300 Foxes and a Donkey's Jawbone
GW070104 10 Several dead as severe storms sweep southeast 20 Iraq: Dozens Killed in a Series of Bombings Across Baghdad 50 Brazil: 50+ people Die in Prison Uprising in Manaus 7 More than 150 inmates escape in Philippine orison break ? Turkey Extends State of Emergency for Three More Months Total: 87
Original article Proofs Kepler's LawsMoons of JupiterPhases of VenusThe Mass of the SunAberration of LightStellar Parallax
When Einstein said that "space is curved" he was stating the fact that it's spherical with Earth at the center. Then he went off the deep end trying to prove that it wasn't, but he knew the obvious truth.
It’s obvious that the author didn’t understand the subject matter and was writing this as an assignment.
In Matty's Paradigm we believe that the universe is enclosed in a crystalline sphere called the firmament, so it can't be expanding. Obviously there's some other explanation for the apparent redshift of stellar objects.
There are three things that we use to deduce that gravity as created on the 2nd day, which means that the during first day, and the time before it, there was no gravity in the universe.
The belief that humans evolved stems from a desire to deny that we're accountable to God, or that there is a God. The rationalization of this premise is what we know of as popular science (SciPop).
The Bible describes the Sun either standing still or going backwards so it seems appropriate to examine the account of creation to see if the scripture could actually accommodate a Geocentrospheric system.
We (that's me and the Holy spirit) were asked: if Newton's law of universal gravitation is an empirical formula, how is the accepted mass of the sun (1.9^E30 kg) not empirical?
There's no observable difference between heliocentric and Geocentrospheric models because they're two frames of reference in the same system. They coexist.