Check out the many new updates to Geocentrism Debunked (www.geocentrismdebunked.org). In the latest update, you’ll find a selection of newer articles covering the topic from various angles—science, theology, history, and more.
I hope you find this information helpful. If you know anyone else who might benefit from it, please feel free to pass it along.
The Magisterium Rules: The Debate is Over – In 1820, Pope Pius VII decreed that there are “no obstacles” nor “any difficulties” for Catholics to hold that the earth moves. Two years later, the Holy Office even decreed that there would be canonical punishments for any Roman censor who refused to allow publication of books supporting the motion of the earth. With good reason, then, Pope St. John Paul II stated in 1992 that the debate concerning whether Catholics may hold to modern cosmological views which include the motion of the earth “was closed in 1820”.
There He Goes Again – In a follow-up to his scientific critique of the new geocentrism, Here Comes the Sun, physicist Alec MacAndrew spotlights still more of Robert Sungenis’s scientific misunderstandings and errors. Sungenis continues to argue that geocentrism works under classical mechanics, but MacAndrew demonstrates that Sungenis’s claims of gravitational balance and his “center of mass” arguments fail. MacAndrew also notes that Sungenis failed to address the glaring Great Inconsistency at the heart of the modern geocentrist polemic, namely, that they reject General Relativity while simultaneously using it to promote geocentrism.
The Fathers Don’t Support an Immobile Earth – Fr. Melchior Inchofer, S. J. was one of the theological assessors who examined the Galileo case prior to his trial. Regarding the motion of the earth, which geocentrist Robert Sungenis insists is the crucial point in the debate, Fr. Inchofer said of the Church Fathers that, “I have not found a single one of the Holy Fathers who has dealt with the motion of the earth clearly and positively, as the saying goes.”
The Four Elements and the Four Humours: Will You Go the Distance? – The Catholic Church teaches that a consensus of the Church Fathers only binds on matters of “faith and morals”—the Magisterium has clearly shown in both word and practice that matters of natural philosophy (i.e. science) are not included. But the new geocentrists insist that a consensus of the Fathers on any topic whatsoever automatically becomes a matter of faith. This error puts them squarely on a collision course with the Magisterium.
It’s Elementary My Dear Geocentrist – The Fathers and Doctors of the Church are in agreement on the view that the entire physical universe is made of four and only four elements—earth, water, fire, and air. They held this as a matter of natural philosophy, as the best science of their day. But according to their own standards, the new geocentrists should therefore insist that all Catholics hold that view too, as a matter of faith. Similarly, as they do with geocentrism, they should also be insisting that the Magisterium of the Church has been completely derelict in its duty to uphold the “True Faith” on this issue. Those who have been influenced by their appeal to the Fathers of the Church might want to look a bit more closely at exactly where this train is headed.
The Geocentrists Have No Sense of Humour – The Fathers and Doctors of the Church are in agreement, as a matter of natural philosophy, that the physical and emotional health of the human body is determined by the balance of the four humours: blood, phlegm, yellow bile, and black bile. Why have the geocentrists not produced a documentary and books decrying all modern medical advances and insisting that Catholics must hold to humourism as a matter of faith? Will the new geocentrists be consistent and denounce the Magisterium as derelict in its duty to teach the “True Faith”, the four elements and the four humours?
That’s the Whole Ballgame Right There! – Podcaster and Michael Voris associate Christine Niles follows in Voris’s footsteps by conducting an infomercial/interview with Rick DeLano about the upcoming movie, The Principle. Depending upon whom he’s talking to at the moment, DeLano can be coy about the ultimate intent behind the movie. But in this interview Niles and DeLano make it very plain that geocentrism is first and foremost a matter of faith, not a matter of science. Listen as Niles herself inadvertently gets caught up in the theological confusion.
Piling On, or Holding Back? – Robert Sungenis has recently complained that documentation of six examples of his conspiracy theories on the Geocentrism Debunked Backgrounds page proves that, “Making a fool out of Bob Sungenis is paramount,” and that “[David Palm] must leave no stone unturned.” Read on to see the proof that Sungenis has it exactly wrong – a great deal of other goofy and paranoid material was originally withheld, precisely to avoid the appearance of piling on.
Who Are You Going to Believe? A Matter of Credibility – If you’re going to present yourself as both trustworthy and qualified to accuse and castigate virtually the entire scientific community and the Magisterium of the Church, as Robert Sungenis has, then credibility matters. Read on to see a few recent examples demonstrating that Sungenis can’t even be trusted to get the simplest and most easily verified information correct, let alone the kind of complex information necessary to turn both the Church and the entire scientific community on their heads.
In a follow-up to his scientific critique of the new geocentrism, “
