Testing Geocentrism – Part 2

Testing Geocentrism – Part 2

Welcome back! In part 1 of this series we saw how geocentrism
fails to explain the seasons, understand the Earth’s tilt or explain basic observations of the inner
and outer planets. In this part we’ll revisit that crazy sun spiral idea,
which I’ll abbreviate to CraSS from now on. As the explanation given for Earth’s seasons,
there is more that it cannot explain and its effect on the other planets
needs to be considered. If the Sun were really magically moving
up and down in space just to make Earth such a lovely place to live,
what happens to the Sun’s axis of rotation? If it changes so that our view of the Sun
differs little throughout the year, then the tilt of the Sun’s axis must change. As the Sun spirals up to the June Solstice,
the Sun’s rotational axis would have to tilt to match. Also, to keep the view of the Sun
consistent throughout the day the Sun’s rotational axis would have to
precess once a day as it circled the Earth. The degree of precession must also change
every day as the Sun travels its crazy spiral. When on the Celestial equator, the Sun’s
rotational axis will have no precession. It must then increase again as the Sun
heads to the December Solstice. There is no sensible mechanism
by which this can happen, let alone to produce the jolly convenient,
annually-repeatable result that it does. So what else might be going on
with the geocentric Sun? If the Sun’s axis of rotation stayed
the same throughout the crazy spiral, that would make life easier for the Sun. It would also give us a fantastic view of
its poles in June and December. We don’t get these views, so it’s obvious
that this doesn’t happen. The Ulysses spacecraft was designed to characterize
the heliosphere with solar latitude. To do this it needed to travel around the Sun’s poles. If CraSS were correct, JPL could have simply launched
Ulysses ahead of the Sun to meet it as it descended, instead of going all the way to Jupiter and
slingshotting the craft out of the ecliptic plane. The reason why this trajectory was necessary is that this infantile explanation
of the seasons is BOLLOCKS. Seasons are also seen on the other planets, so it must follow for the geocentrist
that CraSS is the cause of them. If that were the case then the seasons on
all the other planets must also have a one year cycle, wherever a planet happens to be
on its circuit of Earth, because the Sun supposedly moves up
and down in space once a year. Consider Mars. Its seasons aren’t annual. Spring is about 7 months, Summer about 6,
Autumn 5.3 and Winter a touch over 4 months. Why?
Because the length of a Martian year is 1.88 Earth Years. Jupiter’s seasonal cycle clocks in at 11.86 years. Saturn: 29.46 Uranus: 84.1 years, and Neptune: 164.86 years. How can planets go through their four seasons
in these times if the Sun is moving up and down
in space once a year? Of course the primary reason for the observed
seasons on the other planets is the same as for Earth. The planets each have their own axial tilt, which results in changing seasons
as they complete their orbits of the Sun. Geocentrists might like to note the STUNNING coincidence
between the length of each planet’s year and the time it takes to orbit the Sun! CraSS also introduces strange
behaviour to the planets. Whilst it would be simplest to think that
they just circle the Earth on or near the plane of the celestial equator,
this isn’t what we see. On the solstice of December 21st 2012
you can go out and see Jupiter. It’ll be 21 degrees above the celestial equator.
How so? The Sun’s position against the background stars
moves from west to east over the course of the year, by a little under one degree per day. This traces a line called the Ecliptic,
which also defines a plane. In reality this is the plane
described by Earth’s orbit, and is tilted to the celestial equator
by 23.5 degrees due to the Earth’s tilt. Observations of the planets show that they
are always seen near the Ecliptic. This is perfectly consistent with heliocentrism
but not with geocentrism unless the planets move
from the celestial equator. Because the geocentric Earth is fixed,
and the Sun moves up and down, the plane of the Ecliptic must therefore
tilt up and down throughout the year with the Sun. You can see that there’s an axis about
which the plane would tilt. What does this mean for planetary motion in the geocentric Universe though? Planets that happen to be on the same side
of the axis as the Sun will move up and down in space with the Sun. Those on the other side of the axis
will move contrary to the Sun. A planet’s motion must therefore invert whenever
it crosses this conceptual line in space. Somehow. It’s as if each planet is riding
its own invisible see-saw. Here’s an illustrative geocentric planet,
which we’ll call GeoCack. Let’s ignore, for now, the changing distances
of the planets from Earth that we saw in Part 1, and consider the simplest possible case. Our geocentric planet travels in a nice,
neat circle on the Ecliptic, and is seen to drift against the background stars
as the months and years go by, tracing out the blue line. The end result is that the planet travels a rather extraordinary path through 3 dimensional space as the seasons roll by. We saw that the Sun had its crazy spiral
which couldn’t be explained by any physics, but now we have planets that ride their
own crazy spiralling see-saws. Obviously geocentrists haven’t considered the
implications of their silly explanation for the seasons on the rest of the Solar System. The maximum range of a geocentric planet’s movement
up and down in space depends on its proximity to the tilt axis of the ecliptic.
i.e. where along its path it is. Imagine our planet’s circle on
the ecliptic spread out flat. We see the limits above and below the celestial
equator are imposed by two waves. The planet follows its own harmonic
motion within these bounds. To prove that their model is correct, geocentrists
should be able to produce a single equation that works for all bodies in the Solar System,
encapsulating these features: Firstly it needs to describe the up and down motion of the body with the seasons using a wave with a period of one year. Secondly it needs to have that motion bound by
a second wave for the sidereal period of the body. You need to know that time before you can
produce the formula for an object. You’ve lost the ability to predict motion for
newly-detected objects before you even start. Thirdly, planet’s up and down motion must invert
every half period of the bounding wave. Fourth, your formula must account for the fact that
the orbits are actually inclined to the ecliptic. This has the effect of skewing the bounds on
either side of the tilt axis. Assuming you can get anywhere near this goal
for ONE object, it still won’t match observations, because planets just don’t move in nice,
neat circles around the Earth. So, fifth, your formula also needs to allow for
the changing distances from Earth that we observe. Yep, you need to combine the above unworkable
nonsense with the concept of epicycles. We already know that it took up 13 volumes
when Ptolomy tried it, and that it’s BOLLOCKS. You also need to be able to explain what natural
forces cause all this crazy motion. Good luck! To further grasp the problem facing the geocentrist mathematician, let’s zoom out and consider a more distant planet. It will complete its orbit much more slowly. Being further out, it has to physically
move up and down further and with higher accelerations to remain
appearing near the ecliptic. Here’s our graph for our first planet, GeoCack,
correspondingly scaled to this diagram. The more distant planet has a larger range of motion,
so the amplitude of its bounding wave is larger, and because it circles more slowly, the wavelength
of the bounding wave is much longer. Our second planet still has its annual harmonic
motion within these bounds though and we see the same inversion of motion when
it crosses the ecliptic axis. In 3D space, it’s even crazier. That’s the geocentric concept. Here’s how it applies to Mars and Jupiter
in the 5 years from September 2012. Neither the planets nor the Sun move up
and down in physical space like this. Geocentrists insist that this crazy motion for each
object must be going on, but they cannot explain it. All they have are childish claims of conspiracy,
plus an inability to provide real answers that explain everything we observe in meticulous detail. All they need to do is stump up that single toolset for
describing the geocentric motion of the planets, over 100,000 known asteroids out of probable millions, over 4,100 known comets, and over 1,000 known Kuiper Belt objects
out of possible billions. There are rather a lot of objects in the Solar System. A lot of them are in orbits whose planes are
nowhere near the ecliptic as this chart showing the observed distribution
of asteroid inclinations demonstrates. Geocentrism presents the Crazy Sun Spiral in the myopic hope
that a half-baked explanation for the seasons covers all bases. The inevitable consequence of CraSS
is the Crazier Planetary Spirals. CraPS Until they can explain what forces give everything
the motions that are necessary to keep their universe moving in a manner that matches
observations, they’re just parading their own stupendous lack of even a basic education.
Here’s what they’re up against: In the real world we have Kepler’s Laws. He took it upon himself to find a model
that matched the detailed observations of planetary positions made by Tycho Brahe. For the first time, it was possible to calculate
the motions of the planets with greater accuracy than ANY geocentric model managed,
and they are still of use today. We have Newton’s Laws, which work to fine accuracy with
only a miniscule difference from General Relativity, in gravitational fields of the scale found in the Solar System. And of course we have General Relativity,
which works to fantastic accuracy. It has passed every test of it so far. It explains the minute
anomaly in the perihelion precession of Mercury. It gave the first correct calculation of the
deflection of light from distant stars by the Sun. It predicted gravitational redshift, black holes,
the geodetic effect, and frame dragging. Understanding general relativity is the reason
GPS maintains accuracy for everybody who uses it. Geocentrists think that verified physics is wrong or works in some parts of the Universe but
not for the special case of Earth. So, now, it’s time to present their tested
and verified maths and physics… Ladies and gentlemen, the sum total of geocentrism’s
contribution to human knowledge: [sound of crickets] Oh well. Valid physics has predictive power. Famous examples being Edmund Halley’s use of Newton’s
methods to predict the return of the comet that bears his name. John Couch Adams and Urbain Le Verrier independantly worked out
that another unknown planet explained the deviations of Uranus’ orbit. On September 23rd, 1846 Neptune was found within 1 degree
of where Le Verrier predicted it to be. Le Verrier also recognised the anomaly in
the precession rate of Mercury’s orbit. This anomaly was explained by General Relativity. This ability of the accumulated body of real physics
is how we know that the asteroid Apophis will pass within the orbits of geosynchronous
satellites on April 13th, 2029. It’s worth noting that none of this information
is ever provided by geocentrists. So what explanatory and predictive powers
have geocentrists shown? [sound of crickets] [a distant dog barks] This is, of course, because geocentrism is,
and always has been BOLLOCKS, however much its educationally-bereft
proponents whine like little girls about conspiracies and supposedly “false science”. It can’t even explain its own claims. In the educated world, we understand
and predict the motion of everything, because real physics works,
and explains what we actually see beautifully. And what we don’t see are planets moving up and down
as if they’re playing about on invisible see-saws. In Part 3 we’ll leave CraPS and CraSS behind to look
at a selection of other observations that geocentrism fails to explain, and we’ll see
how it stacks up to basic forces. See you then…

100 Replies to “Testing Geocentrism – Part 2”

  1. oh hey bro thanks for the vids. it is useful to have a framework upon which to clarify ones study, and verify ones own arguments. i think we can all agree that the prime difficulty in understanding sciences not germaine to ones daily life is the necessity of ones day job.

  2. everybody knows that there are no other planets in the solar system since you cant see them on a cloudy night.

  3. I really like what your doing and I especially like your mode of expression when you call these theories what they are.

  4. I have sincerely begged and pleaded on flat earth channels for real math and physics to explain their theories. I have not gotten one single comment.

  5. I'm just curious if you've ever had an actual conversation with a flattard and gotten any feedback on the points that you and 7 billion people also understand perfectly.

  6. Predictive powers of geocentrists? Well Ptolemy and man other geocentrists could predict the eclipses. Are you really dismissing the contributions of Tycho Brahe who accurately measured and predicted the orbits of the (non-Earth) planets around the Sun (given Kepler the data he needed)?.

  7. Geotards/flattards would just say that your science and logic is based on lies. This series is much appreciated, but much too advanced for flattards/geotards to grasp. You lose them at that title sequence.

  8. +CoolHardLogic, at ~9:46 in the video you state that general relativity "gave the first correct deflection of light from distant stars by the sun." Was this effect known of before Einstein? I only ask because while I am aware that GR predicted the deflection of starlight, I wasn't aware that the effect had been noticed prior to Einstein. Could you please clarify?

  9. It would also be of great value, I believe, to point out to fuckwits that if Sol + all planets circle Sol III, certainly everything else would – eg meteors & comets; & if they all orbited US then they couldn't possibly ever impact the Earth! Ditto if the world were flat with a dome covering our world! Yet, SOMEHOW, meteorites have landed on the earth in their millions! (And they also aren't metal/rock Frisbees…) 8-D

  10. Great podcast, thank you! Sir !
    The best heckling material for the recreational mockery of Flatards…
    I can't stop laughing and understanding this globe better.

  11. I know, gravity operates by the square law not the inverse square law. They got it exactly backwards. This explains why us humans don't experience such a massive pull towards earth that would instantly kill us.

  12. Are there any source resources that can be specifically cited where proof of belief in this nonsense can be found?

  13. You realize that very, very few geocentrics understand even 1/10 of the scientific terms, graphs and formulas you are using so eloquently. Its sort of like reading Shakespeare to a pigeon.

  14. I'd rather deal with a geocentrist than a flat earther any day…at least they believe in the sun and other planets…vs. the dome, space wizard, a magic shade sun spotlight, a fake moon and a freaking dinner plate flying through space with mile high ice walls and the inability to travel to Antarctica. Oh and let's not forget gravity is fake and has never been proven. At least a geocentrist is at least marginally smarter

  15. As a real girl with a love of Neutonian physics, astrophysics, education, intelligence and quality, I resent the "whine like little girls" comment, but am otherwise wholly dedicated to this channel. Thank you!

  16. GeocentriTards also need to do some 'splaining about why we don't see Mars transiting across the Sun, or any other planet for that matter.

  17. Man, this is bullshit. I mean, come on, who trust things like math, geometry, testable, repeatable, and predictable models to explain why all of these things happen. Clearly its all just a giant conspiracy that THEY have been keeping from the public for centuries. Oh and da bible is true so i is right.

  18. holy fuck! "seasons happen on other planets" I hope you snapped a pic or two of you visiting another planet to verify this claim. What's Venus like during it's winter months? I mean you sound pretty positive about there being seasons on other planets, you must have visited at least one other planet to be able to say this claim is true? Or is it only true because one of the "scientific" priests you worship told you its true and they are way smarter than yourself?

  19. 5:58 I can produce a single geocentric equation for every body in the sky. We start with the current model. Then we subtract the motion of Earth around the sun from every body in the sky, and from the Earth. Now the Earth is stationary and rotating. Good.
    Everything else is now running in circles around nothing, but let's not dwell on that. Now we set the Earth's axis as one of the axis of our coordinate system. Preferably spherical coordinates.

    Now we subtract Earth's rotation around said axis from the entire bloody universe.
    Why did this equation require starting with current model? YYYYYY, Ummmmm.

    What force causes this crazy motion? There needs to be two forces: one that holds every body in the sky on Earth's orbit, and one that holds every body in the sky in circular motion around nothing. The only force that is defined in physics that causes the entire universe to be acted upon with the same force is inertial force. Otherwise known as ficticious force.

    Ficticious force is caused by acceleration of the frame of reference. Since we're talking frame of reference focused on Earth, it means the Earth accelerates around its axis at 2pi/24h, which means some force causes the moving particles on Earth to not fly into space and constantly pull toward the center as the Earth is rotating. Also, the perceived acceleration of every body around nothing with radius of 1AU is due to the Earth accelerating in reverse direction. It seems that no matter where we look, the Earth's acceleration seems to be towards the Sun. Hmm…

    So it seems there are two forces acting upon Earth, causing the perceived motion of stars. I wonder what that forces are…

  20. Correct me if I'm wrong: meat and potatoes here is that the planets would have to move up and down with the ecliptic plane; as well as a circular orbit which does not match observations as usual.

  21. i disagree on the notion that the motion of planets cannot be described in a geocentric sense (6:00 ish).
    since they follow a clear path with the pivot in the sun, the motion can be described with a coordinate transformation to the pivot in the earth.

  22. Who is the Director of Hicksville Primary School? I can make out the tutors name, but the director is difficult to read. Is it T. Whatatard or TN Flatard? And it's nice that Cletus has been recognized for his demonstrated excellence at chewing crayons in class. At least someone is paying attention.

  23. Probably your best work in the :"Testing geocentrism " series. Even a brain dead monkey can understand this.

    In a side note, One cannot help but laugh when you play the clownish music whilst explaining the geocentric theories! 😂

  24. I've heard that the planet Mercury has cold polar regions. Seems strange so close to the Sun,it is kind of like the FE crowd existing in a modern country.

  25. plotting the relative motion of any satellite in Earth orbit on a flat map produces a strange wave pattern…
    trying to plot it on a Flat-Earth model makes a totally bizarre pattern which would require EVERY satellite to slow down when North of the equator and speed up a LOT when South of it!
    and that's for simple orbits! if you try to do this with a satellite in a Polar orbit, which passes above the South Pole…it makes their claims about Southern-flying Airplanes look simple!

  26. Well, obviously the observations won't match reality when they're made and published by Heliocentrists(?).

    -geocentrists(?) with their ad hoc excuses, that are total bollocks

  27. I’ve always felt that the motion of the planets (Mars’ and Jupiter’s retrograde motions, etc) from our perspective is the greatest clue that the earth is not the center of the known universe. Throw in galaxies, and possibility of life on other planets, and geocentricism really falls apart. If life exists on other planets, and we live in a geocentric universe then life would be REALLY uncomfortable for said aliens.

  28. What is the extra elliptic circle between Mars and Jupiter, in the model at the end of the video?
    is it a mistake or the Asteroid Belt or is it something else?

  29. please don't lump all creationists together- there are many flavors of creationists. I guess you didn't research this. Also, please address the CMB 'axis of evil' which proves that the earth is the center of the universe!. thanks.

  30. Another problem is that the planets moving up and down would cause acceleration, which would be felt constantly in order to achieve the desired motion.

  31. CHL does such a thorough and in depth analysis of the things we can observe. The problem is that the retards that believe in the utter nonsense they vomit actually need more than two brain cells to rub together to UNDERSTAND the material and, alas, they do not. Lol

  32. This video gives one still MORE appreciation for the power of the Copernicus-Kepler-Newton model of the Solar System. ALL of the motions of all of the objects in the Solar System are explained by ONE SIMPLE EQUATION: A = G * M / R squared.

    My God! Think of it. The reduction of a vast quantity of data into an equation that can be expressed in one line. Magnificent. The complex motions of the planets that it took VOLUMES of Ptolemy to approximate rather poorly with his epicycles are explained with great simplicity. All of the changing celestial positions of all of the planets, comets, asteroids, etc plus all of the corresponding angular size data are subsumed by ONE EQUATION. It remains the greatest intellectual tour-de-force in human history.

  33. Sad!! This guy doesn't understand the FE clues; selenelion eclipse, pulling boat back into view after they should passed the curve, the very existence of FE map, flights, sun rays, HAARP, etc. Wouldn't you agree, having all that info and still not be able to see whats real would be retarded?
    Maybe it doesn't make sense bc your arranging it with the same template inside the box… Stop the insanity by doing some different. Think outside box, and try your puzzle again :}

  34. brilliant site, even the music awesome as well, also an epic piss take. wouldn't the distant universes ,stars have to move up and down on as well if earth was central ??., i must admit ,i did have a great education but ive forgotten most of it so i dont really understand much of the mathmatics but i understand perfectly that geocentrism must be bollocks , there really has been some clever bastards in European history though,so much genius

  35. flat earth conspiracy is a psyop run by the ClA to test how gullible people actually are…They nailed it. There is no limit

  36. I subscribe to your channel and I get a recommendation for ……. jeranism, D.Marble, and a few other similar channels. WTF ?
    Very good work.

  37. A geocentric universe is as stupid as claiming the entire universe rocks side to side while you're on a seesaw but the seesaw and you remains still. 😂

  38. I love the "Bollocks" stamp, but wish it had its own theme music. In my tiny brain I add the two-note piece that sounded each time Reginald Perrin thought of whenever his wife mentioned her mother. Works for me.

  39. I would not classify the Ptolemaic model as complete "bullock". At least it tries to explain the observations made at that time and place knowing that they need more information. It was religion-politics that keep the model for so long unchecked!

    At university I took an introductory class of physics. It teach that model as ground to see how it was made and why it was problematic. Then we understood the heliocentric model as a way to explain what the previous model couldn't.

    Kepler center his laws on planetary trajectories knowing that this was the key point to address.

    I love your videos!

  40. The intellect of globed heads.. smh Globed heads assume that planets are celestial objects outside the firmament?? smh vacuum of space existing side by side with and atmosphere.. LMAO !

  41. The fuck is this retarded vid talking about? YOU'RE JUST ADDING HELIOCENTRIC MODEL PROPERTIES INTO THE GEOCENTRIC MODEL.. derp derp


  43. I am so glad this video has reached so many people. Folks need to know about this. The earth is NOT the center of the solar system… the sun is. If only they'd teach this stuff in schools, brilliant people like Cool Hard Logic wouldn't have to dedicate their lives to educating people.

  44. Intruksi om. Om kalau bicara jgn cepat2 otakku buyar aku belum paham bangat bahasa inggris soalnya tapi aku penasaran ini geosentris. Please translate in english.

  45. Whoa whoa whoa! C'mon now! That's so not ok! The cricket at 1025 is not a flattard! It's laughing at the idiots that are! No fair presenting its laughter as arguments for a flat earth, just sayin 😉

  46. Man's worst ENAMY
    Great job ..fu.ing FlatTards Up ..they are true Lamers
    Lemmings by choice

  47. Suggestion for an interesting and friendly wager while watching this CC's videos: Pick an Over/Under time for the first time our intrepid narrator stamps something as "Bollocks!"

  48. The. "PLANETS" are actually wandering stars. That little spacecraft that supposedly went around the Sun, would have been burnt to a crisp, don't ya think?
    NASA has pulled the wool over people's eyes about all the space lies. Common people can't test NASA's theories, they just have to believe their lies.
    Flat Earth has the Bible and can be read. There's no lies in the Bible..

  49. I love CHL's videos: His physics is impeccable and his delivery and humour are both perfect.
    I really wish I could make videos as good as this.

  50. natural senses told me wen i woz about 6yrs old earth is flat and stationary ,i got about 80% understanding about flat earth ,i no its fuckin flat and stationary tho without a shadow ov a doubt,everything evolves around earth ,and the sun and the moon rotates around us in our atmosphere ,we cant go to space and it fuckin winds them up rotton that we cant ,they just scam us for trillions,they hav dun for years ,,,i sust religion woz a scam at 8 yrs old ,the bible holds a few clues disguised wiv fantasy stories,other than that no names in the bible ever exsisted,LIFE IS A FUCKIN SCAM ,A HOAX ,A LIE ,A FUCKIN OPERA

  51. In planetary physics, real physics works well + is supported by evidence. In early universe history back to the time of the background radiation, real physics works well + is supported by evidence. In describing the actual begiinning, before the background radiation time, purported real physics flounders around desperately inventing rolled-up dimensions + proton instability + spiralled up strings + speculated supersymmetries, is in exactly the same type of mess as you show the geocentrists in, + is bollocks.

  52. I just want to say I do believe in creation and I do believe in God but I do think the world is a sphere rotates around the sun with like at least nine other planetary bodies along with the other Quaver build items and other comics and things just don't be so hard on this creation people

  53. I'd really like to know what explanation a geocentrist quack has for the Earth sitting perfectly still, whilst the entire goddamn galaxy orbits around the geocentric quack's silly idea of our planet. Everything else behaves according to the physics that governs this Universe, so certainly the same physics should apply to Earth; so it should follow that geocentrist cack-peddlers should by now have some sort of description of the physics required for an entire damn planet to sit perfectly motionless in some obscure back-water hovel deep withing the Orion Arm / Orion Spur of our galaxy.

  54. BTW, imagine the absolutely bonkers trajectories Voyager 1 & Voyager 2 would have had to have taken for their tour of the planets!!

  55. 10:50 the first explanation of Mercury's precession was assuming speed of gravity as opposed to instant propagation of gravitational fields.

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *