The Geocentrism Debate

How it ran

1. P1 0:33How the response is set up
2. P1 5:53The Church, Copernicus, and Galileo
3. P1 34:33Sunrise, sunset, and what the Bible actually says
4. P1 43:30Joshua 10 and the long day
5. P1 1:09:28The earth shall not be moved: the Hebrew and the context
6. P2 1:06Newton, Mach, and Einstein on rotating frames
7. P2 30:24Epicycles: Copernicus compared with Ptolemy
8. P2 33:45The church fathers and the early reaction to Copernicus
9. P2 51:21Newton's laws and the three inertial forces
10. P2 54:37How the geocentric system works
11. P3 0:07The inertial forces of a rotating universe
12. P3 16:32The speed of light in general relativity
13. P3 22:58The ether, taken back in general relativity
14. P3 28:23Answering their written paper on absolute geocentrism

The key exchanges

Each claim first, then Robert's answer. The time jumps to that moment in the video.

1. P1 5:53

   1. Did Christianity end geocentrism

   Carter argues that the rejection of an earth-centered universe grew out of Christianity itself, through the astronomical measurements taken for years in the meridian lines of European cathedrals.

   Robert answers that the Catholic Church condemned Copernicanism and Galileo in 1616 and 1633 and has never officially retracted those decisions, and that the later softening steps, the 1821 imprimatur for Canon Settele and Galileo's removal from the Index in 1835, were obtained through false claims made to Pope Pius VII.

   “In 1616 and 1633 the Catholic Church officially condemned both Copernicanism and Galileo. Since then the Catholic Church has never made an official retraction of those two condemnations.”

2. P1 15:55

   2. Churchmen encouraged Copernicus

   Sarfati says that churchmen encouraged Copernicus to publish, and Carter adds that Copernicus spent night after night measuring the stars and planets until the data fit a sun-centered system.

   Robert answers that Luther and Melanchthon, the two highest churchmen of Lutheranism, both opposed Copernicus, and that the picture of Copernicus as a patient observer is a myth, since by Arthur Koestler's count his book contains only 27 of his own observations spread over 32 years.

   “Luther calls Copernicus a fool who went against Holy Writ.”

3. P1 34:33

   3. Sunrise and sunset language

   Sarfati argues that when the Bible says sunrise and sunset it is using the same everyday language we all use, describing things from our own frame of reference rather than teaching that the sun moves.

   Robert agrees that both sides use such language loosely, but says it only raises the next question: what causes the sunrise. He answers that in over two dozen passages that bear directly on that question, the Bible says the sun moves and the earth does not, and it never says the earth turns.

   “No competent geocentrist would use such language to prove the world is geocentric.”

4. P1 1:09:28

   4. The earth shall not be moved

   Sarfati argues that the Hebrew behind "the earth shall not be moved" is the same word used of the righteous and of the psalmist himself, so it does not describe a physically motionless earth.

   Robert answers that a figurative use in Psalm 121 does not settle Psalm 93 or 1 Chronicles 16, and that Carter never applied his own rules of context, grammar, and genre to those two passages. He adds that Carter and Sarfati read Genesis 1 literally while reading every geocentric passage figuratively.

   “It only proves that a Hebrew word can be used both figuratively and literally, but this is true of almost all Hebrew and Greek words.”

5. P2 30:24

   5. Epicycles piled on epicycles

   Carter and Sarfati argue that the old earth-centered system had to keep adding epicycles after the fact to match each new observation, so it explained what was seen without predicting anything new.

   Robert answers that Copernicus ended up with more epicycles than Ptolemy, and that Copernicus overstated Ptolemy's count. He cites Owen Gingerich, who found that the story of endless epicycles grew in the retelling and that the Encyclopaedia Britannica could not produce any source for its version of it.

   “Ptolemy's system has 40 epicycles whereas Copernicus ends up with 48.”

6. P2 33:45

   6. Church fathers and Copernicus

   Carter and Sarfati list "church fathers supported heliocentrism" and "Christians supported Copernicus" among their summary points.

   Robert answers that the church fathers are normally understood as the Christian writers of the first through seventh centuries, and he quotes Athanasius, Athenagoras, Augustine, Basil, Chrysostom, Cyril, the Gregories, and Irenaeus as all describing a fixed earth at the center. He says the handful of high-ranking supporters Copernicus did have can be counted on one hand.

   “Not one of them supported heliocentrism.”

7. P2 51:21

   7. Newton as a predictive engine

   Carter and Sarfati argue that Newton's laws of motion and gravity are the greatest engine of scientific prediction in history, pointing to spacecraft navigation and to the discovery of Neptune from the irregular path of Uranus.

   Robert answers that F equals MA by itself will not get a probe to its target: engineers must add the centrifugal, Coriolis, and Euler forces by hand and then treat them as real, even though Newton's system calls them fictitious. He also notes spiral galaxies turning ten times too fast for the same equation.

   “F equals MA requires the addition of the three inertial forces, the centrifugal, the Coriolis and the Euler, to get a space probe to go where the engineers want it to go.”

8. P3 29:24

   8. No dynamic model

   In their paper, Carter and Sarfati argue that a geocentric cosmology could be constructed as one allowable reference frame, but that there is no dynamic model behind it, meaning no forces acting as the causes of the motions.

   Robert answers that Einstein's general relativity supplies exactly that: in the geocentric version the angular momentum of the rotating universe produces real centrifugal, Coriolis, and Euler forces that hold each body in place as it is carried around the earth.

   “The whole basis of general relativity is that dynamic forces in inverted systems are reciprocal.”

9. P3 33:50

   9. Complexity and prediction

   Carter and Sarfati argue that a fully worked out geocentric model would be very complicated, needing terms added almost at random to cover the thousands of variations their own model explains simply.

   Robert answers that plotting a geostationary satellite is no harder in the geocentric model, because the inertial forces are already real and already present. He adds that NASA and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory work in earth-centered frames, and that those frames are used to correct the solar barycentric one.

   “NASA and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory assume that the universe is geocentric.”

10. P3 50:23

    10. Are the laws of physics universal

    Carter and Sarfati argue that if absolute geocentrism were true the laws of physics would not be universal, since experiments done on earth could not apply beyond the atmosphere, yet everything in space behaves as it does here.

    Robert answers that the laws are universal but that one has to start with the right law, since Newton's only hold in an inertial frame while most of the universe is non-inertial. He points again to galaxy rotation, and says Newton had no medium for gravity, no cause for inertia, and no instantaneous gravity.

    “Newton's theory of motion is filled with effects without causes.”