The Narrative of Heliocentricity

And in all matters of wisdom and understanding about which the king examined them, he found them ten times better than all the magicians and astrologers who were in all his realm.

(Daniel 1:21) NKJV

The broad consensus of the scientific community can override what you can see with your own eyes. It’s “science” so you have to believe it.

Peer review has the power to ignore simple facts, like the fact that we appear to be on a rock-solid stationary Earth and the sun, moon and stars appear to orbit the Earth everyday. According to the prevailing narrative, brought to you by peer review, you’re an idiot if you believe that.

The peer review driven narrative for the solar system starts with the desire that the Bible is wrong and that the Earth an insignificant speck orbiting another insignificant speck which is drifting through a vast cosmos.

Back in Galileo’s day the religious dogma of the church was that everything in the solar system had to orbit the Earth. Why this was dogma we don’t know. It’s not stated in scripture. Galileo showed that Venus orbits the sun, not the Earth, debunking the dogma on one count. He also observed moons orbiting Jupiter, debunking the dogma on two counts. Neither of these observations prove heliocentricity, but they’re cited as proof of it. The peer review propaganda machine made that happen.

Another contribution Galileo made to the fog of scientific sleight-of-hand is the use of stellar parallax to confirm heliocentricity. Briefly, stellar parallax works by taking two measurements of parallax, six months apart, when the Earth is on either side of the sun. This means that the assumption of heliocentricity has been made before the measurements were taken. Therefore, using the parallax measurements to confirm heliocentricity is an example of circular reasoning.

Stellar Parallax vs. Matty’s Parallax

Something else that Galileo did was speculate that the minute specks in the sky we call stars were distant suns, like ours. That’s popular science (SciPop) Axiom 3 which we’ll discuss tomorrow. Briefly, if the minute specks in the sky are really the size of the sun, then how far away would they have to be such that they look like minute specks? This is the beginning of modern astronomy. Galileo’s legacy is that the words sun and star are now used as synonyms. It’s theoretical, we don’t observe it, it’s a leap of faith.

Not to be deterred the peer review propaganda machine forged ahead. Better telescopes showed that many stellar objects are not merely minute specks, but they are in fact swirls of minute specks: galaxies. If, the rationale goes, each minute speck in the swirl is a sun like ours, then how far away would it have to be such that it looks like a minute speck? This is the beginning of the Star Trek universe. It gives us the geometry of despair.

The Geometry of Despair

It’s like the slough of despond in “A Pilgrim’s Progress” by John Bunyan.

We blame geometry.

Since the 1960s astronomy and the Star Trek universe have been the same thing. In this sense peer review is really the general consensus of the TV and movie watching public. As soon as a new idea comes out of Physics it’s woven into the plot of a Star Trek episode and quickly becomes peer reviewed science lore. You believe it because it’s in Star Trek.

If it’s good enough for Star Trek, it’s good enough for mainstream science (SciPop). Besides, if you’ve seen it in a Star Trek episode you already believe it’s true. Slam dunk.

– Peer Review

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: