Earth is the Center of the Universe?

While researching the evidence for Cosmic Consciousness, the implications of the collapse of wave function, QM and so on, I came across some interesting evidence pointing to the fact that the Earth not only resides in the special place of the universe, it is the center of the universe…The evidence comes from the so-called “Axis of Evil – the earth’s ecliptic and equinoxes, and this represents a very unusual and unexpected special direction in space, a direct challenge to the Copernican Principle, which “appears to give the plane of the Solar System and hence the location of Earth a greater significance than might be expected by chance.”- Wikipedia

 

To list the implications of this very fact would take more than then several OPs,  but just to mention a few: the big bang theory is goodbyeo… If big bag theory is no longer applicable, is the age of the universe and the Earth based on it correct?

To sum this up: Cosmology as we know it may as well be scrapped…The universe revolves around the Earth because it is special and not a product of mindless processes…

Regarding the Axis of Evil” aligned to Earth Lawrence, before they were confirmed as facts in 2013 by Planck probe Krauss commented in 2005:

But when you look at [the cosmic microwave background] map, you also see that the structure that is observed, is in fact, in a weird way, correlated with the plane of the earth around the sun. Is this Copernicus coming back to haunt us? That’s crazy. We’re looking out at the whole universe. There’s no way there should be a correlation of structure with our motion of the earth around the sun — the plane of the earth around the sun — the ecliptic. That would say we are truly the center of the universe.

What should “the seekers of truth “, like Lawrence Krause, do when the best theory no longer fits the data?

They ignore it…

Yet another nail in the coffin of materialism… ID stands vindicated again…Not that this evidence is going to have any effect on “the seekers of truth”… Cosmologists will just add few more assumptions to their current assumptions and preconceived, materialistic ideas to satisfy the majority of people with what they want to hear and believe…

The illusion has to appear to be “real”…. because fiction has to continue to make sense…

 

100 thoughts on “Earth is the Center of the Universe?

  1. I have not watched the video.

    At least as I understand it, the general theory of relativity implies that everywhere is the center of the universe.

  2. Neil Rickert:
    I have not watched the video.

    At least as I understand it, the general theory of relativity implies that everywhere is the center of the universe.

    Neil,
    You have neither watched the videos nor know what the “axis of evil” imply…if you had done it, you’d know why I have always “questioned” the general theory of relativity and its incompatibility with quantum mechanics…
    I like you but that doesn’t mean I will let th truth fade…You do understand?

  3. J-Mac: I like you but that doesn’t mean I will let th truth fade…

    My personal experience — watching Internet videos wastes a lot of time, but does not provide a path toward truth.

    If you have a link to an open-access peer reviewed article, I might take the time to look at that.

  4. Neil Rickert: My personal experience — watching Internet videos wastes a lot of time, but does not provide a path toward truth.

    If you have a link to a peer reviewed article, I might take the time to look at that.

    What truth are you talking about, Neil?
    ETA: Peer reviewed by your believers? I’m sure it is going to be accurate.

  5. The video seems to be constructed largely of excerpts from “The Principle”, a 2014 documentary film that argues in favor of geocentrism.

  6. James Chapman:
    The video seems to be constructed largely of excerpts from “The Principle”, a 2014 documentary film that argues in favor of geocentrism.

    When you say “The Principle'” you mean the Copernican principle?

  7. The bible says clearly the earth was created special. The universe is only to serve it.
    Earth is the centre of the universe. This has nothing to do with latitude and longitude.
    Genesis should be the first witness. it would save a lot of worthless speculating.
    Einstein, at the end, said he didn’t know what light is. Yet he opined enough on it. genesis says clearly light was a special and first creation and everywhere. tHis witness would of stopped the particle/wave/speed of light concepts out of the gate.
    Physics is obviously not as complex as biology in its atomic nature yet it still is complicated. Conclusions should not so easily be settled before more reflection. they are too quick like old man Darwin..

  8. I don’t see why we should think we’re the center of the universe. So the plane of the solar system aligns with certain features of the cosmic microwave background, and? How does it follow from that, that Earth is the center of the cosmos?

  9. J-Mac, in the OP:

    If big bag theory is no longer applicable, is the age of the universe and the Earth based on it correct?

    “Big bag theory”? Sounds like a variation of ID’s “big tent”.

    And of course nothing about this observation throws Big Bang theory into doubt, either.

  10. Truly, only supernatural intervention could explain why a set of measurements is relative to the position from which those measurements are taken.

  11. keiths:
    J-Mac, in the OP:

    “Big bag theory”?Sounds like a variation of ID’s “big tent”.

    And of course nothing about this observation throws Big Bang theory into doubt, either.

    Indeed, the CMB map presupposes it. The “axis of evil” only has meaning in the context of the Big Bang (another meaning might be found, but that remains to be seen). Otherwise it would just be noise.

    Glen Davidson

  12. Rumraket:
    I don’t see why we should think we’re the center of the universe. So the plane of the solar system aligns with certain features of the cosmic microwave background, and? How does it follow from that, that Earth is the center of the cosmos?

    Why should you believe me??? Read Krauss’ comment:

    “But when you look at [the cosmic microwave background] map, you also see that the structure that is observed, is in fact, in a weird way, correlated with the plane of the earth around the sun. Is this Copernicus coming back to haunt us? That’s crazy. We’re looking out at the whole universe. There’s no way there should be a correlation of structure with our motion of the earth around the sun — the plane of the earth around the sun — the ecliptic. That would say we are truly the center of the universe.”

  13. keiths:
    J-Mac, in the OP:

    “Big bag theory”?Sounds like a variation of ID’s “big tent”.

    And of course nothing about this observation throws Big Bang theory into doubt, either.

    If there was Big Bang, it wasn’t random… which means the obvious…

    What big tent?

  14. Kantian Naturalist:
    Truly, only supernatural intervention could explain why a set of measurements is relative to the position from which those measurements are taken.

    Do you have any other explanation other than you don’t like the implications of the findings by 3 different probes now?
    Why don’t just say materialism first and than the evidence and I won’t be wasting my time…

  15. Neil Rickert:
    I have not watched the video.

    At least as I understand it, the general theory of relativity implies that everywhere is the center of the universe.

    Again, the general theory of relativity is wrong, or at least some aspects of it…
    I can think of 3-4 instances where it is violated, such as by entanglement…

  16. Neil Rickert: My personal experience — watching Internet videos wastes a lot of time, but does not provide a path toward truth.

    The path to the truth, as you see it, is a biased path to support your preconceived ideas. That’s not what the goal of science is… or it shouldn’t be. Unfortunately, there is materialism standing in the way of the pursuit of truth…

  17. J-Mac: Why should you believe me??? Read Krauss’ comment:

    “But when you look at [the cosmic microwave background] map, you also see that the structure that is observed, is in fact, in a weird way, correlated with the plane of the earth around the sun. Is this Copernicus coming back to haunt us? That’s crazy. We’re looking out at the whole universe. There’s no way there should be a correlation of structure with our motion of the earth around the sun — the plane of the earth around the sun — the ecliptic. That would say we are truly the center of the universe.”

    Yeah I see his words, what is missing is the connection that implies Earth is the center of the universe. I don’t see why it follows that if the plane of the ecliptic aligns with particular features of the cosmic microwave background, then the Earth must be at the center of the universe. I don’t care that Krauss is the one who writes the words, he’s not my pope, I don’t believe things just because Krauss says it.

    Can you explain it to me J-mac? The plane of the ecliptic aligns with certain features of the CMBR – therefore it is more probable than not, that Earth is the center of the universe. Why?

  18. J-Mac: Do you have any other explanation other than you don’t like the implications of the findings by 3 different probes now?

    How many solar systems in the universe have their plane of ecliptic facing the same direction as Earth’s? I’m guessing… a thousand trillion. I’m just not seeing the part where this is supposed to mean Earth must be at the center.

    As in, I literally don’t see how that is implied. At all. I need you to connect the dots for me J-mac. Can you help me out? I will try my best to understand the explanation you give.

  19. The cosmic background radiation has a structure which can be seen as a pattern relative to the location of the Earth in the cosmos, therefore God.

    Sure, makes sense to me.

  20. Rumraket: Can you explain it to me J-mac? The plane of the ecliptic aligns with certain features of the CMBR – therefore it is more probable than not, that Earth is the center of the universe. Why?

    All the planets should be the center as well. The solar system also moves around the center of the galaxy. I wonder if that motion causes a wobble in the ecliptical plane which would affect the alignment with the CMBR.

  21. Kantian Naturalist:
    The cosmic background radiation has a structure which can be seen as a pattern relative to the location of the Earth in the cosmos, therefore God.

    Sure, makes sense to me.

    It doesn’t have to mean God since you hate the idea… The special structure or the special direction in the universe clearly implies non-random process…
    The interpretation of this fact is logical to me but not to materialism driven denial of evidence to suit preconceived ideology…

  22. newton: All the planets should be the center as well. The solar system also moves around the center of the galaxy. I wonder if that motion causes a wobble in the ecliptical plane which would affect the alignment with the CMBR.

    Did you carefully watch the video?

  23. Rumraket: . I don’t care that Krauss is the one who writes the words, he’s not my pope, I don’t believe things just because Krauss says it.

    Many view Krauss as the new Dawkins… So he will be your pope like it or not..you’d better listen… lol

  24. J-Mac: Did you carefully watch the video?

    Yes I did and since all the planets move on the plane as the Earth why would the Earth considered the center?

  25. Rumraket: They did? How is that relevant?

    Yes, because Rome was the center of the world, so to speak, at the time…
    Same applies to the special structure or the direction of the universe pointing to the Earth… small and yet very significant… Random process of the big bang model can’t account for this anomaly…

  26. J-Mac: It doesn’t have to mean God since you hate the idea… The special structure or the special direction in the universe clearly implies non-random process…
    The interpretation of this fact is logical to me but not to materialism driven denial of evidence to suit preconceived ideology…

    I know it’s really important to you to believe that I’m a “materialist,” even though I’m not and I’ve explained many times why I’m not. And I know it’s important to you to believe that I hate God even though I don’t and I’ve explained many times why I don’t. So don’t expect me to repeat myself when it comes to correcting your misunderstanding of my positions — it would just be a waste of my time.

  27. J-Mac: Many view Krauss as the new Dawkins… So he will be your pope like it or not..you’d better listen… lol

    Not my pope.

    I have never been a fan of Krauss. For that matter, I have never been a Dawkins fan.

  28. Neil Rickert: Not my pope.

    I have never been a fan of Krauss.For that matter, I have never been a Dawkins fan.

    Nor I. I was a fan of Carl Sagan and Stephen Jay Gould when I was a kid, and they were certainly formative influences on me.

    But I consider it a sign of intellectual and emotional maturity to not have any heroes. My intellectual independence involves being severely critical of all the philosophers I admire and finding something admirable in all the philosophers I oppose.

  29. Kantian Naturalist: I know it’s really important to you to believe that I’m a “materialist,” even though I’m not and I’ve explained many times why I’m not. And I know it’s important to you to believe that I hate God even though I don’t and I’ve explained many times why I don’t. So don’t expect me to repeat myself when it comes to correcting your misunderstanding of my positions — it would just be a waste of my time.

    That’s settled then. So, you are a Third Way phenomena follower…

  30. Neil Rickert: Not my pope.

    I have never been a fan of Krauss.For that matter, I have never been a Dawkins fan.

    Both serve the purpose of filling the need of what many want to hear by denying the evidence…I call them the stumbling blocks of true scientific research…

  31. J-Mac: Same applies to the special structure or the direction of the universe pointing to the Earth

    Have you watched the video? Earth lies in the same plane just like Mars.

  32. Kantian Naturalist,

    So,do you believe that there’s purpose in the universe and therefore in life itself?

    While I have not much respect for Krauss, I do agree with him in one of his beliefs; the purpose of life in the pursuit of knowledge, especially scientific knowledge… If this pursuit is unbiased, it can be very fulfilling…

  33. J-Mac: Random process of the big bang model can’t account for this anomaly…

    What are the odds against it happening by random?

  34. newton: Have you watched the video? Earth lies in the same plane just like Mars.

    Where doesn’t say that Earth and Mars are in the same plane?

  35. newton: What are the odds against it happening by random?

    Same as thousands of proteins happening by random to form a living cell… which means materialists are willing believe it…😉

  36. J-Mac: That’s settled then. So, you are a Third Way phenomena follower…

    I find it really quite fascinating that you assume I must be a follower of some sort or other.

    J-Mac: So,do you believe that there’s purpose in the universe and therefore in life itself?

    I certainly think there’s structure to the universe, and that life itself as a structured process would be impossible without a structured universe.

    Whether cosmic structure is a result of a choice made by some divine Mind is, I think, completely unknowable and quite frankly not very interesting. Since such a conjecture could neither be confirmed nor disconfirmed, nothing can be inferred from it; neither the conjecture (that there is such a divine Mind) nor its denial (that is not) has any justifiable practical consequences for human conduct. The only way one can get any practical consequences for human conduct one way or the other is by taking a leap of faith that is without epistemic grounding.

    That is, it should be obvious, as true for “atheism” as it is for “theism”. It’s a leap of faith one way or the other, so it’s a waste of time to argue about which is more rational than the other.

  37. Kantian Naturalist: I find it really quite fascinating that you assume I must be a follower of some sort or other.

    I certainly think there’s structure to the universe, and that life itself as a structured process would be impossible without a structured universe.

    Whether cosmic structure is a result of a choice made by some divine Mind is, I think, completely unknowable and quite frankly not very interesting.Since such a conjecture could neither be confirmed nor disconfirmed, nothing can be inferred from it; neither the conjecture (that there is such a divine Mind) nor its denial (that is not) has any justifiable practical consequences for human conduct. The only way one can get any practical consequences for human conduct one way or the other is by taking a leap of faith that is without epistemic grounding.

    That is, it should be obvious, as true for “atheism” as it is for “theism”. It’s a leap of faith one way or the other, so it’s a waste of time to argue about which is more rational than the other.

    If there is structure in the universe, as by your own admission, then there has to be a structurer or mind. Therefore,while in both views, theism and atheism, require a leap of faith, theism seems more probable then atheism based on your admission alone… And if theism is more probable, therefore it is more desirable in pursuing than the unlikelihood of atheism…

  38. J-Mac: Where doesn’t say that Earth and Mars are in the same plane?

    It doesn’t therefore every planet in that plane is the center .

  39. J-Mac: Same as thousands of proteins happening by random to form a living cell… which means materialists are willing believe it…

    Without that number how can you conclude it is inexplicable according to our present theory? Seems like depending on then precision of the measurement it could be as little as 1:180.

  40. J-Mac: If there is structure in the universe, as by your own admission, then there has to be a structurer or mind. Therefore,while in both views, theism and atheism, require a leap of faith, theism seems more probable then atheism based on your admission alone… And if theism is more probable, therefore it is more desirable in pursuing than the unlikelihood of atheism…

    I am unable to make sense of that.

  41. newton: It doesn’t therefore every planet in that plane is the center .

    The video and quotes are of course saying that the purported correlation “appears to give the plane of the Solar System and hence the location of Earth a greater significance than might be expected by chance.” It’s that the solar system is supposed to be at the center. It’s not exactly Ptolemaic.

    Not much in the video, of course, and less than zero in J-Mac’s muddled nonsense (because he’s wrong on so many matters). From what I can see, it’s interesting how things line up, but it’s bound to happen in some cases. Was the rotation of our nebula specifically intended to fit with the CMB? Why? How? If someone has an actual explanation (not some mindless tripe like in the OP), that’s good. If not, well, it’s an interesting line-up, sample of one. Even a great explanation would be hard to test with a sample of one.

    Glen Davidson

  42. J-Mac: If there is structure in the universe, as by your own admission, then there has to be a structurer or mind.

    That’s just false. The existence of structure doesn’t entail the existence of structure.

  43. KN:

    The existence of structure doesn’t entail the existence of structure.

    I assume you meant:

    The existence of structure doesn’t entail the existence of a structurer.

  44. newton: It doesn’t therefore every planet in that plane is the center .

    You just contradicted you previous comment:
    “Have you watched the video? Earth lies in the same plane just like Mars.”
    Make up your mind!

  45. newton: It doesn’t therefore every planet in that plane is the center .

    Wrong again. The orbits of Earth and Mars don’t lie in the same plane. Their paths around the sun are a bit tilted with respect to each other…

Leave a Reply

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