Luiza, boa noite! Tudo bem contigo? Aqui, me desculpe primeiramente pela pergunta direta, mas eu poderia conversar contigo pelo Whats ou Face? Eu adorei sua foto de capa, de perfil e, mais recentemente, gostei muito do jeito que você escreveu no último vídeo do Italo Marsili ao comentar sobre o sujeito que o Italo elogiou. O jeito que você descreveu o cara, usando todos aqueles adjetivos e referências filosóficas, me deixou intrigado com toda a sua bagagem intelectual. Obviamente você é uma (ou pelo menos está em processo). Por fim, obrigado pela atenção. Eu gostaria muito mesmo de te conhecer melhor.
Hello Rick and Dr. Smith. We have discussed this at length in the geocentrism facebook group. So great to hear a coming together from another tremendous mind to arrive at the same conclusions. Special Relativity is an exercise of circular logic. As Einstein had stated, because of Michelson Morley 1887 results, electromagnetic radiation such as light cannot be used to detect the motion of objects in an absolute reference frame. So if it cannot be used to detect such motion, why in the world should it be allowed by the consensus of science supposedly based in logic, to apply the Lorentz transformations to the data collected by using light. This inability of nearly all modern PhDs in the physical sciences to be able to see this illogicality and blindly believe Einstein leaves me stunned. I want to use the word stupid.
How would you explain the Foucault's Pendulum or the difference of the gravity depending if you are in pole or equator (what seams to depend to centrifugal force) if the Earth is stationary (1:09:44)
@Shekiesadi715 My friend, the Foucault pendulum Will be explained in the geocentric model as the following If the earth is at rest and the universe is rotating around it. The rotation of the universe will produce inertia force such as centrifugal and Coriolis and euler forces. Which will act on the Foucault pendulum. This happened been also explained also to book in a book called " an introduction to the theory of relativity" As it says "Obviously it does not matter if we think of the earth as turning round on its axis, or at rest while the fixed stars revolve round it. Geometrically these are exactly the same case of a relative rotation of the earth and the fixed stars with respect to one another. But if we think of the earth at rest and the fixed stars revolving round it, there is no flattening of the earth, no Foucault's experiment, and so on-at least according to our usual conception of the law of inertia. Now one can solve the difficulty in two ways. Either all motion is absolute, or our law of inertia is wrongly expressed. I prefer the second way. The law of inertia must be so conceived that exactly the same thing results from the second supposition as from the first. By this it will be evident that in its expression, regard must be paid to the masses of the universe."
If geocentrism is true of earth, it must also be true of every other earth like planet. The brain experiences the curvature of the planet as the ever receding horizon.
Similarity doesn't mean samaness. There is no planet same as earth. Therefore, geocentrism, the whole universe revolving around our earth, is a unique to earth.
And then making matters worse for SR, along comes Sagnac 1913 and Michelson Gale 1925, detecting rotational motion difference between the ether of exactly one day. So Michelson Morely detect a zero translational velocity and Sagnac a rotational, means Einstein basis to SR is DISPROVED, but modern science has ignores it again. This proves geocentrism. Even our science is propagandized. Thank you Dr. Sungenis and Rick for showing us this in you movies.
Luiza, boa noite! Tudo bem contigo? Aqui, me desculpe primeiramente pela pergunta direta, mas eu poderia conversar contigo pelo Whats ou Face? Eu adorei sua foto de capa, de perfil e, mais recentemente, gostei muito do jeito que você escreveu no último vídeo do Italo Marsili ao comentar sobre o sujeito que o Italo elogiou. O jeito que você descreveu o cara, usando todos aqueles adjetivos e referências filosóficas, me deixou intrigado com toda a sua bagagem intelectual. Obviamente você é uma (ou pelo menos está em processo). Por fim, obrigado pela atenção. Eu gostaria muito mesmo de te conhecer melhor.
olavo tem razão
i have to leave 4mins in i dont know if i can take the host...
Hello Rick and Dr. Smith. We have discussed this at length in the geocentrism facebook group. So great to hear a coming together from another tremendous mind to arrive at the same conclusions. Special Relativity is an exercise of circular logic. As Einstein had stated, because of Michelson Morley 1887 results, electromagnetic radiation such as light cannot be used to detect the motion of objects in an absolute reference frame. So if it cannot be used to detect such motion, why in the world should it be allowed by the consensus of science supposedly based in logic, to apply the Lorentz transformations to the data collected by using light. This inability of nearly all modern PhDs in the physical sciences to be able to see this illogicality and blindly believe Einstein leaves me stunned. I want to use the word stupid.
Please note that to address Rick and Wolfgang you need to comment on OUR channel. We are also on Facebook.
How would you explain the Foucault's Pendulum or the difference of the gravity depending if you are in pole or equator (what seams to depend to centrifugal force) if the Earth is stationary (1:09:44)
I think you mean difference in weight.
@Shekiesadi715 My friend, the Foucault pendulum Will be explained in the geocentric model as the following
If the earth is at rest and the universe is rotating around it. The rotation of the universe will produce inertia force such as centrifugal and Coriolis and euler forces. Which will act on the Foucault pendulum.
This happened been also explained also to book in a book called " an introduction to the theory of relativity"
As it says
"Obviously it does not matter if we think of the earth as turning round on its axis, or at rest while the fixed stars revolve round it. Geometrically these are exactly the same case of a relative rotation of the earth and the fixed stars with respect to one another. But if we think of the earth at rest and the fixed stars revolving round it, there is no flattening of the earth, no Foucault's experiment, and so on-at least according to our usual conception of the law of inertia. Now one can solve the difficulty in two ways. Either all motion is absolute, or our law of inertia is wrongly expressed. I prefer the second way. The law of inertia must be so conceived that exactly the same thing results from the second supposition as from the first. By this it will be evident that in its expression, regard must be paid to the masses of the universe."
If geocentrism is true of earth, it must also be true of every other earth like planet.
The brain experiences the curvature of the planet as the ever receding horizon.
Similarity doesn't mean samaness. There is no planet same as earth.
Therefore, geocentrism, the whole universe revolving around our earth, is a unique to earth.
@@bachamadu2076 The brain still experiences the curvature of the planet as the ever receding horizon in any case.
And then making matters worse for SR, along comes Sagnac 1913 and Michelson Gale 1925, detecting rotational motion difference between the ether of exactly one day. So Michelson Morely detect a zero translational velocity and Sagnac a rotational, means Einstein basis to SR is DISPROVED, but modern science has ignores it again. This proves geocentrism. Even our science is propagandized. Thank you Dr. Sungenis and Rick for showing us this in you movies.
Joe Inoiamac yes. and you cant predict eclipse with heliosentrik model... that the key of debunk heliosentric model