The Earth is Set Firmly in Place
Praise the Lord’s glorious name;(1 Chronicles 16:29-31) Good News Translation
bring an offering and come into his Temple.
Bow down before the Holy One when he appears;
tremble before him, all the earth!
The earth is set firmly in place and cannot be moved.
Does relativity refute the idea of an absolute frame of reference? No. Relativity is an inductive rationalization of the premise that there isn’t one, but it’s derived from an incorrect theory of gravity.
When you theorize about an empirical observation the theory isn’t empirical. Put it this way, “empirical” isn’t a heritable trait. The empirical nature of an observation doesn’t pass on to its theoretical descendants. Empirical and theoretical are opposites.
The things that mainstream science (SciPop) calls scientific facts are inductive rationalizations of evidence. They are strategic data points designed to establish a false narrative. Once you move beyond empirical data SciPop has no facts, regardless of what it may claim.
Science = Faith
Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.(Hebrews 11:1) KJV
Empirical is what we see. We don’t need to hope for it. What we can’t see we hope for. This is called faith. Anything beyond empirical in SciPop is faith. Theory is the scientific word for faith. Theories are speculative. Theoretical science is speculative, but the skill involved in crafting THE NARRATIVE is so compelling that it goes down smoother than a really good episode of Star Trek. How do we weed out the theoretical from the empirical?
Reconnaissance by Fire
Reconnaissance by fire, also known as speculative fire, is a warfare tactic used in which military forces may fire on likely enemy positions to provoke a reaction, thus confirming the presence and position of enemy forces.– Reconnaissance by Fire, definition
We have found that this can be a very effective way to shake out potential bugs in our hypotheses, or to strength test them and confirm their robustness. Yesterday’s blog post was speculative fire. We don’t know everything about relativity, but we do know the goodness and nature of God. This is how it worked, our speculative fire:
Relativity Reconnaissance by Fire
- IF God cannot lie,
- THEN His Word is true.
- IF God’s Word is true,
- THEN the Bible is accurate.
- IF the Bible is accurate,
- AND there’s a spherical Earth below and a spherical heaven above,
- THEN Earth is the center of the cosmos.
- THEREFORE this is an absolute frame of reference.
What shook loose on Twitter was a reactive defense of relativity by one of our adversaries.
You are specifying an absolute frame of reference for relativity, overlooking the fact that relativity refutes the notion of an absolute frame [of reference].– Irritated Troll
So what is relativity really? Let’s put it in perspective. We’ve already established that there’s an absolute frame of reference by deducing it from what the Bible teaches us, and by comparing it with empirical observations. Therefore, it’s impossible to refute an absolute frame of reference. We’ve combined the absolute frame of reference with electromagnetism to give a unified field theory. We went on to resolve this with the plan of redemption to give us a unified theory of everything. The deductive trail grew from our Biblical law of Gravity.
Gravity (A) is a field emitted from a created instance (a singularity) which causes a body to have attractive force (p) proportional to its mass and inversely proportional to the square of its distance from the source (pG).
G is the gravitational constant. This is a general physical law derived from empirical observations by using deduction.– Matty’s Law of Biblical Gravitation
Galileo was the first to give us a reason to wonder if the Earth is at the center of the cosmos, but it was clever speculation based on redefining words like Sun and star. This changed the conceptual frame of reference from the Earth being at the center of the cosmos to being merely a part of it, but it was a half-truth which depended on sleight-of-hand. However, the Sun still rises and sets every day.
Kepler followed this up by making it look like heliocentricity was based on empirical data and mathematics, but it was a half-truth which depended on sleight-of-hand. Kepler’s laws are the weakest link in the SciPop paradigm, the equivalent of being able to destroy the Death Star by dropping two proton torpedoes down a ventilation shaft that is 2 meters wide. The Sun still rises and sets every day.
Newton appeared to give heliocentricity a solid foundation by showing mathematically how to make the Sun is vastly more massive than the Earth, but it was based on assuming that the Sun is vastly more massive than the Earth. It didn’t prove anything. It was a half-truth which depended on sleight-of-hand. And not only that, the Sun still rises and sets every day.
Subsequent to this the frame of reference was moved again, this time to the notion that our Sun is just one of billions drifting through an infinite cosmos. This isn’t truth, not even half. The cosmos isn’t infinite, and we’re not drifting. Against this backdrop the Sun still rises and sets, and the cosmos is still observed to orbit the Earth every day. The stars are evenly distributed in whatever direction we look, and the furthest edge of space is the same distance away in whatever direction we look. But the Sun still rises and sets every day.
Einstein built his theory of relativity from the mindset of the Galileo/Kepler/Newton SciPop paradigm. He was determined to develop a theory which would rationalize why the self-evident truth and empirical observation that the Earth is at the center of the cosmos was not to be believed. As such, relativity doesn’t refute an absolute frame of reference, it’s an inductive rationalization of the premise that there isn’t one. It only works if the premise is true. The problem is that the premise, the Newton/Einstein concept of gravity, is wrong. Plus the Sun still rises and sets every day.
Relativity is Circular
- IF gravity is a field emitted from a singularity at the center of the Earth,
- an absolute frame of reference,
- AND this is deduced from
- a) the word of God (the truth),
- b) and empirical observation,
- BUT relativity requires that there’s no absolute frame of reference,
- THEN relativity is not the truth,
- SINCE relativity has to stipulate the conditions necessary to rationalize its premise, in this case: no absolute frame of reference.
- THEN relativity requires circular reasoning.
The reason why relativity appears to be so complex and sophisticated was that it was keeping up with the times and new developments of physics. Einstein incorporated new knowledge of the nature of matter and energy but he didn’t add any new vision. He rationalized modern physics to fit the SciPop narrative of godless existence. He didn’t prove anything.
The beauty of his work is that it is buried in mathematics which is only comprehensible to a minute set of elite academics. You believe it because it’s math. You have been told that math doesn’t lie. Math is the language of faith.
- Call upon the name of Jesus Christ,
- believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead,
- confess your sin.
Read through the Bible in a year
|Reading plan||April 20|
|Linear||1 Chronicles 25-27|
|Chronological||Psalms 121, 123-125, 128-130|