Darwin and evolution

[rossum]

Darwin certainly was a racist.

As were Washington and Jefferson. They both owned slaves, which Darwin never did.

rossum

 

[oriel16]

Darwin was no more racist than others of his age. Less so than most. You cannot destroy the concept of evolution by attacking it in this way any more than you can destroy the Christian faith by highlighting the racism of Spanish Catholics during their conquest of South and Central America,

Give it up,Darwin’s ‘cause’ for evolution is anti-scientific and will always contain the national racial supremacy undercurrents from which it emerged.

If you wish to promote evolution then do so using your fellow countryman William Smith who added an evolutionary trajectory to Steno’s original observations and the principles joining biological and geological evolution -

strangescience.net/smith.htm

The Catholic encyclopedia has the most appaling entry for Steno and his actual achievements in basically starting off modern geological evolution along with biological evolution -

newadvent.org/cathen/14286a.htm

A better view of Steno is found here -

ucmp.berkeley.edu/history/steno.html

No wonder people dump everything into Darwin as though Darwin was responsible for ‘evolution’ when he only attempted to inject a ‘cause’.

Look,I think I have said enough at this stage but watch what comes out of that meeting in Rome next week.If there is anything less than a fight to recover evolution from the ‘cause’ that Darwin injected into biological evolution then an entirely different set of circumstances will arise.

 

[grannymh]

Give it up,Darwin’s ‘cause’ for evolution is anti-scientific and will always contain the national racial supremacy undercurrents from which it emerged.

If you wish to promote evolution then do so using your fellow countryman William Smith who added an evolutionary trajectory to Steno’s original observations and the principles joining biological and geological evolution -

strangescience.net/smith.htm

The Catholic encyclopedia has the most appaling entry for Steno and his actual achievements in basically starting off modern geological evolution along with biological evolution -

newadvent.org/cathen/14286a.htm

A better view of Steno is found here -

ucmp.berkeley.edu/history/steno.html

No wonder people dump everything into Darwin as though Darwin was responsible for ‘evolution’ when he only attempted to inject a ‘cause’.

Look,I think I have said enough at this stage but watch what comes out of that meeting in Rome next week.If there is anything less than a fight to recover evolution from the ‘cause’ that Darwin injected into biological evolution then an entirely different set of circumstances will arise.

 

[grannymh]

Look,I think I have said enough at this stage but watch what comes out of that meeting in Rome next week.If there is anything less than a fight to recover evolution from the ‘cause’ that Darwin injected into biological evolution then an entirely different set of circumstances will arise.

Dear oriel16,

This is an unfamiliar forum for me. Regardless of how I landed at this last post, I have two questions 1. regarding the ‘cause’ that Darwin injected… Is that cause (a bias) causing misinterpretation of genome data? 2. What is the best source for following the meeting in Rome?

I realize that my questions may have been addressed in your previous posts. I do intend to read them… Thank you.

Blessings,
granny

All human beings are worthy of profound respect.

 

[oriel16]

Dear oriel16,

This is an unfamiliar forum for me. Regardless of how I landed at this last post, I have two questions 1. regarding the ‘cause’ that Darwin injected… Is that cause (a bias) causing misinterpretation of genome data? 2. What is the best source for following the meeting in Rome?

I realize that my questions may have been addressed in your previous posts. I do intend to read them… Thank you.

Blessings,
granny

All human beings are worthy of profound respect.

The evolution issue is simply a symptom of a much bigger issue and rather than being a basis for attacking Christianity or worse - creating a platform for ‘two ways of knowing’ or some sort of simalar capitulation ,Darwin’s injection of a ‘cause’ is a means to expose that empiricism illegally takes the name of ‘science’ but in itself is a variation of an Arian cult.It is,in fact,an anti-scientific cult that narrows investigation of terrestrial/celestial phenomena and creates an artificial atmosphere where people find science vs religion acceptable.

The Christian challenge to empiricism as representing science is not through Darwin but using Darwin to expose the real opportunist in all this - how Newton mangled the work of Christian astronomers is getting the empirical ‘laws’ bandwagon rolling in the first place ,Darwin is simply hopping on that bandwagon in the most spurious way.

The smoke and mirrors Newton employed to surround the original astronomical insights with definitional fluff is quite remarkable notwithstanding that he completely inserts his own idiosyncratic agenda of reducing astronomical insights to ‘experimental’ conditions and while I would not expect anybody ,at least presently,to spot this act of vandalism,I assure you I can ! -

“It is indeed a matter of great difficulty to discover, and effectually to distinguish, the true motion of particular bodies from the apparent; because the parts of that absolute space, in which those motions are performed, do by no means come under the observation of our senses. Yet the thing is not altogether desperate; for we have some arguments to guide us, partly from the apparent motions, which are the differences of the true motions; partly from the forces, which are the causes and effects of the true motion.”

members.tripod.com/~gravitee/definitions.htm#time

Talk about shuffling the deck to suit yourself !!!.

If a person can do that to the great Copernicus and his insights based on the motions of the planets they can do just about anything,basically make up whatever story they like to fit whatever conclusion they desire.

The most visible sign of the problem is that the atmosphere within the Christian tradition was always productive for investigation of terrestrial/celestial phenomena due to the same inspriational faculties which affirm Christ and Christianity but now exists as a separate thing that attacks it.

The signs are that the Christian authorities are on the road to appeasement when they should actively demonstrate that the underpinning of the empirical approach are counter-productive and downright anti-scientific.Does the Church not realise that some of the empirical/Arian ideas and those who promote them have now painted themselves into conceptual corners ? , because ,while there is plenty of noveltistic value to the ideas,there is no real substance .

I will see what happens next week and the outcome although I fear it will only worsen matters but again,that remains to be seen.

 

[grannymh]

I’ll try to find an article or more info to post on it, but I read recently about some new discoveries about evolution.

Basically scientists have found that species don’t gain new genes through evolution, but instead species have always had the same genes. The thing is that the genes just turn on or off through evolution. Like for instance, they believe that an Emu at one time was a species of Raptor, and they are currently experimenting with de-evolving certain birds to their dinosaur state. This seems to point to the belief that there is a plan behind evolution, or it would be quite coincidental that when we were in early evolution we already had all the genes we have now, just different ones were active.

Dear Hobble

Please pardon me for jumping into the middle of a thread. I am very interested in your mention of “discoveries” about the same genes within a species which appear to turn on or off.

Did you or anyone else find the articles?

Blessings,
granny

All human life is sacred.

 

[rossum]

Dear Hobble

Please pardon me for jumping into the middle of a thread. I am very interested in your mention of “discoveries” about the same genes within a species which appear to turn on or off.

Did you or anyone else find the articles?

Blessings,
granny

All human life is sacred.

Although it does not deal directly with raptors, you may well find “Endless forms most beautiful” by Sean Carroll useful:

amazon.com/Endless-Forms-Most-Beautiful-Science/dp/0393060160

rossum

 

[grannymh]

The evolution issue is simply a symptom of a much bigger issue and rather than being a basis for attacking Christianity or worse - creating a platform for ‘two ways of knowing’ or some sort of simalar capitulation ,Darwin’s injection of a ‘cause’ is a means to expose that empiricism illegally takes the name of ‘science’ but in itself is a variation of an Arian cult.It is,in fact,an anti-scientific cult that narrows investigation of terrestrial/celestial phenomena and creates an artificial atmosphere where people find science vs religion acceptable.

…

I will see what happens next week and the outcome although I fear it will only worsen matters but again,that remains to be seen.

Dear oriel16,

For ages, I’ve seen Arian’s influence in moral/ethical issues right down to having my car rifled by teenagers. So it was enlightening to see it as anti-science. I share your view about the Christian tradition of being productive for investigations of our marvelous universe including the most marvelous of all, us.

While my goal is to study astronomy when I turn 80, right now I’m dealing with an evolution issue which is directly opposed to the Catholic belief in original sin.

I have always liked the evolutionary theory especially when it treats dinosaurs. I relate well with 5-year-olds. However, I object to human beings being considered in the same class as my dear dinosaurs. And when some evolutionary scientists claim that “evidence” suggests that Adam and Eve were not distinct from the patterns of similar primates, I stamp my foot and say prove it. This means that I have to answer claims which I believe are limited and most likely misinterpretations of available data.

I, too, am looking forward to the meeting in Rome.

Blessings,
granny

All human beings were created for life beyond the limits of our universe.

 

[StAnastasia]

Darwin certainly was a racist.There is a belief that African Americans are black because they are not as evolved as whites and Asians. Don’t believe me. Do a search on Sharon Broome an African American woman from Louisiana. She is also a state legislator in Louisiana. She got a resolution passed in Louisiana condemning the racism of Darwin and his followers. /QUOTE]

You have a silly notion of scientific knowledge. Einstein had an extramarital sexual affair, but that does not invalidate his theory of relativity. Nothing Darwin did or thought invalidates the solidly supported theory of evolution.

StAnastasia

 

[StAnastasia]

Darwin certainly was a racist.There is a belief that African Americans are black because they are not as evolved as whites and Asians. Don’t believe me. Do a search on Sharon Broome an African American woman from Louisiana. She is also a state legislator in Louisiana. She got a resolution passed in Louisiana condemning the racism of Darwin and his followers. .

You have a silly notion of scientific knowledge. Einstein had an extramarital sexual affair, but that does not invalidate his theory of relativity. Nothing Darwin did or thought invalidates the solidly supported theory of evolution.

StAnastasia

 

[StAnastasia]

I, too, am looking forward to the meeting in Rome.Blessings,granny All human beings were created for life beyond the limits of our universe.

Grannymh, will you be going? I’m trying to change my housing arrangement, as the seminary where I’ll be staying is a two-mile walk from the Gregorian University, poorly served by the metro.

I’m interested in your tag line that “All human beings were created for life beyond the limits of our universe.” The “all humans” clause raises intriguing questions in light of the long evolutionary history of human kind. Who will be included and who will be left behind? The “beyond the limits of our universe” clause directly contradicts the view of some YECs that heaven is somewhere out there in this universe.

StAnastasia

 

[StAnastasia]

Darwin’s injection of a ‘cause’ is a symptom of an Arian cult and its thinking by making creation something less than it is and that men can actually know the cause of life and its diversity.

Can you explain what you mean by an “Arian cult”? I don’t know of this cult, whose teenagers grannymh thinks rifled her car. Is this cult related in any way to the fourth century Arius of Alexandria?

 

[grannymh]

Can you explain what you mean by an “Arian cult”? I don’t know of this cult, whose teenagers grannymh thinks rifled her car. Is this cult related in any way to the fourth century Arius of Alexandria?

Dear StAnastasia,

No I’m not going to Rome. However, a friend proposed that sometime in the future, the two of us would find inexpensive lodging so we could hang out in the churches of Rome. I don’t expect this to happen soon.

What I actually wrote is:
“For ages, I’ve seen Arian’s influence in moral/ethical issues right down to having my car rifled by teenagers.” It is one of the many ways to reference Arius, the Greek theologian, and how his denying that Jesus was of the same substance as God has morphed in present times. You make me wonder about Darwin and evolution? ? ? I’ll think about that much, much later.

So glad you found my tag line interesting. I’ll repeat it. When you find the answers to your questions in post 230, let me know.
For now obligations limit my search time. Sorry.

Blessings,
granny

“All human beings were created for life beyond the limits of our universe.”

 

[StAnastasia]

“For ages, I’ve seen Arian’s influence in moral/ethical issues right down to having my car rifled by teenagers.” It is one of the many ways to reference Arius, the Greek theologian, and how his denying that Jesus was of the same substance as God has morphed in present times. You make me wonder about Darwin and evolution? ? ? I’ll think about that much, much later."

Grannymh, his name was “Arius,” not “Arian” (Arian is the adjectival form). I’m trying to wrap my mind around the idea of a connection between Arius and Arianism, on the one hand, and your car being rifled through on the other. Are you sure it wasn’t a group of Nestorians, or perhaps even Eutychians or Pelagians who rifled your car? Without the relevant theological evidence (e.g., heretical tracts left behind), it would be difficult to determine which specific heresy was responsible for motivating this crime of teenage vandalism.

StAnastasia

 

[oriel16]

Can you explain what you mean by an “Arian cult”? I don’t know of this cult, whose teenagers grannymh thinks rifled her car. Is this cult related in any way to the fourth century Arius of Alexandria?

Look,you are better off with what you believe of Einstein,or rather his 20th century adaption of a H.G. Wells ‘Time Machine’ `19 th century science fiction novel -

“Filby became pensive. ‘Clearly,’ the Time Traveller proceeded, ‘any real body must have extension in four directions: it must have Length, Breadth, Thickness, and—Duration.”

bartleby.com/1000/1.html

“The concept of spacetime combines space and time within a single coordinate system, typically with three spatial dimensions: length, width, height, and one temporal dimension: time”

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spacetime

“‘Scientific people,’ proceeded the Time Traveller, after the pause required for the proper assimilation of this, ‘know very well that Time is only a kind of Space.”

bartleby.com/1000/1.html

"In physics, spacetime is any mathematical model that combines space and time into a single construct called the spacetime continuum. "

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spacetime

How a science fiction novel based on ‘time travel’ took up so much effort of the last and got the guy ‘Man of the Century’ through Time magasine is just one of those things where I shake my head.Whereas Darwin’s adaption of an essay on national supremacy is anti-scientific and dangerous,Albert’s effort is just plain funny.It does show what happens when nobody understands Newton’s absolute/relative space in terms of his botching the main Christian arguments for heliocentricity based on apparent retrogrades by invoking a hypothetical observer but this would be lost on you and it would most here.

So,Christianity is standing amid the ruins of its own scientific heritage while some people who call themselves Catholic are making a nuisance of themselves by supporting an Arian agenda.I know this,because if you are supporting a childish novelty like ‘time travel’ you certainly have no self respect for yourself let alone creation.

Albert ruined a perfectly good science fiction novel but there is about as much science in his junk as there is in Darwin’s nationalistic imposition on biological evolution.It is the ‘scientific method’ that is the problem but unfortunately genuine and decent Christians have difficulties separating empiricism as a variation on the Arian heresy from science which is and always was inspirational within the Christian tradition.

I went through the quaint ‘relativity’ thingie fairly quickly and it is just too low on the intellectual scale to comment on save that it does expose what Newton did in hijacking astronomical insights in terms of absolute/relative time,space ect.The message to Christians is that it is too childish to consider unless you want to dump ‘time travel’ and ‘warped space’ into the magnificent celestial arena.

 

[oriel16]

Dear oriel16,

While my goal is to study astronomy when I turn 80, right now I’m dealing with an evolution issue which is directly opposed to the Catholic belief in original sin.

QUOTE

Yes it is,the original Sin in eating of the tree of First causes which Christ restored as Love and not knowledge ,as the old author had it - what fell and died in Adam rose and lived in Christ. -

“The Scripture and the Faith and the Truth say, Sin is nought else, but that the creature turneth away from the unchangeable Good and betaketh itself to the changeable; that is to say, that it turneth away from the Perfect to “that which is in part” and imperfect, and most often to itself. Now mark: when the creature claimeth for its own anything good, such as Substance, Life, Knowledge, Power, and in short whatever we should call good, as if it were that, or possessed that, or that were itself, or that proceeded from it, — as often as this cometh to pass, the creature goeth astray. What did the devil do else, or what was his going astray and his fall else, but that he claimed for himself to be also somewhat, and would have it that somewhat was his, and somewhat was due to him? This setting up of a claim and his I and Me and Mine, these were his going astray, and his fall. And thus it is to this day.”

passtheword.org/DIALOGS-FROM-THE-PAST/theogrm1.htm

The Earth, a grand and ancient stage for so much history,not just human history but the climate,the long since dead animals,the great geological and astronomical events that are written in the rocks and in the fossils and their for us like a big jigsaw puzzle where it each generation fits a piece or two.,sometimes re-adjusts older pieces in the process to make way for the newer pieces.
grannymh;4844074:

I have always liked the evolutionary theory especially when it treats dinosaurs. I relate well with 5-year-olds. However, I object to human beings being considered in the same class as my dear dinosaurs.

QUOTE

To be fair,they really don’t think that.That the dinosaurs became extinct could be for many different reasons,that they roamed the Earth that we now inhabit is exciting and will always thrill the kid in us and credit to those who are still trying to tell the geological ,climatological and other stories that went into the rise and departure of those great land creatures.

Pity the genuine guys will be sabotaged by the narrow view in looking for a single line ancestry via the ‘survival of the fittest cause’ in trying to convert humanity back into a pool of chemicals and as a means to attack Christianity.
grannymh;4844074:

And when some evolutionary scientists claim that “evidence” suggests that Adam and Eve were not distinct from the patterns of similar primates, I stamp my foot and say prove it. This means that I have to answer claims which I believe are limited and most likely misinterpretations of available data.

I, too, am looking forward to the meeting in Rome

QUOTE

Sorry for cutting this short MH, I think anything further will just look like intellectual grandstanding on my part yet I fear that the opportunity of striking while the iron is hot next week when the meeting convenes will be lost to empirical complicity.It is an important juncture is Christianity and sometimes God makes it this way that the things that look of little importance become the most important things of all.

.

Blessings,
granny

All human beings were created for life beyond the limits of our universe.

 

[a_burger]

]This is in direct reply to John Romanoski who happens to have 80 more credits in theology than Jesus of Nazereth had. John also believes in Darwinian evolution as does a Catholic Cardinal named Schonborn.
Since Cardinal Schonborn and John Romanoski appear to be Christians we now have to reexamine the truthfulness of Jesus. Let’s start with some Bible verses.

The Apostle Paul, who happened to be appointed by Jesus Christ, to bring the Gospel to the Gentiles says, in II Timothy 3:16 “All Scripture is God breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training.” Let’s remember at this time there was no New Testament. Paul was talking about the Old Testament. That means everything written in the Book of Genesis is God breathed and, therfore, correct…
Genesis 1:25 God made the wild animals according to their own kind.
Genesis 2:7 the Lord formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and the man became a living thing.

Please note that the Lord didn’t breath into the nostrils of a monkey or a one celled animal. Paul, unlike Cardinal Schonborn and John Romanoski was appointed to preach the gospel. To say species evolved into higher species is another gospel because it certainly isn’t the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

When I was young and even into my early twenties I was an agnostic because of the teaching of the Darwinian evolutionists. Then fortunately I found the truth. It was people like Romanoski and Schonborn who would have cost me my salvation.

I am Catholic and by the way am I impressed that a Catholic Cardinal would support Darwinian evolution? I am no more surprised then when we found out one of Jesus’ own Apostles was a betrayer named Judas.

Do yourself a favor and flush your 80 theology credits down the toilet. Simply put if you disagree with God breathed wqrds you lose.

 

[cassini]

]This is in direct reply to John Romanoski who happens to have 80 more credits in theology than Jesus of Nazereth had. John also believes in Darwinian evolution as does a Catholic Cardinal named Schonborn.
Since Cardinal Schonborn and John Romanoski appear to be Christians we now have to reexamine the truthfulness of Jesus. Let’s start with some Bible verses.

The Apostle Paul, who happened to be appointed by Jesus Christ, to bring the Gospel to the Gentiles says, in II Timothy 3:16 “All Scripture is God breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training.” Let’s remember at this time there was no New Testament. Paul was talking about the Old Testament. That means everything written in the Book of Genesis is God breathed and, therfore, correct…
Genesis 1:25 God made the wild animals according to their own kind.
Genesis 2:7 the Lord formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and the man became a living thing.

Please note that the Lord didn’t breath into the nostrils of a monkey or a one celled animal. Paul, unlike Cardinal Schonborn and John Romanoski was appointed to preach the gospel. To say species evolved into higher species is another gospel because it certainly isn’t the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

When I was young and even into my early twenties I was an agnostic because of the teaching of the Darwinian evolutionists. Then fortunately I found the truth. It was people like Romanoski and Schonborn who would have cost me my salvation.

I am Catholic and by the way am I impressed that a Catholic Cardinal would support Darwinian evolution? I am no more surprised then when we found out one of Jesus’ own Apostles was a betrayer named Judas.

Do yourself a favor and flush your 80 theology credits down the toilet. Simply put if you disagree with God breathed wqrds you lose.

This is the most marvellous of the 236 posts I have found on this thread. Thank you a burger for showing me such a faith still exists on earth. I hope your faith covers all that Jesus said and taught to the apostles and has not become a part victim to the heresy of all heresies, Modernism, in which evolutionism plays a great part.

If I could add that nothing in the Catholic faith can be isolated. Every dogma, doctrine and theology are interlinked. Its an all or nothing faith. Discredit one aspect of Catholic belief and in time it will spread its error into other aspects of faith. This is why evolutionism has led many into agnosticism and atheism

Now me let add to what you say. The Scriptures also reveal the world was created geocentric and thus anthropocentric and theocentric. All the Apostles, all the Fathers, Doctors and faithful understood the Scriptures to confirmed what the senses told them. As Genesis reveals direct creation, it also tells us the material world was created in this order, the earth, the moon, sun and stars, an act of God that can be understood only if we read the theology of it compiled by the Fathers, culminating in the writings of St Thomas Aquinas. This truth was confirmed by the Church herself, with a papal decree to this effect in 1616.

The Devil is ‘the Father of lies’. He knows how to attack the Church and its teachings, as well as tempting man to disbelieve by way of intellectual pride. He began his attack on Scripture using Galileo. As man - mainly through Masonic run societies like the Royal Society of London - claimed ‘proof’ for a moving earth (empirical science cannot prove the earth moves. Man can all agree it moves, but they cannot prove it, just as man cannot prove life evolved, but they mostly agree it did) Churchmen did a U-turn and the Scriptures were then made redundant as a means of revelation. Metaphor replaced the literal.

The devil knew that once Copernicanism - the first heresy to be adopted into the Church - was installed as a truth, it would lead to further changes. Science asked the question, how did the universe come to be. We all know this led to the nebular theory (a precurser to the Big Bang theory). Now the scene was set for science to ask, 'well if the universe evolved to include a solar system, flora and fauna must have evolved also,

So, you must see a DIRECT CONNECTION between the U-turn of the geocentric revelation to a U-turn on a literal revelation that tells us of a direct creation of EVERYTHING, and flora and fauna according to their kinds. (a kind can spread within its kind but cannot go outside its kind). Just as not one Churchman in Rome would claim the Bible reveals geocentricism, they now dare not go against the consensus that the Bible should NOT be read literally but metaphorically.

So, Copernicanism set the Church up for evolutionism and both have led to the current apostasy in the Church where important dogmas and doctrines are clear cut anymore…

I realise the question of geocentricism has its own treads, but I bring it up here to show how the evolution fraud now reigns high with the Copernican heresy (never abrogated by the way) and affects everything.

Again a burger, thank you for a brilliant post. Alas there are only a few of us who can still recognise your truth.

 

[oriel16]

I realise the question of geocentricism has its own treads, but I bring it up here to show how the evolution fraud now reigns high with the Copernican heresy (never abrogated by the way) and affects everything.

Again a burger, thank you for a brilliant post. Alas there are only a few of us who can still recognise your truth.

Well Cassini,I am sure that you will be happy to know that empirical science has not only brought us back to geocentric reasoning but surpassed it and reduces it down further to homocentricity.They now call it the ‘Cosmological principle’ -

abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/cosmo/lectures/lec05.html

I do not blame you,the Christian and Church involvement in heliocentric reasoning is well known and probably Galileo gives one of the best essays on this as he tried to get himself out of his silly maneuver against the Pope by appealing to Chruch astronomical involvement -

“With Herculean toil Copernicus set his admirable mind to this task, and he made such great progress in this science and brought our knowledge of the heavenly motions to such precision that he became celebrated as an astronomer. Since that time not only has the calendar been regulated by his teachings, but tables of all the motions of the planets have been calculated as well. Having reduced his system into six books, he published these at the insistence of the Cardinal of Capua and the Bishop of Culm. And since he had assumed his laborious enterprise by order of the supreme pontiff, he dedicated this book On the celestial
revolutions to Pope Paul III. When printed, the book was accepted by the holy Church, and it has been read and studied by everyone without the faintest hint of any objection ever being conceived against its doctrines.” Galileo

galilean-library.org/manuscript.php?postid=43841

There are Christians who find the experience of God’s creation helps them understand Christ and Christianity better.The first Christians to propose the motions of the Earth did so because it proclaims God in all things and everywhere.It would be silly to put God physically at the center of creation and thereby the center of the Earth so they looked for reasons to get the Earth moving.

The great Archbishop Cusa presented the first technical arguments based on the idea that two different people,one at Northern latiudes and one nearer the Equator essentially see the same thing so the same observation cannot satisfy both observers and has to be accounted for by the motions of the Earth -

"Suppose person A were on the earth somewhere below the north pole of the heavens and person B were at the north pole of the heavens. In that case, to A the pole would appear to be at the zenith, and A would believe himself to be at the center; to B the earth would appear to be at the zenith, and B would believe himself to be at the center. Thus, A’s zenith would be B’s center, and B’s zenith would be A’s "

Hence Archbishop Cusa could write in the early 15th century -

"And wherever anyone would be, he would believe himself to be at the center.Therefore, merge these different imaginative pictures so that the center is the zenith and vice versa. Thereupon you will see-- through the intellect…that the world and its motion and shape cannot be apprehended. For [the world] will appear as a wheel in a wheel and a sphere in a sphere-- having its center and circumference nowhere. . . " Nicolas of Cusa

It was Copernicus who really supplied the dramatic arguments that sent the Earth orbitally moving between Venus and Mars and as Galileo correctly states,the Church in his time was a fertile ground for the reception of his arguments.The present Church is not doing enough to promote the discovery of Coperniucs even with modern time lapse footage and allows Newton’s view and the present conceptual monstrosities to steal the attention.

So Cassini,have you got this clear,What Archbishop Cusa seen as a horror and a good reason to look for a justification for the Earth’s motions is now promoted in empirical science as something wonderful ! - "For [the world] will appear as a wheel in a wheel and a sphere in a sphere-- having its center and circumference nowhere. . . " Nicolas of Cusa

When Newton jumped the tracks with his hypothetical observer on the Sun to accout for retrogrades,he set in motion a train of events that even outdoes you as can be seen in the ideas of celebrity empiricists -

arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0205119

Even you will fit right in Cassini but as often is the case -Save us from out friends.

 

[cassini]

Thank you oriel 16. I do see we meet half-way. This is good because most catholics on this forum have no time for Catholic wisdom and give their absolute allegiance to ‘science’ and its theories.

Now I did not intend to turn this popular thread into a discussion on geocentricism, but only to show that the Copernican heresy preceded the evolutionary ‘heresy’ (I believe if it were not for the 1741-1820 U-turn on the Church’s 1616 decree on the true interpretation of Scripture, the Church would have declared evolution as a heresy because of its attack on certain dogmas such as Original Sin, the foundational dogma of the Catholic Church. The nineteenth century hierarchy were intimidated lest they would find themselves having to do a second U-turn on the evolutionary heresy in time). One U-turn is enough to show the Catholicism of Copernicans is a false Christian religion.

If I be permitted a once-off reply to your post oriel 16 so as not to turn the thread into a HvG one.

I am aware that the divide between man and God is that whereas relativity presents numerous philosophical possibilities for man, such as a-centrism and cosmological principles, this is not the case with God and His revelations. He knows the real order of the universe and thus if He says it it geocentric that is enough for me now. The real fraud of science and the Copernicans on this forum is to assert geocentricism has been falsified. They have PROVEN God wrong, proven the Churchmen had read the Scriptures incorrectly, and proven the Bible is metaphor on such matters. I now know they haven’t and thus can revert back to the 1616 as true Catholic faith.

I have now learned enough to reject such ‘facts’ as space-time (on your posted site). The Scriptures say that God created the stars VISIBLE to Adam and Eve in the first week of creation. Thus He created universal time. Space-time is an invention by man. The absurdity that we can see back into time is like saying we men are now like God.

I can also offer a physical explanation for an expanding universe (another theory disputed by many physicists by the way) if an expanding universe is true. If the universe is rotating around the earth, the inertia would cause an expanding universe.
There is also the ‘theological’ adherence to God only as infinite. In a heliocentric universe the assertion that it is infinite (an atheistic princple) is reasonable. This human reasoning does not lead to God. But if it is geocentric and rotates once every 24 hours it cannot be infinite for an infinite universe cannot rotate once every 24 hours.

You seem to be a little uninformed regarding Copernicus and his book. In the preface Osiander placed a clear statement that Copernicus was not offering a true order of the universe but only a mathematical method for plotting the courses of its many bodies. Thus there was no contradiction of Scripture, thus no need for censorship or banning. Galileo was chancing his arm as he usually did.

Your next error is taking seriously the idea that geocentricism is valid only if the earth lies at the mathematical centre of our sun, moon planet system. It means no such thing. It simply means the earth is at the centre, just as the 1616 stated. Were it at the mathematical centre then there would be equal timed seasons. Geocentricists like Domenico Cassini knew well that the orbit of the sun is oval and no oval has a centrepoint, only circles have a mathematical centre. Copernicus and Galileo accepted circles thus pulling them into this ‘circle/centre’ error.
Thus Nicolas of Cusa did not have truth on his side.

This ‘centre’ ploy was used by Churchmen from 1741 to 1820 to bring about a U-turn. Now it is being used in 2009 in the same way. ‘Nothing new under the sun’.

I do agree that Newton the arian was also used by the Devil and his ‘priests’ to attack the word of God. But thats another story.

The day anyone proves God, the Scriptures and the Church of 1616 wrong in any way, will be the day they prove Christianity a man-made religion.