The Heliocentric Hoax

by emptypockets

So-called "scientists" who propound the hoax of heliocentrism have been at each other's throats this week as their so-called "theory" falls apart. Heliocentrism is the idea that Earth and all other planets were formed at some point in history and circle around the Sun. How shaky is this "solar system" theory? Well, the experts don't even know how many planets there are:

In the hope of ending years of wrangling, a committee of astronomers and historians has proposed a new definition of the word “planet” that would expand at a stroke the family of planets from 9 to 12 and leave textbooks and charts in thousands of classrooms out of date.

But astronomers immediately began to wrangle about it.

“It’s a mess,” said Michael E. Brown of the California Institute of Technology.

[...]

So it was no surprise that as word of the decision leaked out yesterday, reaction from astronomers suggested that the argument was far from over.

“This will be the talk of the town in Prague,” said Alan P. Boss, a planetary theorist at the Carnegie Institution of Washington, who said the new definition, with four paragraphs and four footnotes, read as if it had been written by lawyers, not scientists. “I don’t think this is the one were looking for.”

(Emphasis mine.) Even the so-called "scientists" admit their own theories are contradictory nonsense. First, their theories change from day to day -- in fact, the idea of a sun-centered solar system didn't even arise until the year 1540. Second, they can't even agree on the details of their own theory -- some say there are 8 planets, some 12, some say as many as 53! Third, their theories are formed by committee, not derived (as they would have you believe) from some absolute external truth.

Compare that with the Bible, which tells us that Earth was created on the first day, and the Sun was created on the fourth day. (What did Earth circle around the first three days, Professor Smartypants?) The Bible is constant and unchanging, it is a single source of truth, and it was given to us by God not by some committee vote. Here's an experiment for you four-eyes: get your nose out of the telescope and look up in the sky. Then tell me the Sun doesn't go around the Earth.

We've already been through all this once with the "theory" of evolution. That so-called "fact" is always being revised, re-written, re-thought -- some idea of truth! Every day someone discovers some new observation that expands or refines the idea of evolution. How many times do they have to re-write it before they realize they are just wrong? No wonder fewer Americans believe in evolution than people in any of 31 other developed countries do. It's just good sense.

Hopefully, at last, we can start writing the textbook stickers that say, "Heliocentrism is a theory not a fact."

Comments

[emptypockets]

For the snark-impaired, our generation's planet-finder Mike Brown http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/16/opinion/16brown.html>puts it beautifully in an op-ed in the Times today (before he knew the committee's vote had made his hope come true):

I hope the union takes another galactic approach, and simply declares 2003 UB313 our 10th, full-fledged planet. Doing so might convince schoolchildren to put new paper disks on their walls, to look up to the sky and realize that exploration does continue, and that they can be part of it, too.

[justme]

Eppur si muove.

[Meteor Blades]

Heliocentric? We've got more important theories to debunk than that. Here's an excerpt from the self-paroding Mission Statement of the people who can do it:

Enter the Flat Earth Society. For over five hundred years humanity has believed the "round Earth" teachings of Efimovich and his followers. But all hope is not lost. For through all that time, a small but diligent band of individuals have preserved the knowledge of our planet's true shape. And now, after centuries in the Dark Ages, we believe that mankind as a whole is once again ready to embrace the truth that has forever been the Flat Earth Society. Using whatever means are deemed necessary and relying heavily on a callous disregard for the lives and well-being of our members, we have slowly but steadily been spreading the news.

But why? Why do we say the Earth is flat, when the vast majority says otherwise? Because we know the truth.

Nice post, ep

[robert]

obviously the earth did not circle for three days, it waited....

[orionATL]

very nice work, emptypockets.

science is obviously in decline. no scientist can say for sure if the earth is warming or not, if god exists or not, if using stem cells does or does not involve pain. if there are two or three or an infinity of universes.

i think science needs a good make-over - one with less edge, especially less leading edge.

just smooth out the message.

karl would approve - and maybe reward.

[Fernando]

Nice article and comments for a laugh...

"Science is obviously in decline". hahaha sorry, I believe your brain is in decline. Really... americans! The laughing stock of the world... (but ok, I know a few who are very pleasant!)

[Fernando]

Ok, sorry for my last comment. Kind of harsh...

Anyway. What I see is: Who disagrees with anything scientific generally falls in one of two categories:

1 - Doesn´t understand science at all.
2 - Chooses to ignore science in favor of a particular personal belief.

For number 1 cases:
You can´t criticize astronomy if you don´t have at least a degree in physics. You sound like the lawyer who criticizes the bridge the engineer built... in fact, you look silly and stupid (I´m not saying you are, just what it looks). Like the cretinists, who LOOOVE to use lists of "scientists" who disagree with evolutionary theory (just count how many of them are biologists...), oh, and forget PROJECT STEVE! - http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/3541_project_steve_2_16_2003.asp - .
And to say that science is at fault because it´s constantly changing and IMPROVING? Oh my, that was one the best proofs of your lack of understanding of science. Happens a lot with bible-thumpers (don´t know if you´re one, ok, but looks like one...), who are told since childhood to believe blindly in a fable book and never question it... so I understand why you can´t grasp the concept of "truth improving". For you, to understand and accept something, it must never change... quite a boring and close minded view of the world if you let me say, but... your choice. :-D

And now for number 2 cases:
Have you ever thought that in any case, your personal truth must be the personal truth of no more than 2% of the world population (and this in a best case scenario, like those brain-dead wackos who believe in the childish and stupid "rapture" concept (even below those 2%). So, in cases of personal truth... believe what you want, but keep in mind that you MAY and PROBABLY are WRONG, WRONG and WRONG. I keep that in mind all the times. Helps to be a better person, you know?

Thank you.

[Fernando]

"Heliocentrism is a theory not a fact."

Really. Get some science education. You sounded quite foolish with this quote. You know why? Because of this:

The word theory, in the context of science, does not imply uncertainty. It means "a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena" (Barnhart 1948). In the case of the theory of evolution, the following are some of the phenomena involved. All are facts:

* Life appeared on earth more than two billion years ago;
* Life forms have changed and diversified over life's history;
* Species are related via common descent from one or a few common ancestors;
* Natural selection is a significant factor affecting how species change.

Many other facts are explained by the theory of evolution as well.

And to finish...
If "only a theory" were a real objection, creationists would also be issuing disclaimers complaining about the theory of gravity, atomic theory, the germ theory of disease, and the theory of limits (on which calculus is based). The theory of evolution is no less valid than any of these. Even the theory of gravity still receives serious challenges (Milgrom 2002). Yet the phenomenon of gravity, like evolution, is still a fact.

Ok?

Need links? Links to THOUSANDS of peer-reviewed papers? And how about links to a scientific paper that challenges evolution - Ooops, my bad, AREN´T NONE! Maybe because it´s a WORLDWIDE CONSPIRACY against the bible, should be! All biology scientists in the world must be part of it, riiiiiiiiiiight.

Ok, why I used evolution? Because of the "theory not fact" BS. I know you talked about heliocentrism... ok. But the kind of people who criticizes scientific theories the way you did, are just the same... one explanation fits all, simple minds, you know.

I like this site! It´s so funny!!!

Thank you.

[Fernando]

Bad comment system, uh? Published my last comment seven times! Only one should be ok... can you delete it, please? The excess ones...

Thanks

[Fernando]

Bad comment system, uh? Published my last comment seven times! Only one should be ok... can you delete it, please? The excess ones... if you please, could let just the last one?

Thanks

[Rocky]

Is this site for real???
I mean, come on, this is a satire or gag, right?
With all the knowledge of astronomy, many spacecraft sent to almost every planet and moons in our solar system, and man actually being on the moon, and looking back at earth??? You can't possibly really think the earth is flat and the sun goes around the earth???
If you do, PLEASE tell me you don't live in the USA, we already have enough of a problem of gibbering idiots turned loose on computers and making normal Americans seem insane to the rest of the 21st century world.

[Matt]

Baked potato, how many times have you read the Bible? Please reread the first paragraph from your post...(I'm not saying you are, just what it looks).

[baked potato]

"Heliocentrism is a theory not a fact."

Right on! And how come Darwin gets all the "personal" attention? I mean, the SF Chronicle (formerly liberal, now thankfully almost Fox) aptly describes those people who push evolution - "scientists" or something the call themselves - as "Darwin supporters."

Great! But why not identify these Heliocentrists in the same way - "Galileo supporters," "Copernicus supporters," etc.

Why let Charles Darwin get all the blame for this heathen talk that calls itself "science"?

[baked potato]

ok, a little housekeeping to do here:

first, thanks to http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/08/old_myths_reexamined.php>PZ Myers for the link

second, to our new readers: welcome. I'm a biologist. This is satire. Obviously.

finally, to baked potato: I'm sorry. I accidentally deleted your comment posted around 14:35 while trying to delete some duplicate (and sexto-or-septotuplicate) comments from other readers. I re-posted baked potato's comment from 14:35 (as myself under the "baked potato" name) at 20:07.

[emptypockets]

crap. and one more piece of housekeeping: that 'housekeeping' comment above is me, the piece's author, forgetting to change my name back after trying to fix the comments.

(some days it's easier to have just stayed in bed...)

[Steve]

That was great!

Thanks for the wonderful parody. It must be hard to write like that with a straight face. I'm really impressed that your commenters can keep it up too!

[Rocky]

Oh, thank Darwin!!!!!
It is a satire!

[Matt]

Baked potato, my comment was directed towards Fernando, not you. Sorry.

I get the whole satire theme, I was just annoyed at the comment that one "can't criticize astronomy if you don't have at least a degree in physics" but apparently it is okay to call the Bible a fabled book without being a Biblical scholar. Guess that is more irony (or hypocritical) than satire.

Now that I have cleaned that mess, blog on!

PS So have we decided whether the earth is round or flat yet? Maybe we should vote.

[djlactin]

The earth really is flat; I know this because the Bible says so. But those round-earth conspirators are DANGED GOOD! They even jiggered spacetime to make it SEEM like it's 3:50 pm here in korea and 2:52 am in New York.

[Fernando]

My fake flame war doesn´t got the expected result... :-( I thought that by now I was going to get called anything from "stupid" to "sarcasmometer impaired".
;-)

[Paul Lyon]

Fernando, you are a troll, in the old proper usenet sense of the word, where it meant precisely somebody who tries to set up a fake flamewar, or the like.

[Paul Lyon]

Oh, and nice satire EP. Too bad the fundies won't read this.

[shoe stretchers]

If you were going to buy a golf club, you wouldn't walk into a store and buy the first one you see, would you? Of course not; especially if you want to improve your golf game! You'll want to hold the club, take some practice swings, hit some balls if the store has a practice spot, and look at the price, of course. If you are considering buying running shoes, you need to go through a similar process and take the time to find the perfect shoe.