Galileo Was Wrong: First Annual Catholic Conference on Geocentrism

[Ian David]

<snip>

Galileo Was Wrong is a detailed and comprehensive treatment of the scientific evidence supporting Geocentrism, the academic belief that the Earth is immobile in the center of the universe. Garnering scientific information from physics, astrophysics, astronomy and other sciences, Galileo Was Wrong shows that the debate between Galileo and the Catholic Church was much more than a difference of opinion about the interpretation of Scripture.

Scientific evidence available to us within the last 100 years that was not available during Galileo's confrontation shows that the Church's position on the immobility of the Earth is not only scientifically supportable, but it is the most stable model of the universe and the one which best answers all the evidence we see in the cosmos.

<snip>

Galileo Was Wrong: The Church Was Right is one of the most unique and penetrating books you will ever read. Now complete in Volumes I and II, authors Robert Sungenis and Robert Bennett take you on a tour of science and history the likes of which you would have never believed possible unless it were told to you in detailed and graphic form. Has modern science led us down the primrose path and convinced us of something that they cannot prove and that is in actuality false? Were the Fathers, the Medievals, our popes and cardinals of the 17th century correct in believing that the Earth, based on a face value reading of Scripture, was standing still in the center of the universe? Come with an open mind and allow these two authors to show you facts and figures that have been hidden from the public for a very long time. This is a page turner that you will find hard to put down, once you get riveted by the astounding material these authors have assembled for you. Prepare yourself, however. Your world will be rocked, literally and figuratively. Not only will you see from Volume I how modern science has documented for us in bold fashion that the Earth is motionless in space and occupies the center of the universe (yet have done an equally remarkable job in keeping these important facts out of our educational system), you will now see in Volume II how deeply the popes of the 17th century were involved in condemning heliocentrism, guiding the process step-by-step and finally castigating it as "formally heretical." You will also see how effusive is the data in Scripture that teaches a geocentric universe in the most detailed exegesis of Holy Writ ever presented to the public on this topic. Lastly, Volume II offers detailed and comprehensive documentation of the consensus of the Church Fathers and Medieval theologians on geocentrism. It also covers all the statements and teachings of modern popes and councils, such as Gregory XVI, Benedict XIV, Pius VII, Leo XIII, Benedict XV, The Council of Trent, Vatican I, Vatican II, and a special section on John Paul II in his re-examination of the Galileo case. These are facts and analyses that every Catholic should avail himself. The most important thing you will receive from this astounding study is a very close relationship with God. For once you see that God, his Church, and Holy Scripture have given us the unadulterated truth, proven by modern science itself, you will have no choice but to put yourself completely in His trust and care for everything else in your life.

Did the Catholic Church make a grand and embarrassing mistake when it condemned the heliocentric system under Pope Urban VIII in 1633 as “formally heretical” and “opposed to Scripture”? Has modern science proven that heliocentrism is the correct system of cosmology? Did John Paul II officially concede that Galileo was right and the Church was wrong? To the surprise of many, the answer to all three is no. Now, abridged from the original two volume set of over 1200 pages, the essential facts and figures of one of the most controversial events in the history of man has been distilled down to 700 pages (350 pages of science and 350 pages of ecclesiastical history) and put in a comfortable 6 x 9 book frame in a less expensive paperback version.

More:
http://www.galileowaswrong.com/galileowaswrong/



No, it's not a hoax. Here's the dude behind it...

Robert Sungenis
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Robert A. Sungenis (born 1955), is the founder of the Bellarmine Theological Forum. Sungenis is known for his works in apologetics critiquing the Protestant doctrines of Sola Fide and Sola Scriptura. More recently, he has become known for his advocacy of geocentrism and also for views of Jews and Judaism that have created controversy.

<snip>

In 2008, Sungenis took credit for the fact that the U.S. bishops voted to remove a sentence from the next printing of the U.S. Catholic Catechism for Adults that involves the Jewish people and the Mosaic covenant ("Thus the covenant that God made with the Jewish people through Moses remains eternally valid for them"). The bishops proposed to replace it with a sentence from the universal Catechism of the Catholic Church.<5><9> Sungenis expressed concerns about the original sentence at his website and said he wrote to the Vatican about it.<10> The executive director of evangelization and catechesis for the USCCB's committee on the catechism denied that the change occurred because of Sungenis' intervention.<5>

Sungenis has also become known for his advocacy of geocentrism. He believes that physics and the Bible prove that the sun and all the planets orbit the Earth and that the Earth does not rotate. In support of his beliefs, Sungenis published the book Galileo Was Wrong in the hope that people will "give Scripture its due place and show that science is not all it's cracked up to be." <11>

More:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Sungenis

Hat-tip to: http://twitter.com/BibleAlsoSays/status/24403682548

[Recursion]

1. OTOH if the earth is stationary we don't need special relativity.

Since the experiments showing the speed of light is independent of the motion of its source depend on the idea that the earth is moving.

[TheMadMonk]

8. Actually I think you have it backwards. Special Relativity is at the core...

...of the twisted logic involved. The only problem is, by his own logic, the tip of every nose on the planet, is suimultaneously a stationary point about which the universe revolves.

The whole point of Special Relativity is that for any exercise, one can pick any referece they chose and decree that point to be the absolute center of the universe about which all else revolves and be absolutely correct.

But when all is said and dusted and you do the math and cancel some terms and normalise others, a local "absolute" reference point naturally emerges at the absolute center of mass of the system under consideration. On and near Earth that point is the centre of the Earth. Include the moon and it's a moving point down in the mantle. And so on out to the solar system and the sun. Beyond the sun the distances are so huge that the distance between the Sun and Earth is infintesimal and for most purposes a simple time correction of about 4 mins per day is enough to couch everything in geocentric terms. Even so that 4 min "correction" actually effects a frame shift to the sun.


Ultimately it is possible to force everything into geocentric terms, but it will never be elegant.

[Recursion]

9. Actually relativity was the axiom

The observation was that the speed of light is independent of the motion of its source. The axiom of relativity requires no frame of reference be "privileged". 1 - v^2 / c^2 is what you get from that.

Though I guess you wouldn't really need Michelson-Morely results; the problem Einstein solved is inherent in Maxwell's equations.

[jgraz]

10. You could do it with Special Relativity, but never with General

The curvature of space-time makes it pretty clear who's revolving around whom.

Edit: And really, Special Relativity doesn't work either, given that it explicitly excludes accelerated reference frames -- like a planet in orbit around a star.

[Pab Sungenis]

2. All I have to say is

even his own family knows Bob Sungenis is nuts.

[FiveGoodMen]

3. Ahh, progress!

We'll have flying cars in no time, now.

[Sinistrous]

4. The tragedy of this wackjob being in print is that some people

may actually read this nonsense and use it as another authority to buttress their fight against scientific progress and through even more roadblocks into the understanding of reality.

[laconicsax]

5. Teach the Controversy!

[AlecBGreen]

12. lol

love it, thanks for posting.

[struggle4progress]

6. Sungenis is a wacko with a website, who self-publishes his nonsense

He seems to have been active in rightwing Protestant circles before he deciding to portray himself a Catholic. He seems to have no Catholic theological training, and Wikipedia has this interesting tidbit:

... n 2008, Sungenis' bishop, Kevin C. Rhoades, denounced his views of the Jewish people and Judaism as "hostile, uncharitable, and un-Christian" and required Sungenis to stop writing about them. He also directed him to stop using the word "Catholic" in his organization's name.<5> Sungenis has stated that he will only comply with Bishop Rhoades' directive to stop writing about Jews and Judaism if he is forced to do so "under the aegis of a canonical trial" ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Sungenis

To summarize: he's a noisy crank

[laconicsax]

7. Does his lack of "theological training" make this less of a religious issue?

:shrug:

[journierman]

11. Sungenis and his "doctorate"

More about Sungenis "credentials" here http://sungenisandthejews.blogspot.com/search/label/fake%20doctorate

Please note that Sungenis has no official capacity in the Catholic Church and was forced by his bishop to take the name "Catholic" off of his organization. Thank you.