelling at 400kph - and walk from the tail end of the fuselage towards the cockpit - you are travelling 405kph right - but assuming to make no attempt to stop or open the cockpit dood - you will only damage yourself and the door with a force equal to the effect of your mass and your 5kph walking pace

understand ?

reply to post by ignorant_ape


Well you have a theory that foucaults pendulum may prove rotation of the earth but it doesnt. For one thing, it can only work if you set up the pendulum at the north pole EXACTLY over the X plane. And you must have zero air resistance and zero effects from the moon, and the sun and neighbouring bodies that can affect its movement.

You think it proves rotation when its situated at Paris or south USA? How does it work when its not over the plane and its on the earth's surface attatched to a wire, to the building using some magnets to continually keep it moving. How can you trust this power put into its motion that it isnt affected its swinging?

Can Foucaults pendulum prove that the moon's gravity doesnt affect it?
Can Foucaults pendulum prove that the Sun's gravity doesnt affect it?

How can the pendulum work so precisely if its swinging in air? If you get enough people running passed it on one side, it can screw up the whole experiment. Never mind the air vents in the building, moving air around creating resistance on it. That alone should debunk that whole experiment. And maybe you havent read the books 'The Earth is not moving' and 'Galileo had it wrong: the church had it right'.

www.galileowaswrong.com...

staticearth.net...

sites.google.com...

The pendulum could in NO WAY be positioned to follow the 'invisible plane' so perfectly that it would not be in line after the release. And who is to say when the pendulum was released that it was in the 'perfect' position of that plane in the first place? There is no way to release that pendulum perfectly, not even a computer could do it without error. It would have to line up literally by a nanometer. If it was off by a single nanometer, the experient is flawed.

There is no way to prove earths rotation with that experiment. The pendulum could be moving slightly after its swing because it never was released perfect in the first place. And it will never be positioned where it will stop trying to recorrect itself because its being powered by some magnet to keep it moving forever in the wrong direction.


The earth doesnt rotate also cause the fact if it did, you could fly one way faster, and one way slower in a plane, but you dont. Planes flying lets say to the east would save on gallons of fuel, and flying west they would be using extra fuel.

If the earth rotated, you would have less weight at the pole vs at the equator. Its about 0.9% difference. So any cargo ship or moving company that would transport materials from the equator up north or south of it, would be losing hundreds of tonnes over a course of a many years, yet they dont......


The theory started off wrong, with an assumption, basing on theoretical math that doesnt exist, on falty data, with no understanding of real science, claiming to prove Scripture wrong. This is all its about, proving the Bible wrong, and that the universe is just some random events. It wont matter if I bring out thousands of proofs the earth is stationary, you already made up your mind. You are only trying to justify your belief. We will see, judgment day is not so far away, and thats when everyone will know the truth. Not this nonsensical pseudo-science-witchcraft satanic worship cult garbage.

reply to post by CyberTruth




No. The earth, the sun and the stars all revolve around you, me or whatever point the observation is from.

reply to post by Seektruthalways1


utter twaddle - the link i gave exlains the differences at the poles and equator

further the tiny air currants in a building have negligable effects on a 28kg pendulum bob

lastly - you dont need to " align it " - it hangs from a 60m wire - gravity aligns it for you - then inertia / mommentum conduct the experiment

now you have made your absurd claim that the earth does not move at all - now i know where the fallacy " geostatic " came from

just consider the implications of your claim - everything else in the univers must orbit the earth with an angular velocity of 0.25 arc seconds / second [ 1 orbit / 24 hours ]

wahat is the linear velocity of thie known stars [ some upto 12000 ly away ] ?

once you subscribe to idiocy like religiously motivated geostatism - you have to consider the implications - or sart making up " magic " explainations

reply to post by ignorant_ape


Maybe the issue is that all the foundation of the space celestial bodies is wrong. And from the wrong basis all these assumptions are incorrect.

The stars are not as far as they say they are, how can you know the distance to the sun if the earth isnt moving, and how come science claims these stars in distant galaxies have 'wobble' due to other planetary bodies around them and they will figure out what they are?

Its sooo rediculous these claims, and people believe this nonsense. NASA is full of lies, the scientists have built their whole idea of the universe on a false doctrine, and this is what we have come to.

Distance is not based on how fast light travels, lightyear, because light can be slowed down or sped up. Read the experiments they slowed down light to a pulse. So no distances to any know point of light can be measured even remotely accurate. Star colors can mean anything! Did you know that light when it refracts through prisms it breaks up into colors? Maybe those stars are shining light through areas that break the light up into a specific color, and has nothing to do with 'red shift'

Believe what you want, but I still say lots of the science now is mumbo jumbo numbers cooked up that have no real factual basis. Its a shock to you to admit it, but sooner or later everyone will know the Scriptures were right!