Amazon.com Widgets

# Heliocentrism (Yes) or Geocentrism (No)

Heliocentrism (Yes) or Geocentrism (No)
• ## We aren't in the middle ages

First of all, there are many faults with the geocentric model of the solar system. Earth's gravitational pull is not strong enough to capture the sun, or any other planets in it's pull. Also, in the early 17th century, Galileo's observations messed up the geocentric model. He discovered Jupiter's moons, which didn't match up with the geocentric model. In conclusion, if you believe in the geocentric model, you are an uneducated idiot who should take grade 5 science.

• ## Earth's motion has not been 'proved' yet.

The scientists say that the earth revolves round the sun just because the sun cannot revolve around the earth, because earth cannot exhibit centifugal force on the sun but the sun can, just because of their sizes.

But, science only believes in methodological naturalism. We cannot percieve thungs in higher dimensions and that, the earth is a part of a stationary disc and the sun is revilving around the axis of pole star, which passes through the center of that disc.

Also, earth's rotation is an assumed fact. Just go though some pilot observations and work on the distance-time statistics that really come out to be simple. The complexities of calculating the earth's rotationary speed and then applying it to find distance travelled, time taken and speed would not match with the actual data.

Just think twice and speak. May the middle ages have gone, but its always not necessary to get driven away by certain assumed changes.

• ## Earth's motion has not been 'proved' yet.

The scientists say that the earth revolves round the sun just because the sun cannot revolve around the earth, because earth cannot exhibit centifugal force on the sun but the sun can, just because of their sizes.

But, science only believes in methodological naturalism. We cannot percieve thungs in higher dimensions and that, the earth is a part of a stationary disc and the sun is revilving around the axis of pole star, which passes through the center of that disc.

Also, earth's rotation is an assumed fact. Just go though some pilot observations and work on the distance-time statistics that really come out to be simple. The complexities of calculating the earth's rotationary speed and then applying it to find distance travelled, time taken and speed would not match with the actual data.

Just think twice and speak. May the middle ages have gone, but its always not necessary to get driven away by certain assumed changes.