Star Trek actress lends her gravitas to film promoting Geocentrism

[Perspicuo]

Damn.

The Raw Story: ‘Star Trek’ actress lends her gravitas to film promoting idea that sun revolves around Earth
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/04/...romoting-idea-that-sun-revolves-around-earth/

A new documentary film, narrated by a former Star Trek actress, promotes the long-ago disproven idea that the sun revolves around the Earth.

“Everything we think we know about our universe is wrong,” says actress Kate Mulgrew as she narrates the trailer for The Principle.

The film, which is set to be released sometime this spring, was bankrolled in part by the ultra-conservative and anti-Semitic Robert Sungenis, who maintains the blog “Galileo Was Wrong.”

In addition to Mulgrew, who played Capt. Kathryn Janeway in “Star Trek: Voyager” and “Star Trek: Nemeis,” the film features several scientists, including Michio Kaku, Lawrence Krauss, and Max Tegmart.

Krauss said Tuesday morning that he had not willingly participated in the film.

UPDATE: Kate Mulgrew releases a statement, saying she is not a geocentrist and was misled by the makers of The Principle.

That's Kate Mulgrew, a.k.a. Cpt Kathryn Janeway of Star Trek Voyager.

The Raw Story: ‘Star Trek’s Kate Mulgrew on geocentrist film: ‘I was a voice for hire, and a misinformed one’
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/04/...i-was-a-voice-for-hire-and-a-misinformed-one/

Star Trek: Voyager and Orange Is The New Black star Kate Mulgrew released a statement online on Tuesday saying she was misled about her participation in the “geocentric” film The Principle.

“I am not a geocentrist, nor am I in any way a proponent of geocentrism,” Mulgrew said in her statement. “More importantly, I do not subscribe to anything Robert Sungenis has written regarding science and history and, had I known of his involvement, would most certainly have avoided this documentary. I was a voice for hire, and a misinformed one, at that.”

Amazing, amazing jerks.

 

[spikepipsqueak]

I agree if you're saying the makers are jerks.

That implies that Mulgrew and Krauss thought they were participating in a scripted fiction, then found out different.

 

[rjh01]

I just wonder what is the evidence that the Earth goes round the sun?
- Theory of gravity
- Nearby stars appear to wobble because the earth is moving around the sun.
- Spacecraft?

I know the evidence was not there until sometime in the early 1800s.
What else?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Well, if Captain Janeway says that they Earth revolves around the sun, that's good enough for me. Maybe you stupid Picard fanboys need more, but fuck you guys.

 

[bilby]

Is there a reason why this is back in the news? It was discussed a few months ago when it was first reported - has the movie now been released or something?

 

[James Brown]

I just wonder what is the evidence that the Earth goes round the sun?
- Theory of gravity
- Nearby stars appear to wobble because the earth is moving around the sun.
- Spacecraft?

I know the evidence was not there until sometime in the early 1800s.
What else?

Heliocentrism explains the retrograde motion of Mars and other planets. Galileo's telescope observations punctured holes in geocentrism, specifically the moons of Jupiter and the phases of Venus. And as you mentioned, stellar parallax shows the Earth goes round the Sun rather than the opposite.

http://science.jrank.org/pages/3276/Heliocentric-Theory-triumph-heliocentric-theory.html

 

[Perspicuo]

I agree if you're saying the makers are jerks.

That implies that Mulgrew and Krauss thought they were participating in a scripted fiction, then found out different.

Of course I am.

Is there a reason why this is back in the news? It was discussed a few months ago when it was first reported - has the movie now been released or something?

We are not omniscient. That is why people post these things more than once. Do you scan every thread on Talk Freethought? Do you have that amount of time and idleness? I don't.

 

[rjh01]

I just wonder what is the evidence that the Earth goes round the sun?
- Theory of gravity
- Nearby stars appear to wobble because the earth is moving around the sun.
- Spacecraft?

I know the evidence was not there until sometime in the early 1800s.
What else?

Heliocentrism explains the retrograde motion of Mars and other planets. Galileo's telescope observations punctured holes in geocentrism, specifically the moons of Jupiter and the phases of Venus. And as you mentioned, stellar parallax shows the Earth goes round the Sun rather than the opposite.

http://science.jrank.org/pages/3276/Heliocentric-Theory-triumph-heliocentric-theory.html

If all the other planets orbited around the sun and the sun orbited around the earth then that would also explain the retrograde motion of Mars and other planets.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Wasn't there already a thread on this? (Uh oh... someone already noted that)

Man, how lacking in morals must one be to put out a science documentary and have to lie to your participants about it? Must make one think the science is a bit lacking in the truth category.

But there is an app for that, Willful Blinders 2.0. At 3M, we don't make you deny the truth, we make it easier.

 

[Keith&Co.]

If all the other planets orbited around the sun and the sun orbited around the earth then that would also explain the retrograde motion of Mars and other planets.

Which would require that there is some force moving things around the Earth, starting at the Earth's surface, no?

Then how would geostationary orbits fit into that model?
And why does Focault's pendulum work so differently at the Equator than at the North Pole?

 

[James Brown]

Heliocentrism explains the retrograde motion of Mars and other planets. Galileo's telescope observations punctured holes in geocentrism, specifically the moons of Jupiter and the phases of Venus. And as you mentioned, stellar parallax shows the Earth goes round the Sun rather than the opposite.

http://science.jrank.org/pages/3276/Heliocentric-Theory-triumph-heliocentric-theory.html

If all the other planets orbited around the sun and the sun orbited around the earth then that would also explain the retrograde motion of Mars and other planets.

Tychonic systems like what you describe held its own compared to Copernicus' heliocentric theory since Copernicus assumed circular orbits, thus requiring multiple epicycles like Ptolemy. It was Kepler's use of Tycho's careful observations that led him to make the planetary orbits into ellipses, and with that he was able to modify Copernicus' model and make better predictions. With that, geocentrism of any kind lost favor. The discovery of stellar parallax in the 18th century nailed geocentrism's coffin shut.

Until 2014, that is, when some desperate souls are trying to resurrect the old moldy corpse.

 

[rjh01]

If all the other planets orbited around the sun and the sun orbited around the earth then that would also explain the retrograde motion of Mars and other planets.

Which would require that there is some force moving things around the Earth, starting at the Earth's surface, no?

Then how would geostationary orbits fit into that model?
And why does Focault's pendulum work so differently at the Equator than at the North Pole?

Yes there would need to be some force making the sun orbit the Earth and not everything else. As for geostationary orbits and Focault's pendulum they would would still work as the Earth would spin on its axis and that is what both depend on.

Usually in science for something that is basic there are heaps of different pieces of evidence that says that something is true. I am wondering is there something else that tells us that Earth goes round the sun that has not been mentioned?

 

[Keith&Co.]

Yes there would need to be some force making the sun orbit the Earth and not everything else.

It's far simpler to explain everything going around the sun than everything BUT Earth going around the sun and the sun going around the stationary Earth. Then the 'force' would apply equally to all planets and stars at the same time,

As for geostationary orbits and Focault's pendulum they would would still work as the Earth would spin on its axis and that is what both depend on.

Um...If the Earth spins on it's axis, as evidenced by the Pendulum and geostationary orbit, that would explain why the sun appears to go around the Earth. What more are you looking for?

 

[Sarpedon]

If stars that are light years away orbit the earth in a day, they must be travelling much faster than light.

 

[rjh01]

It's far simpler to explain everything going around the sun than everything BUT Earth going around the sun and the sun going around the stationary Earth. Then the 'force' would apply equally to all planets and stars at the same time,

As for geostationary orbits and Focault's pendulum they would would still work as the Earth would spin on its axis and that is what both depend on.

Um...If the Earth spins on it's axis, as evidenced by the Pendulum and geostationary orbit, that would explain why the sun appears to go around the Earth. What more are you looking for?

If stars that are light years away orbit the earth in a day, they must be travelling much faster than light.

Both of you have over looked the fact that the Earth spins on its axis everyday and orbits the sun (or is that the sun orbits the Earth?) every year. I asked for evidence, other than what I had listed, for the Earth going around the sun rather than the other way round and I have not got any good answers so far.

 

[Keith&Co.]

I asked for evidence, other than what I had listed, for the Earth going around the sun rather than the other way round and I have not got any good answers so far.

What's wrong with the parallax answer?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It's far simpler to explain everything going around the sun than everything BUT Earth going around the sun and the sun going around the stationary Earth. Then the 'force' would apply equally to all planets and stars at the same time, Um...If the Earth spins on it's axis, as evidenced by the Pendulum and geostationary orbit, that would explain why the sun appears to go around the Earth. What more are you looking for?

If stars that are light years away orbit the earth in a day, they must be travelling much faster than light.

Both of you have over looked the fact that the Earth spins on its axis everyday and orbits the sun (or is that the sun orbits the Earth?) every year. I asked for evidence, other than what I had listed, for the Earth going around the sun rather than the other way round and I have not got any good answers so far.

We have launched many spacecraft into solar orbits and they go where we expect them to.

We have transmitters in orbit around IIRC 4 planets right now. Those among other things those transmitters let us measure the actual speed of the planets--doppler shift. (Yes, it matters at planetary speeds. The Huygens mission as originally planned would have been a complete failure because someone didn't think about this. The original mission profile left Cassini moving quite fast relative to Titan when the probe landed--far enough that the doppler shift would have rendered the radios unable to operate. Since this was only realized while the hardware was already on the way they had to redo all the orbital plans for Cassini to get it's velocity relative to Titan at that time down.) We can certainly conclude that all the spacecraft and the 5 planets we have orbited are all going around the sun. Why in the world would everything else orbit the sun but then that whole mess of sun and planets orbit the Earth???

 

[rjh01]

I asked for evidence, other than what I had listed, for the Earth going around the sun rather than the other way round and I have not got any good answers so far.

What's wrong with the parallax answer?

It was one of the answers I gave above.

If stars that are light years away orbit the earth in a day, they must be travelling much faster than light.

Both of you have over looked the fact that the Earth spins on its axis everyday and orbits the sun (or is that the sun orbits the Earth?) every year. I asked for evidence, other than what I had listed, for the Earth going around the sun rather than the other way round and I have not got any good answers so far.

We have launched many spacecraft into solar orbits and they go where we expect them to.

We have transmitters in orbit around IIRC 4 planets right now. Those among other things those transmitters let us measure the actual speed of the planets--doppler shift. (Yes, it matters at planetary speeds. The Huygens mission as originally planned would have been a complete failure because someone didn't think about this. The original mission profile left Cassini moving quite fast relative to Titan when the probe landed--far enough that the doppler shift would have rendered the radios unable to operate. Since this was only realized while the hardware was already on the way they had to redo all the orbital plans for Cassini to get it's velocity relative to Titan at that time down.) We can certainly conclude that all the spacecraft and the 5 planets we have orbited are all going around the sun. Why in the world would everything else orbit the sun but then that whole mess of sun and planets orbit the Earth???

I agree, spacecraft would be required to go to a different location if the Sun orbited the Earth and not the other way round. That is the sort of good answer I am looking for. Thanks.

 

[skepticalbip]

If the Sun were orbiting the Earth then it would mean that Newton's law of universal gravitation and laws of motion were all wrong. That is unless the Earth were much more massive than the Sun, in which case the other planets would be orbiting the Earth too rather than orbiting the Sun. However, our observations seem to indicate that Newton’s laws are pretty damned safe. Of course there is always the chance that sweaty little angels are pushing all the bodies around under the direction of some trickster god to make it look like Newton was right.

 

[Perspicuo]

If the Sun were orbiting the Earth then it would mean that Newton's law of universal gravitation and laws of motion were all wrong. That is unless the Earth were much more massive than the Sun, in which case the other planets would be orbiting the Earth too rather than orbiting the Sun. However, our observations seem to indicate that Newton’s laws are pretty damned safe. Of course there is always the chance that sweaty little angels are pushing all the bodies around under the direction of some trickster god to make it look like Newton was right.

Your argument has one fatal flaw that makes it all wrong: it's logical and it depends on evidence. Therefore it makes no sense to faith. And meaning. And when you say things like that, baby Jesus cries. Oh, and information, something about information... Ah, yes, your theory supposes an increment of information that Darwinian evolution requires. And quantum consciousness. If the Earth revolves and rotates and wobbles consciousness would get dizzy, and are you dizzy? No, right? I'm dizzy, and what does that say? Huh? It makes no sense.