The Fixed-Earth Assumption

“And finally Winter, with its bitin', whinin' wind, and all the land will be mantled with snow.”

Roy Bean


Aviation Navigation, the Fixed-Earth Assumption

Like a dinner fork left in a tree, the significance of anything is in the thing itself, and also the sign; and if it was like deja-vu all over again, some windy gusty day, walking along the runway at the airport, then observe the wind and fixture of the Earth. Only to pluck the vibrating strings, corde pulsum tangite, to think about the effects of any dangerous crosswinds landing, and watch a wind-lashed plane come in to land. 


"The might of the awakened wind lashes the ocean and o’erwhelms vast ships and scatters the clouds, and anon scouring the plains with tearing hurricane it strews them with great trees, and harries the mountain-tops with blasts that rend the woods: with such fierce whistling the wind rages and ravens with angry roar."-1

Confucius says "balance is the great fundamental basis of the world, and harmony is the universal and permanent law", since everthing must fit, yet invisible threads may be the strongest, and fortune can be strange like the moon. Ever changeable, waxing and waning, up then down, as the wind blows where it will. As much as Lucretius and Carmina Burana, people in planes about to crash know the feeling too, even the authenticity, that existence and perceptibility may be convertible terms. And sometimes in close parallel, it may seem like all of this has happened before, and it will all happen again.

"O Fortuna, imperatrix mundi, velut luna: statu variabilis, semper crescis aut decrescis," et cetera.

As much as the mind is another element, another subject and object of being, representing and participating in something elemental too, composed as well in some measure of an elasticity like air, or another frequency, as much as the mind is an element to function in relation, if not exactly the same as air, sometimes the universal and primary opinion is that if nothing can ever be present to it but an image or perception, even where the senses are the only inlet, the last one may prove most telling. In art and nature, of course, the perception of an object may be as real and instrumental as the object itself indeed.


"You learn to know a pilot in a storm", they say, and the movement of severe crosswinds and the plane may make things very dangerous, but there is never any movement from the airport runway or the Earth. The terra firma does not move, of course. In fact, if an unfortunate plane does crash, trying to land in the midst of violent winds, it hits solid ground that is not moving. Like a thick brick wall, it is totally obvious that the Earth is motionless, whether flying in a plane or not, and the only navigation that works is based on a ready fixed-earth assumption.


"For it is in respect of what is present that man's wit is increased"-2, and if people already know aches and pains, and can appreciate vividly the dangers of plane crashes and a tortured existence, how could they not notice if the Earth were in astronomical motion? Because if it were, it certainly would make an added dimension of confusion, if not horrendous excruciation, terrorizing everyone and increasing the presence of such a perilous environment.


Vermis crucis, vermes mundi, and it goes without saying that actuality and the common experience are not only for pen and paper. The common sense of actual awareness seeds in the pith and marrow of understanding and should not be for nothing even if nobody writes it down. However life is now, it is no accident that it would be all over the place if the Earth were spinning around, every day at astronomical rates to orbit the Sun. Not only a problem for the UN, it would completely derange the humble science of ornithology, to the last beak and feather, not just poor pilots, the illuminati, and mechanics. 

Charles Linbergh once said, "I realized that if I had to choose, I would rather have birds than airplanes", yet the entire species of condor Vultur gryphus, for instance, soaring high over the Andes, would find himself lost over the Pacific Ocean in no time, if the earth spins more than 1,000 mph into the east. Majesty unraveled and the world unglued, doom for those great birds in Greek and Latin, and the other neornithes and passerifomes, like them in nature, that leave their nests in the morning, since they would not be able to find home again in the evening.


"The airplane has unveiled for us the true face of the Earth", and passer domesticus etiam delenda est. The house sparrow is up for total destruction, where the earth flies away, and zunzuncito, the smallest living bird, a hummingbird from Cuba, will not make it either.


No safe place small and well enough to hide, and so it goes as well for every pilgrim of the wingèd shoe, with more than 1,000 channels of television and doublespeak. Some discussions can become powerful modes of broadcast confusion, like relativity and the 4th dimension; but all aviation navigation is based on a fixed-Earth assumption, and GPS follows suit, and it all works because the Earth is not moving. The satellite-based global positioning system follows the same fixed-Earth assumption as pilots and navigators, and aerospace engineers assume a fixed-Earth coordinate system when launching and guiding satellites.  


Scientific materialist arcana would allow that Newton's theory could be employed to describe the falling of an apple but give the wrong answer for GPS, yet Newton's theory happens to be wrong in both cases. And when t-shirt devotees of Einstein would say that the Special or General Theory of Relativity would come to the rescue, and have anything to do with GPS or aviation navigation, or the falling of an apple, they are not playing from a full deck. In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is King: “in regione caecorum rex est luscus".-3 Therefore, where they say "relative" and “absolute”, insist rather that they should also mean "authentic".

Insist on authenticity, since without authenticity what is the point? After all, some information is useless. "There are three kinds of intelligence: one kind understands things for itself, the other appreciates what others can understand, the third understands neither for itself nor through others. This first kind is excellent, the second good, and the third kind useless."-4



Relativity's concept of time and motion is overdone, too much loopty loop, too ruffled and too much beak in the feathers. Too much bird shop chit chat and nonsense, since time around the earth is always simple and "in stereo", from Greek meaning solid and complete. Time is successive and circular that way, one piece in many, like a love triangle, it goes into the forms then comes back out again. Since "succesion is the whole nature of time", one thing after another, like cause and effect, is the principle of sufficient reason in the occurrence. For example, it is only one day and one phase of the moon at a time, and when Tuesday it is, it is Tuesday all day; and neither the moon nor the sun can be in two or more different places at the same time.

Mathematical values are not accidental, of course, and there is a universal version of time and motion between them all. Any communication complications or time lapses in signals with satellites vis-a-vis the earth are not due to Einstein's doublespeak, or from counting time from major objects like the Moon, the Sun, and the Earth. They follow only from interstitial motion or accidents between frequencies of minor objects. The operations of the devices themselves, therefore, and the extension and divisibiltiy of space between other minor objects account for any interferences involved, which also are authentic, since reality does fill the void.


The Special and General Theories of Relativity contradict each other anyway, and where they would introduce Einstein's value of “c”, the supposed constant speed of light, into the normal course of things in GPS calculations, to show that E=MC^2 and relativity would have some practical application, there resurfaces the old trick where the value in question, "c", gets reset equal to one. Like Galileo's "gravity", division or multiplication by one, it goes without saying, does not affect anything.


Only an abstract theory clouded over in smoky math fummdiddles, and funny tricks of discussion, relativity is not too difficult to appreciate for the peculiar perspective it makes itself out to be. It is not really useful for applied sciences like navigation or GPS, and it has not been useful for development of nuclear power or EMP technologies. In applied science, the center must hold ab origine, from the source, and it is the natural truth that matters most since it has a way to resolve all the ends. In “relativity”, on the other hand, the truth does not matter the same and there is no center.



For example, when planes come in for landings, they are never moving as fast as par for heliocentrism, and the Earth is not even in rotation. As well, by natural law of physics and Porphyry, the navigator of a vehicle can only be in one place at a time, go one speed at a time, with only one direction at a time. The navigator cannot move away from himself, of course, and neither can any other coherent object or subject: neither the earth nor the sun, nor any of the other satellites in question. O, the heavens must have their kind, and the coincidence of natural subsistence in such things also represents a form of precision, a sort of fine placement, that technology cannot excel, no matter how much doublespeak or small print of "inertial and noninertial" frames of reference. 


If the Earth spins at 1523 feet per second in Quito, and a helicopter is hovering in the air from more than a hundred feet or about 10 stories over a position, the ground below still does not move away. So is there any view from outer space which would show a rotating Earth to differ? Are there any space videos or NASA cameras that would show a rotating Earth, would that it were, since no once can tell by flying in planes or helicopters?


"There are in reality no videos anywhere actually showing a rotating or moving Earth: no real video [of such] anywhere;"-5 yet a few on YouTube and the internet would pretend to show a revolving Earth when viewed from more distant locations in space; but these are manipulated film animations to create the illusion, and they only beg the question, if the Earth is revolving why can nobody recognize it directly, and why does it remain as perfectly undetectable as unaccelerated? 


And if gravity is so powerful and universal in nature, why is it weaker than all forces we are able to experience directly? Why is it weaker than the tiniest refrigerator magnet, and why not as much as the least of any lateral force?


One instance of canned satellite images converted into deceptive moving pictures meant to depict rotation of the Earth has come from NASA's "Terra" program. The "Terra" satellite is the flagship of NASA's "Earth Observing System", which comprises a "series of artificial satellite missions and scientific instruments in Earth orbit designed for long-term global observations of the land surface, biosphere, atmosphere, and oceans of the Earth".-6 The "Terra" faculty was launched December 18, 1999, and began collecting data on February 24, 2000, and has been an important part of NASA's "Earth Science Enterprise", formerly called "Mission to Planet Earth". With this project, NASA would hope to better "develop a scientific understanding of the Earth system and its response to natural and human-induced changes to enable improved prediction of climate, weather, and natural hazards for present and future generations".-7

The images from the "Terra" satellite are real enough, but the sequence of rotation is an illusion like an old art studio kineograph from "The Inkwell Imps". The video represents a rapid display of images to create the illusion of movement. In an article from October 6, 2011 by Robert Simmon, "Crafting the Blue Marble", the creators of the spinning Earth video explain how the simple illusion was created like a flip book projection.

In 2002, as "Terra" was gathering high resolution color images, Reto Stockli was working on a global picture map of the earth intended to impress. To showcase the imagery, a special team put together about 10,000 satellite scenes (each file over 300 MB), which were collected over 100 days. They stripped out the clouds and created a 43,200-pixel by 21,500-pixel map of the Earth, and later the clouds were overlaid back in the illustration.-8 It was perfect, a fancy enough techno kineograph, manipulated with prime photography and chrome, yet tellecor and even the most advanced telemarketing offices of worldwide vacation discount advantage were never moving. It was the satellites that were orbiting the Earth -- not the earth spinning and flying to orbit the Sun, of course.

What the satellites all discover is the same as what all pilots can figure too, and up to the international space station at 190-240 miles in low earth orbit as well, whenever they fly that high: that the earth is not moving. From 100 stories to 20,000 feet, and whether on to 200-250 miles (or 1,056,000 or 1,320,000 feet) in low earth orbit, the essential property at the center does not change.


For the man on the ground, like Juan Valdez high up in the coffee mountain range, to condors flying farther up, up up into the sky, the essential property of terrestrial solemnity does not change. Since error in many cases could be considered proximately due to an "extension of one's judgment beyond evidence"(9), one could say that it also represents a failure in mathematical metaphor. Therefore, to be correct, a lemon tree rustled by the wind is the same seed too, from the gardens of Verna to Saturn, even if an all-seeing eye exists that knows much better about universal metaxology and fixation of immobility than NASA. 

The truth is that from nowhere further out, not even furthest away, will any one see it move or rotate any more than from when close to it with the nose, the ears, and the eyes, yet one of these to one of those can carry things pretty far. As though all appetites were better for the relation, the release, and increase of one, that one, for example, to must have it, or then perhaps one more. Too much is never enough, many there or here many there are, of course, sentiments of need and desire between it all, but the sense must be correct and the reasons accurate.

Besides begging the questions of relativity, when NASA or anyone else pretends that there is honest visual evidence of a rotating Earth, from a view taken deeper out in space, they are only adding other fallacies to the scene. As Bucalino Deprivitatus Regulus used to say, "errors may beget errors, and mistakes may increase". Yet “an error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does the truth become error because nobody will see it."-10


“Error, indeed is never set forth in its naked deformity, lest, being thus exposed, it should at once be detected. But it is craftily decked out in an attractive dress, so as, by its outward form, to make it appear to the inexperienced more true than truth itself.”-11 They say errare humanum est, "but to perisist in error is diabolical",-12 and "any man can make mistakes, but only an idiot persists in his error".-13

As much as NASA still pretends that it landed on the Moon and Mars, and that its Galileo spacecraft and Epoxi space mission somehow were able to obtain undoctored film of the rotations of Earth, seen from way out in the solar system, there is something persistently strange, weird like Kepler's "Dream", "Somnium Sive Astronomia Lunaris", where Kepler was taken to the Moon by demons, and from there saw the Earth revolving while nobody at home can recognize it.


The Copernican syndicate in charge would claim that the Galileo craft took images of a rotating Earth from 2 to 2.7 million kilometers away in mid December, 1990; and that Epoxi took similar images of the Earth from 31,000,000 miles or more in May, 2008. Yet in early December, 1990 the Galileo spacecraft was reported to be only 597 miles away from Earth, but they do not have images of a revolving Earth from there, but supposedly from millions of miles away instead. It is the same story with Epoxi. In December 2007, it was somewhere less than "10,000" miles from Earth, but there are no images of the spinning earth from there either, but supposedly only from millions and millions of miles away in May 2008.

The series of Epoxi photos that were put together as an animation to suppposedly show the Moon transiting around the revolving Earth, 28 and 29 May, 2008, from a view supposedly taken 31,000,000 miles out in deep space, are so obviously fake that they look like they came from the "Deep Fried Twinkies Space Movie" or "Revenge of the Nerds" -- and they have the Moon going the wrong way again, of course, counter-clockwise as seen from above the North Pole rather than clockwise. And the clouds are all marbleized too, frozen together like an ice wall, or the great chain of snowflakes, as cotton candy sort of stuck in place, from place to place, even as Earth supposedly spins and spins away.

When anyone sees the film of a supposedly rotating Earth from deep space, the clouds are always marbleized like the seven continents on a billiard ball. The clouds rotate swiftly, in funny tune with the Earth, but never move independently like weather systems within the design, just the opposite of video from a weather satellite tracking storm clouds and hurricanes, where the clouds move but the land masses do not. Anyway, as it is, "gravitation" does not move clouds any more than the weather comes from "gravity" in the desert or seaside marsh. Contrasting patterns in the elements themselves in types of dryness and moisture, density, air pressure, and temperature conditions move clouds.

The wind may blow the rain away, but Judeo-Masonic controlled NASA has been sitting crooked at the dice table and government gravy train too long. It is a sort of gambler's fallacy, which is close to the hot hand fallacy, to imagine that going further out into space with a billion dollar'd art-cam project will somehow help survey the detectable undetectable and unaccelerated motion of the earth. To compass all the lights of the sky and grace of the lost garden, the probability of seeing the Earth spin from far away remains the same as it is up close: nil and as close to nil as it can get.


The gambler's fallacy is "when a person assumes that a departure from what occurs on average or in the long term will be corrected in the short term."-14 In other words, the detectable undetectable and unaccelerated motion of the Earth, that everyone has experienced here for millenia, even as positive stillness, yet as a thing not existing except to be refuted and ridiculed by theoretical science, will be corrected by another view, another roll of the dice, taken from another distant mile out in deep space.

For instance, on August 18, 1913, at the casino in Monte Carlo, black came up a record twenty-six times in succession at the roulette wheel. The air was electric and there was a near-panicky rush to bet on red, beginning about the time black had come up a phenomenal fifteen times. Following the doctrine of maturity of chances, also a gambling fallacy, players doubled and tripled their stakes, believing after black came up the twentieth time there was not a chance in a million of another repeat. In the end, the unusual run enriched the Casino by some few millions of francs.-15


1. Call it black, red, or snake eyes: the motionless earth is in occurrence. In fact, the "Day the Earth Stood Still" has been happening over thousands of years, for everyone to see.

2. Yet this departs from heliocentrism and what is expected by NASA and the Bank of England to occur on average or over the long term.

3. Therefore, the phenomena of a stationary earth will come to an end, when NASA takes a picture of it from far enough out in space, when the dice roll one more time from further away.


They add to affairs like Galileo and Einstein, committing the fallacy of equivocation by using a term in two or more different senses within a single argument. "For an argument to work, words must have the same meaning each time they appear in its premises or conclusion."-16 Arguments that switch and play with meanings of the words equivocate, and, therefore, do not work. "If the words in the premises and the conclusion mean different things, then the premises and the conclusion are about different things, and so the former cannot support the latter," etc.-17


An example could be:

NASA would like to encourage heliocentrism, acentric cosmology, and relativity by one formula or art deco picture or another.

Heliocentrism, acentric cosmology, and relativity together represent a psychosomatic condition of stagnosia* resulting from excessive consumption of fast food, TV, cheap spirits, video games, Time Magazine, secondhand cigaretes and smoke, and complicatedly incomprehensible math fummdiddles.

Therefore, NASA would like to distribue "E=MC^2" and posters of Einstein -- pictured on a bicycle or tongue sticking out, or counting ducks by the pond or whatever -- to math students more frequently.


Relativity relativising in so many noninertial as inertial frames of reference, et cetera, like the major predication of heliocentrism, remains equivocal ad infinitum. If one could explain all the others, all the strange things and normal things, it always comes back to ambiguity and doublespeak. Is it the NASA spacecraft or its camera that is at rest, in still resolution frame by frame, or the Earth, yet as the Earth spins and spins? Where does the stillness in the division come from?

As Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich used to say, "fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me". Tom Petty sang, "love is a long long road", and for his part, Bob Seger of the Silver Bullet Band used to croon, "blame it on midnight, shame on the Moon ...

Everywhere it's all around
Comfort in a crowd
Strangers faces all around
Laughin' right out loud
Hey, watch where you're goin'
Step light on old toes"

Until you've been up to the top of the North Pole, you may not really know.

When nothin comes easy, old nightmares are real.

Oh, blame it on midnight
Ooh, shame on the moon
Oh, blame it on midnight
Ooh, shame on the moon"


Once taken by the ways of tomfoolery and half-truths, fallacies and lies, the mind can be swept away in a dither river of confusion. And the fallacist's fallacy can remain comfortably numb in pursuit of it all, the old fool-once-removed with paddle and oar: with NASA from the Moon to the stars high over the Cracker Barrel.

If one would say that 2 & 2 are 4 by some method that is absurd, well then 2 & 2 are still 4, of course. Even if there is only an appeal to  buffoons in egress, for authority, well okay, it still is correct to say that 2 & 2 are 4.

Mathematical values truly are not an accident, even if some things about the results are, and if one said, after turning off the TV, "I realize Dr. Teller was right. The Sun orbits the Earth, the Moon does not rotate, and neither does the Earth: and NASA has never landed on the Moon." Well, correct again, post hoc ergo propter hoc, and perhaps turning off the TV helped for some realization of the truth about the position of the Earth in the cosmos. 


All options seem to open or close in predetermined ways. The fool once removed has that uncanny feeling sometimes. It may be difficult to express yet known knows the flow like an atmosphere. Knowing whether not knowing, in the know is knowing as such a know, when the opposition knows it is going to be move "A", for example, even if it would be a secret -- because that seems like that would be the best thing to do, and that, therefore, however, to be more strategic, it should be move "B" instead. If the opposition knows that it will be move "A", such an opposing party is already prepared against that naked perception too: so, in consideration of the stupidity of pre-cognition and too much information, and the defense prepared against "A", since by convention that would be best, then it will be "B" instead, for benefit of suprise. And the opposition knows as well that "A" remains too obvious, so "B" is what actually will occur instead, to avoid loss of advantage by the conspicuous token, even if it would have been clearly advantageous.

A little less perhaps, yet "B" is not so much of a surprise or the better second either, since the opposition knows to expect the unexpected, and already has prepared for that. So to keep it simple, which is always good as back to basics, "A" could be the trick more than it seems, and a surprise, yet most direct for the win, while "B" has been statistically identified and foreseen also, even if as an unexpected second. And the same problems of doubt and speculation go for "C" and "D", and "E" and "F", in their turns, and the rest of the alphabet, whether or when they lead back again to "A" or "B".


Like the most ancient syllogism and the pains of Aristotle, besides bad logic, confusion can be like a dream; and the notion that one could see the Earth rotate, if a view were taken from far enough out in deep space, calls into question the whole value of the human intellect and experience. Even at the root, its memory, understanding, and presence would seem to fail in the thickest part of the balance. Memory, for one, is such a fundamental part of human understanding that no one understands what he cannot remember, and no one remembers what he cannot understand, at least superficially, and then the recollection whatever more. Like a dinner fork in a tree or in a rock of petrified peanut wood in Lone Pine, California, what touches the sense perception is touching, but to be reminded of it or of things like and unlike is something a little more.

In the ancient world, memorization was valued so highly that taking notes and writing everything down was contemned. The art of memory was regarded as fundamental to rhetoric, oratory, law, and understanding. Socrates, for instance, disparaged relying too much on notes. He said, "if men learn this, it will implant forgetfulness in their souls: they will cease to exercise memory because they rely on that which is written -- or which they see in false videos from NASA -- calling things to remembrance no longer, no more from within themselves and their experience."-18


Today unfortunately, in many cases, memory is useless or nonexistent. With so many techno crutches like smartphones and instagram, computers and calculators, besides the effects of large scale brain washing and the weirdnesses of high school, the ability to remember has slowly faded over time. 

According to tradition, the oldest and most reliable method of developing clear memory comes from the method of place, modus loci, which traces back to the story of Simonides of Ceos and the collapsing banquet hall. He was in attendance at a great banquet and was called outside by a visitor. While outside, the entire building suddenly collapsed in a grievous disaster and many people died. It was a terrible situation, and when they were recovering the bodies for burial many were crushed beyond recognition, but Simonides was asked to identify them because he could remember where they had all been seated and perished alive.

If a little bit grisly, perhaps some of the same morbid sympathy -- in a generalized superficial way, more distant as not so particularly fashioned by direct circumstance -- affects the mind of all of us when we forget a name. Still it is the oldest description of the mnemonics of a memory palace, which uses spatial awareness to memorize large amounts of information. A simple and systematic way to improve memory by using the imagery of place, a memory palace facilitates depth of cognitive awareness, of course, including memory and understanding, by spatial learning and aptitude in natural geometry, et cetera, so that if valuable information to be recalled is stored inside a design like a palace, it can more easily be retrieved.


Memory provides delineation and form in the balance, like a building or a ship, or shops on a street, and with some the talent to recollect can become quite extensive. Like any geographical entity composed of a number of discrete loci, when a set of items or things to do needs to be remembered, it is easier to recall them in a structure. Since one then walks through these loci of the mind, which have been committed to memory by placement, the organized design helps bring things to mind that might otherwise be forgotten. Since a distinguishing image or logo in sequence forms a loop between an item and its locus, the same as a filing system or the alphabet on the shelf, walking through the set, 1-2-3, retrieves incidentals and particulars intended for the memory.

Mental storage of features by association with specific locations becomes convenient for retrieval of facts, and as much as any memory palace, the Earth is mnemonically good. As all nature is akin, out of a single recollection comes the rest. It figures then that the middle point among things is the best mnemonic starting-point to reach any of them, and with seven continents and seven oceans in a perfect sphere, Tellus is well arranged by nature for total recall. It seems natural and true in general, therefore, that when any astronuat out in space has memories of the Earth, they should be also that it is not moving, and it does not orbit the Sun. People may remember hometowns and houses, different days and golf courses, old streets and friends, and words that somebody said, but nobody remembers the Earth spinning around and around to fly through space to orbit the Sun. 


Since the Sun does move, there is not an orrery or an airport or its runway either for heliocentrism, as any memory that some one would have of heliocentrism would be total confusion. However, it may be true that one man's memory may be another's clown car: and the clowns never stop coming out. Some heliocentric jesters coming out of a Volkswagen Beetle at the circus go so far as to suggest that meteors, meteorites, and meteor showers, much less the moons of Jupiter and a magnifying glass, would prove that the Earth rotates, yet the argument only juggles another false dilemma. Like Galileo's telescope, based as it is on questionable cause and post hoc ergo propter hoc, meteor showers would call in doubt the already plentiful and extensive evidence that the earth is not revolving? A false apprehension about the asteroid belt and comets would justify the errors of Copernicanism?

It would seem some cannot bear the simplicity of things in right order with nature, by appropriate qualities of atmosphere, sphere of influence, and haecceitas, and in constant view of the immobility of the Earth, where all equability and perfection is given to the circle of natural laws. As if one thing that is like so and so, on one end of the stick, should contradict the other thing that is not like that but rather like this, on the other end, and that both or either should contradict the stick itself: or the wheel of which it would be the axle. If there were a wagon to carry the truth, with however many different things arrayed around it, how would it not go rolling along?

The simple view of life is to keep the eyes open and get on with it, via negativa apophatic or not; yet, for whatever reason, some of the heliocentric wags refuse to acknowledge the Earth for its unique sign and present characteristics of total metaxological immobility. As if one sign from the truth should contradict another, they would fear to abase the data about meteorites and the asteroid belt to elevate the apparent facts of geocentrism.

The evasion and styled ignorance in all this is astounding. As duplicity may have such skill in constructing lies that they seem like evident truths, that the unaware may begin to take falsehoods for truth, let suspicion be a safegurad to the wise.

From Galileo's telescope out of a clown car, to NASA's fake trips to the Moon, Mars, and Pluto, those opposed to common sense would make a mummery of science to obscure the truth: that the penguin does not contradict the scorpion, nor the dolphin the bear, and neither do they or meteorites or the moons of Jupiter contradict the stationary position of the Earth. Because all of nature is of the same kind, relatio secundum esse, recollections of just one thing may lead to discovery or rediscovery of everyhting or anything else. All truths are interconnected and supported by other truths, and heliocentrism has progressed no further than what sophistry it has been able to accomplish: no further than the Foucault pendulum, misinterpretations of stellar aberration, insane math fummdiddles -- one cold drop of which could freeze a frog -- and faulty enthymemes.

The simple fact remains that all motion in the cosmos at any go is agreeable with logic, principles of authenticity, and the transfixed immobility of the Earth, that rises up around everyone everywhere as much as the ghost in the machine.




 rebmun a fi meop a etiuq toN

denots uoy erA 

? - gnivom ton si htraE eht llet uoy t'naC

?... htraE eht stibro nus eht dnA ?