NOTA BENE:

THE FALLACY

OF

SPHEROIDAL

EARTH

GEOCENTRISM

prefatory

Heliocentrism: An Obvious Falsehood

As pointed out in Heliocentrism Refuted: Experimental Proof of a Stationary Earth, it is simply too easy to disprove heliocentrism (specifically in that case, by disproving the alleged rotating earth component of heliocentrism in the present age of jet travel). Furthermore, heliocentrism has been scientifically disproven for at least a century and a half; see Heliocentrism Refuted: The Airy Experiment (1871) wherein the alleged translational or orbiting earth component of heliocentrism is disproven. The writing is on the wall. All that is holding up heliocentrism today is culturalized propaganda being passed off as education. It has absolutely no substantive basis.

Introduction

Geocentrism necessarily subsumes a stationary and planar earth (not to mention a proximate cosmology) in the same sense that heliocentrism subsumes a rotating and spheroidal (or ellipsoidal) earth (with a distant cosmology), the characteristic of (alleged) spheroidicity or ellipsoidicity being sophistically attributed by Newton to have resulted from the earth’s (alleged) axial rotation; see The Early Modern Period: Copernicus to Newton (1543–1726). Unfortunately, many geocentrists today attempt to preserve the spheroidal earth with its distant cosmology involving absurd astronomical distances spanning billions and billions of light years, as well as other aspects of the existing cosmological paradigm. But this is not unlike the compromising theistic evolutionist who maintains that God created man but used an absurd process of evolution spanning billions and billions of years. Such geocentrists have done to space (i.e., billions and billions of light years) exactly what theistic evolutionists have done to time (billions and billions of years). In essence, they are little more than present-day Teilhard de Chardins (see Appendix I: Creation and the Method of Saint Thomas Aquinas). By placing cosmology on an inhuman spatial scale while simultaneously purporting to be theists, they implicitly endorse cosmological theistic evolutionism just as the theistic evolutionist (while denouncing atheistic evolutionism) nonetheless endorses a biological evolutionary process on an inhuman temporal scale whereby millions of years of death and disease lead to the emergence of man (as opposed to death and disease having resulted from the fall of man as clearly explained throughout the Holy Bible). See for example, in Romans 5:12 as follows:

* Propterea ſicut per vnum hominem peccatum in hunc mundum intrauit, & per peccatũ mors, & ita in omnes homines mors pertranſijt, in quo omnes peccauerunt:
— epistola beati pavli ad romanos, v: 12, Biblia Sacra, Vvlgatae Editionis (1598 A.D.)¹

† Therfore, as "by one man ſinne entred into this vvorld, and by ſinne death: and ſo vnto al men death did paſſe, in vvhich al ſinned.
— the epistle of s. pavl the apostle to the romanes, v: 12, Holie Bible, Doway-Rhemes Edition (1582, 1609, 1610 A.D.)²^,³^,⁴

Partial Truth Subterfuge

A partial truth is often used to replace the least pernicious element of a false edifice in order to uphold its most pernicious component. Such is the case with geocentric models that otherwise retain the heliocentric attributes of a spheroidal earth and distant cosmology. While spherical or spheroidal earth geocentrism is not particulary new, its recent resurgence begs the question of its promoters’ intentions. What appears to have transpired in this case is that certain interests have essentially conceded geocentrism (while preserving all other modern cosmology absurdities) for (from their perspective) a very good reason: A geocentric model wherein the large-scale structure of the earth’s surface is planar and the cosmology therefore proximate, necessarily obliterates a naturalistic cosmogony, specifically, the evolution hypothesis and concomitantly, the hypothesis of other worlds and extraterrestrial life. On the other hand, a geocentric model wherein it is conceded that earth has a special place in the universe but in a universe of otherwise unimaginable proportions, the possibility of other worlds and extraterrestrial life logically remains open.

Spheroidal Earth Geocentrism: A Sophistical and Self-Contradictory Concession

Given the inevitable demise of heliocentrism and the obvious implications of planar earth geocentrism, worldwide totalitarian interests desperately need to control the geocentric narrative. They have therefore tolerated (or possibly even promoted) the (spheroidal earth) geocentric model as it otherwise preserves the cosmogonical and cosmological basis for the contrivance of an extraterrestrial threat from (alleged) asteroids or (alleged) intelligent life, with the concomitant hegemonic politicization thereof.

But if heliocentrism has to go, then the discovery of a geocentric attribute ostensibly related to the existing cosmological paradigm (and preserving the politically useful elements of that paradigm) would be a workable alternative.

Such an (apparently geocentric) attribute has surfaced over the last couple of decades or so, in this case, ostensibly associated with the (so-called) cosmic microwave background (CMB)—an alleged remnant of the (so-called) Big Bang of modern (heliocentric) cosmology. Analyses of the purported mappings of this cosmic microwave background (whatever its origins) appear to indicate multipolar anisotropies apparently aligned with the (so-called) ecliptic of the solar system, the implication being that the earth and solar system occupy a special place in the universe. Such a result is apparently a violation of the modern (so-called) Copernican principle that posits an essentially isotropic universe, the earth and solar system being insignificant in the grand scheme of the cosmos. And so (believe it or not), some (spheroidal earth) geocentrists have latched on to this (apparently geocentric) attribute of this Big Bang remnant as a means to render the earth and the solar system cosmologically significant in a cosmos that under the modern (heliocentric) paradigm, is unfathomable in both space and time.

But as stated above, geocentrism necessarily subsumes a stationary and planar earth (not to mention a proximate cosmology) in the same sense that heliocentrism subsumes a rotating and spheroidal (or ellipsoidal) earth (with a distant cosmology), the characteristic of (alleged) spheroidicity or ellipsoidicity being sophistically attributed by Newton to have resulted from the earth’s (alleged) axial rotation; again, see The Early Modern Period: Copernicus to Newton (1543–1726). Hence, any geocentric model premised on a spheroidal rather than a planar earth is an obvious non-starter since the alleged spheroidicity iteself allegedly results from an allegedly rotating earth—a fundamental tenet of heliocentrism. Such a geocentric model is not only sophistical but inherently self-contradictory.

Furthermore, spheroidal earth geocentrism that otherwise retains the (distant) chaotic Big Bang cosmogony (as opposed to planar earth geocentrism that naturally subsumes a nearby, Heaven-oriented comogony) is faced with the absurd idea of an earth-centered rotating universe wherein cosmological entities trillions of light years distant, somehow revolve around the earth on a daily basis, thereby exceeding the speed of light by unimaginable orders of magnitude. That is what happens when an element of truth is attached to a grandiose falsehood.

— FINIS —

WEB PAGE CONTROL
REVISION	0	1
DATE	2021-OCT-21	2023-DEC-30