Movie - "The Principle"

No one remembers this brouhaha? The Principle came out a year or two back, and misrepresented so many scientists who had unwittingly taken part in the film that Lawrence Krauss (featured in the movie) denounced it in a Slate article. Narrator Kate Mulgrew also distanced herself from the project, though it's worth noting that geocentrism is only slightly less plausible than season 3 of Orange Is the New Black.Edited by MrHambre, : No reason given.

There's no question that Darwinian evolution does away with the notion of species being fixed and immutable. True, a "species" is more a convenient classification than a hard fact. However, I don't understand how that makes taxonomy as a whole somehow impracticable. Most populations evolve slowly enough that useful if arbitrary distinctions have always been made, with or without the assumption of common ancestry.The notion of flux in other areas of empirical research doesn't invalidate all their distinctions either. Temperature is a variable quality that's local and dependent on many factors, but that doesn't mean "true temperature measurement ceases to be possible." Uranium decays into lead over time, but that doesn't mean that measuring the proportion of radioactive element to its byproduct ceases to be possible.Edited by MrHambre, : No reason given.

Well, no, we observe lots of things: that animal and plant populations display innumerable variations; that breeders can produce vast phenotypal changes in a small amount of generations; that fossils of organisms change drastically in successive geological strata; that bones in the forelimbs of organisms as different as bats, humans, and whales have identical structures and genes for development; that humans and chimps share a pseudogene for vitamin C synthesis wrecked by an identical base mutation; and various other observations of living organisms and their remains.The theoretical framework that unifies all these observations is the concept of common ancestry. Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection interprets and explains the data in a way that no other theory has been able to.

You're right that the physics of how the solar system works is beyond laymen like you and me. But why do you think that so many professionals in astronomy throughout the centuries since Galileo have been so reluctant to work out what some theology blogger like Robert Sungenis found so easy to recognize? Since there's so much gain and glory at stake in the competitive science industry, I have a hard time believing that countless experts simply toed the heliocentric line when the evidence is supposedly so overwhelmingly against it.

I'm not talking about religion either.You didn't respond to the question I asked in my post: why would presumably millions of astronomers from Galileo's time to ours have ignored the overwhelming evidence of geocentrism, when there's so much wealth and renown at stake?You seem to be arguing for the existence of a vast conspiracy to suppress the truth about the Earth being the center of the universe, fueled by a pervasive hatred for Jesus Christ even in a fairly religious nation like the USA. I'm wondering why none of the astonomers working in religious universities, particularly those who are likely to have religious beliefs if they live in the USA, would have ventured to point out the obvious scientific truth. Excuse me for finding the idea that only a theologian like Robert Sungenis was smart and/or brave enough to take on the entire astronomy industry a bit less plausible than that the idea of heliocentrism has more support than Robert's movie lets on.

At least I have the benefit of knowing about the competition that has historically fueled advances in science. Darwin, Einstein, and Watson & Crick were all motivated by an urge to receive the tangible benefits of industry celebrity (perhaps in addition to a dedication to scientific progress). I have no reason whatsoever to think astronomers don't share this urge to become renowned for overturning centuries of scientific error.However, I've never seen any evidence of the sort of improbably vast conspiracy of silence that would keep millions of astronomers and educators quiet about the obvious truth of geocentrism. Can you offer any reason for me to share your suspicion that Jesus-hatred has kept countless astronomers quiet for centuries?

Obviously this conspiracy is more diabolical than we can imagine.