Letter: Evidence supports geocentrism
The Nov. 3 letter to the editor, "Measuring the age of the Earth," says: "We have abundant scientific evidence indicating an Earth much older than 10,000 years."...
The Nov. 3 letter to the editor, "Measuring the age of the Earth," says: "We have abundant scientific evidence indicating an Earth much older than 10,000 years."
The writer cites sediment layer count, and radiometric dating methods as evidence. However, the preponderance of evidence shows that the Earth has undergone extreme catastrophic violence in the form of a worldwide flood and ensuing volcanic and crust movement activity resulting in rapid burial of plant and animal life which now form our coal, oil and gas deposits. Common sense tells us that a violent shake-up of the planet will disqualify any geologic column sedimentation deposits that seem to indicate millions of years of "quiet" build-up.
Radiometric dating has shown itself notoriously unreliable, i.e. 9 billion-year-old diamond, 27 million-year-old volcanic rock from a known 200-year-old eruption, etc.
As to the age of the sun, dust particles form a large disk-shaped cloud that orbits the sun. These particles should have spiraled into the sun in less than 10,000 years, and no significant replenishment source is known.
The author of the Oct. 20 letter, "An explanation of the universe," defends a non-geocentric view of the universe. He cites 19th-century stellar parallax as the proof for the non-geocentric model. But this proves nothing since parallax can observed from a geocentric view also.
A simple example of geocentric parallax is to picture yourself at the center of a merry-go-round observing the closest horse in relation to the farthest horse. I would submit that one of the evidences of geocentricity would be our current GPS satellites acting as a giant interferometer encircling the earth to detect absolute motion (Sagnac Effect).
As to defending macro-evolution, I don't think anyone even tries anymore. It's a total basket case and certainly should not be taught in our schools as anything but mythology.
For those who will do future rebuttals, may I specify that we keep religion out of this debate at this time? I believe the three items can be demolished on secular grounds.