Part 2: Scientific & Astronomical Evidence That Heliocentric View & Spinning Earth Are Myths

The Earth is not moving and it does not rotate, it does not spin, it does not orbit. Numerous scientific experiments were performed in order to debunk the globally-held view of a fixed Earth and geocentric universe but they have all failed disastrously.

Simply put, the “spinning Earth”, “revolving Earth (around the Sun)”, and “tilt of the Earth” are complete and total fabrications. In this article I will not go into the tilt, but will discuss why science and logic prove conclusively that the Earth is not moving or spinning.

Before Copernicus decided to fundamentally change the entire universe model, the most brilliant minds of the previous 6,000 years all concluded rightly that the Earth is in a fixed position and the universe revolves around it. They believed this because all of the universe, and logic, points to the evidence. All we have to do is look up at the night sky and we can see the truth.

Copernicus causes the Earth to spin


Copernicus, determined to overthrow the church and overthrow scientific truth, devised an elaborate fiction completely turning science on its head. He decided that he wanted the Earth to simply be another planet in a vast universe of billions of planets and stars, moving just like everything else, in order to support his atheistic view that there is no God.

All of science and the universe was designed by God in such a manner that truth and science will always point to a divine Creator. It is impossible to look at true science and determine evolution or the idea that Earth is not unique and special in the universe. Copernicus, however, refused to accept fact, logic, and truth, and determined philosophically against all science that “since God doesn’t exist” then “it’s impossible for the Earth to be the center of the universe”, because, if Earth was in the center, the plausibility and impossibility of such a “coincidence” is too astronomical for any logical, rational human to accept as reality.

Thus, Copernicus decided to make Earth rotate around the Sun. However, he ran into an extremely difficult conundrum. If Earth was rotating around the Sun and it took 1 year, then it would mean that the whole Earth would be night for 6 months and day for 6 months, instead of dark and light every day. Therefore Copernicus decided to spin the Earth like a top.

The devastating, historical failure of the Michelson-Morley experiment


Three and a half centuries later (Copernicus died in 1543) with still zero scientific evidence that the Earth is spinning (and all science and logic determining the truth that the Earth is stationary), the Michelson-Morley experiment in 1887 was supposed to prove that the Earth was spinning. However, its utter and absolute failure in fact proved that the Earth is not spinning.

Additionally, the Michelson-Morley experiment is often falsely used to disprove the existence of the “aether” – an invisible substance that encompasses the entire universe like a 3-dimensional blanket. The aether exists, and Nikola Tesla was well aware of it and used it as the basis for many of his successful experiments.

You see, if the Earth was spinning, then the existence of the aether would have caused the Michelson-Morley experiment to succeed. However, since the Michelson-Morley experiment was a catastrophic failure, instead of accepting the truth that the Earth is not spinning, instead they decided to say that the aether doesn’t exist – a terrible scientific blunder which has crippled science for the past 150 years since the experiment.

The motion of the stars is undeniable proof of a fixed, stationary Earth


Another one of the most obvious proofs of a stationary, fixed Earth, which does not spin nor move, is the most obvious and absolute proof that anyone with a camera can observe in their own backyard. If you point a camera at the sky, and over a period of days, weeks, or even months daily take a picture and observe the timelapse motion of the stars, the proof is undeniable.

God knew this and created the Earth in such a special and fixed position in the center of the universe because God knew that this would provide proof of Himself, the Creator. This is because when you observe the motion of the stars, instead of going horizontally across the sky like would happen if the Earth was spinning and moving, instead the stars go in circles, proving that the Earth cannot be spinning.

In addition to the undeniable proof of the notion of the stars as a whole, the absence of motion of just one star, Polaris, is undeniable and absolute proof that the Earth cannot be hurtling around the sun in a galaxy hurtling through the universe at millions of miles per hour.

Problems with acceleration as evidence of a stationary Earth

They say that the speed is 600km/s local supercluster motion + 40km/s local group motion + 200km/s milky way motion + 30 km/s earth motion = 870km/s; half the year they say up to 900km/s including another 30km/s. Taking the 900km/s number, that would imply that the Earth is traveling at 2,013,240 miles per hour.

If this number doesn’t concern you, it should. I am going to do some simple math and applied logic here that has not been done before to prove why the Earth moving at 2 million miles per hour is not possible. Then, I will conclude with an obvious fact that proves the Earth can’t be moving.


An article on Gizmodo gives an opening paragraph that clearly explains why intense acceleration is unsustainable for human life (and subsequently other life on Earth):

Our bodies are surprisingly resilient in many situations, but rapid acceleration is not one of them. While the human body can withstand any constant speed—be it 20 miles per hour or 20 billion miles per hour—we can only change that rate of travel relatively slowly. Speed up or slow down too quickly and it’s lights out for you, permanently.

As the article says, our bodies cannot sustain major changes in acceleration or deceleration. Just how much acceleration? According to many other sources, our bodies can handle up to about 5G’s – that is, 5 g-forces, which is 5 times the speed of sound. This is about 4,000 miles per hour. However at these speeds (rate of acceleration, not total speed), the human body will black out, and many people who have not been through training for their bodies to handle g-forces will die immediately. One of the reasons why is that heart is not strong enough to pump enough oxygen to the brain against such strong forces of acceleration.


Now, if the Earth is supposedly moving at around 2 million miles per hour though the universe, this is why you should be concerned with that number. The human body cannot handle even 1,000 miles per hour rate of acceleration without significant deleterious effects leading quickly to death. Now consider that 1,000 miles per hour is only 0.025% change – that is, 1/4,000th of a change in the rate of speed of the supposed motion of the Earth.

For reference’s sake, and to more easily understand this, consider that changing only 1,000 miles per hour from 2 million mph is the same concept as say you were driving 60 miles per hour down the highway and you slowed down only 0.015 mph. You can’t slow down that little, it would only occur for a millisecond.

Or, say that you were flying at 500mph in an airplane, and the airplane slowed down only 0.125 mph (1/8th of one mph). Still too hard to conceive since the difference is so little. Let’s say you were going 1,000 mph in a rocket ship and you slowed down only 0.25 mph – that is 1/4th of one mph. Not much of a change, right?

This is exactly my point. If Earth is hurtling through the universe at 2 million miles per hour, a change of only 1/4000th of the rate of speed plus or minus, and only for 1 second, is enough to cause every being on earth to black out and most of them to die. Do it for a few seconds and you’ve wiped out most of the life on Earth.

The consequences from such an extremely small relative change in rate of speed of the Earth hurtling through space (such as 1,000 mph) would be devastating, apocalyptic; but, reality would dictate that the acceleration changes would be far greater than only 0.00025 (0.025%). In reality, the changes would be more like 1% to 10% changes (perhaps more). Even at a 1% change, we’re now talking an acceleration of 20,000 miles per hour – this is 27 times the speed of sound. Nothing on Earth could ever travel that fast. How do we know this? See below.

Rate of change of acceleration as evidence of a stationary Earth

One of the most obvious reasons why Earth can’t be moving is because even the smallest percentage of fluctuations in speed of the moving Earth would have devastating and catastrophic consequences that would likely immediately wipe out all life on Earth.

If Earth were moving at such high speeds (2 million mph), the smallest fluctuations in speed would put such extreme stress due to unattainable levels of acceleration and deceleration that the consequences would kill every life form on Earth instantaneously. Life forms can simply not handle such extreme fluctuations in speed.

The first consequence of a “statistically normal” rate of change in acceleration of a moving Earth from 2 million miles per hour (such as at least 1% rate of change), would be that due to air friction, everything on earth would burn up instantly.

Ever seen a rocket ship enter earth and get super hot (in movies)? It gets so hot because of air friction. The rocket ship entering Earth is traveling fast (17,500 mph), so the air friction would cause it to burn up and disintegrate. A rocket ship could even reach speeds in excess of 20,000 mph. It needs a massive heat shield to prevent it from disintegrating.


That’s why Earth doesn’t get bombarded by meteors. They all burn up in the atmosphere. Except one thing – the atmosphere is very thin high up, and it is just air. Down on Earth, the atmosphere is much thicker, meaning that potential speeds are much, much lower before burning up and disintegrating.

The reason the astronauts survive 20,000 speeds is because this is not a change of 20,000 mph. They have to very slowly reach this speed. Their actual acceleration is only a few G’s at a time. 25+ Gs would instantly kill any human.

But the acceleration of 20,000 mph resulting in instant death for any Earth life form is not the only problem. The air friction of a 20,000 mph change in rate of speed would instantly vaporize anything on Earth – and instantly liquefy steel.

The apocalyptic consequences of even the smallest rate of change in acceleration

earth burning up due to acceleration through space

This means that even a 1% change in rate of speed from the supposed “2 million miles per hour hurtling through space” Earth would instantly wipe out all life, burn (“vaporize” is a better word) everything on the entire planet due to air friction, and liquefy all rocks. For example, a city would be instantly converted from a thriving city with skyscrapers to having everything inside vaporized except the hardest materials such as steel which would collapse into a puddle of molten lava due to the extreme temperatures from a second or so of air friction moving 20,000 mph. All that would be left of the city would be some molten lava and scorched earth. There wouldn’t even be bones – even the bones would vaporize.

If not for the air friction, everything would also be thrown out into space, but nothing would get that far because the air friction would vaporize and liquefy everything from people and animals to skyscrapers, shopping malls, and football stadiums. Metal would turn into lava and organic material (such as people and even bacteria) would instantly vaporize.

Therefore, such changes in acceleration would be unsustainable. The Earth could not sustain life. Moreover, due to the astronomical impossibility of an absolute, never changing speed of the Earth through space, then ironically and humorously, if the Earth really was moving, then the only way that could be possible would be some higher being is preventing the speed from ever changing even the smallest amount. Because scientifically it is impossible for the acceleration to be absolutely and completely never changing, even despite entering a cold zone of space or moving through ambient radiation from a nearby system.

Therefore, even if you said the Earth was moving, the only way for that to be possible is if God Himself is constantly, every millisecond, ensuring that the rate of speed never, ever changes. However, it would be relatively easy to prove that the rate of accelerating of items in the universe (outside Earth) absolutely are changing in rate of speed, thereby proving that the Earth cannot be moving, due to issues with acceleration wiping out all life on Earth.

The absence of measurable changes in acceleration as further proof of a stationary Earth


However, this alone is not the only reason. Even if the acceleration and deceleration, which is statistically impossible, were to be extremely minute, this acceleration and deceleration would be entirely measurable on Earth. We would be able to measure the stress and strain of the expansion and contractions on an atomic level even if the acceleration and deceleration were unnoticeable to the casual observer.

However, for such an extremely low percentage of fluctuation in speed that the Earth, Galaxy, supercluster, and universe were all moving at an absolute and unchanging rate of speed, forever, in order to sustain life on Earth, the plausibility is so astronomically impossible that it simply could not occur.

Not even to mention that collision with the ambient radiation of any other supercluster or galaxy, which surely occurs on a regular basis, would inevitably alter the speed of the moving universe; as well as effects from entering a colder or warmer portion of space in its travels, inevitably decelerating or accelerating the motion of the supercluster, galaxy, and Earth – hence destroying all life on Earth.

However, the truth is that there simply is no movement that can be measured. The movement cannot be measured because it is not occurring. Science dictates that it is not possible to claim from a scientific standpoint that the Earth is moving in any way whatsoever, because there is no science that can prove it, and all science disproves it.

Therefore, everyone who advocates these unproven fallacies of a moving Earth is either a blatant liar, completely deluded, brainwashed, or merely blindly believes in such an obvious lie just because it was written in a textbook written by someone who knows nothing about science.

Science therefore dictates and proves that the Earth cannot be moving


In conclusion, the Earth is not moving, and science, along with the whole of nature, the universe, and the stars, are all evidence that we are not moving anywhere. Copernicus tried to change science, and while he changed what people are taught in their textbooks, he only introduced lies and destroyed real science. His theories, his fantasies which he manufactured out of thin air, do not hold up to science, logic, or even the smallest amount of genuine scientific scrutiny.

Earth is in a fixed position in the center of the universe, and science and astronomy proves this absolutely with undeniable accuracy. The only way, however, for the Earth to truly be in the center of the universe from a scientific and statistical standpoint, is if someone put the Earth here, because the theory of evolution would make the Earth being at the exact center an impossibility.

Therefore, the Earth being at a fixed point in the center of the universe is scientific evidence for the existence of God, and this is why the atheistic people who call themselves “scientists” and “professors” do not want anyone to know about the truth, because they do not believe God exists, so they ignore all the scientific evidence proving God, and blindly follow the scientifically unfounded (no evidence) philosophy of atheism, under the “hope” that “one day there will be evidence”. That is not science!

When your “science” is based on the premise that “one day science will have the answer”, then your “science” is not science at all, but philosophy. Science is only science when its experiments are absolute, repeatable, and repeatable in different contexts by different people whose conclusions all agree. Yet, a “moving earth” has no proof by any scientist or experiment. It is merely unfounded theory, a philosophical view of the universe which illogically goes against every fiber of real science – even one’s very own eyes which see the motion of the stars proving the Earth is fixed and not moving.



  1. I have read several of your articles. You didn’t cite any references for your information. Can you provide any?

    1. I provided references for some articles, some articles are pulled directly from the Bible, and others like this one do have a couple of references in inline links, and references to scientific experiments with the Michelson-Morley experiment, although I will consider adding a References section to it in the future. Also, keep in mind that all mainstream “science” sources are going to be biased and contain false information, because they are all controlled by the “scientific” community to agree on certain agendas like the spinning Earth, and are not allowed to publish any peer-reviewed articles that disagree with their agenda. “Peer-review” is a system that restricts science into a narrow scope and does not allow real science when it goes against certain agenda.

  2. You state that the Earth can’t be moving because a change in speed (acceleration) would likely kill everyone on the planet.

    What would be causing these changes in speed?

    1. As I mentioned in the article, there are very many factors. Some of these may include friction, entering cold spots in space (space is not uniform in temperature), colliding with other solar systems, the solar system passing by gravity wells, etc. There are so many things that could change the movement of the Earth even just a small amount which would still wipe out all life on Earth, if the Earth were really moving through the solar system at 2 million miles per hour.

      1. Sorry I missed that section.

        Where would friction come from?
        How do we know space is not a uniform temperature?
        Would it matter if the Earth was stationary or not if we collided with anything on the magnitude of a solar system or gravity well? Life on earth would surely have been destroyed if that happened therefore the fact that it hasn’t happened doesn’t prove or disprove earth being stationary?

        1. We know for a fact based on scientific readings that space is not a uniform temperature, but it takes only a tiny bit of comment sense to realize how that’s the case.

          If Earth is stationary it would not be colliding with other solar systems etc, that is the point. All of (actual) science supports a stationary Earth. Only religious fanatics believe in a moving Earth. These atheist religious fanatics deny all of science and use their basis as a fact when it is a religious view in spite of all the evidence. They call this religion “science”, but it is not actually science, it is a religion. Real science, which is composed not of theories but of actual evidence, proves a non-moving Earth.

          Every experiment that has ever been done has proved a stationary Earth, despite the scientists believing that it would prove a moving Earth. Every experiment to prove a moving Earth has failed, but there is tremendous other scientific evidence that points to the Earth being stationary, unmoving, at the center of a static, non-expanding universe.

          Recent scientific evidence has shown that the galactic non-uniformity showing the hot and cold spots in the universe has added up to what scientists call the “axis of evil” (not evil as in religious or bad, it is referring to the cosmic microwave background radiation CMR or CMBR) that shows the Earth being directly in the center. This shocked scientists and resulted in documentaries like The Principle (2014).

          The chance of life “evolving” are absolutely zero, but even more, the chances of life “evolving” AND being in the exact center of the CMBR is so profound that it can only mean that God created the heavens and the Earth. Nothing is by chance. Science proves this.

          1. Thanks for the reply James.

            Are the scientific readings about the temperatures in space coming from the same scientists that would say the earth is NOT the center of the universe?

            Are the other solar systems moving and just not the earth? Doesn’t that mean the other solar systems could still collide with earth? Similar to how a person can drive into a parked car.

            How can I tell the difference between the “actual” science that proves the Earth is stationary and the other science that disagrees?

            I thought being an atheist simply meant the absence of a belief in a God, what does that have to do with believing or not believing in science?

            Could you provide some sources I could read about the experiments that prove the Earth is stationary? I’d like to see what type of sources are trustworthy vs not trustworthy.

            Last thing, your statement about the chances of us being alive on earth. Doesn’t the very fact that life is here mean we won the galactic lottery so to speak? No matter how small the chances were for life to evolve we wouldn’t be here to ask these questions if it hadn’t?

          2. It would not be possible to say what the views of every scientist are, that question is far too general.

            Are the other solar systems moving? Sure but not through the entire universe. Generally they stay in the same place in the universe, for the most part. They don’t travel through it. How do we know? Because the star patterns are just about the same as they were thousands of years ago. The constellations haven’t changed.

            How can you tell the difference? One is based on objective facts, where the other is based on presuppositions which skew data and are by definition not science, even though they call it “science”. Science is based on repeatable experiments and objective observation. Almost all of modern “science” does not rely on the fundamental principles of actual science. If you don’t want to do all the research yourself step by step then you are forced to trust me and others who have done the real research.

            But it’s pretty easy to tell if someone is a real scientist or not. If they use evolution, Big Bang cosmology, or “millions of years” in anything they talk about, then they are not a scientist, they are a priest (for the religion of atheism and naturalism).

            Atheists are not anti-religious or non-religious, they are not neutral; they are the most staunch religious activists, fierce apologists for the no-God religion. To deny to such a degree the physical reality, logic, and common sense necessary to maintain an atheistic view, is to spend every single day in denial of reality; and to do this, one has to frame everything around lies, and this is a religion. A foolish religion, but a religion nonetheless.

            Technically, no experiment “proves” a stationary Earth, just like no experiment has “proved” a moving Earth. But the infamous failures of every experiment which was supposed to prove the moving Earth speaks volumes. If the Bible only describes a stationary Earth, and the majority of human history had science books that taught a stationary Earth, and every modern experiment that has ever been done has absolutely failed to prove a moving Earth, then you tell me, what is the logical and scientific conclusion?

            I’ve discussed some of these experiments. First the Michelson-Morley experiment. You’re right it will be hard to judge what’s true when every peer reviewed paper is by definition biased against truth and reality (the “peer-review” system forces a particular viewpoint), so it will be difficult to read things and know what is true from a lie. Basically, as soon as they say “evolution” or other ridiculous, unfounded religious views (evolution is a religion), then you know they have virtually zero credibility, because they are not scientists, even if that is their profession – especially if that is their profession. A scientist who calls a religion like evolution a science is not a scientist, they are a liar, or deceived, they cannot be trusted. They are an unreliable source, a false witness.

            Witness: I saw him shoot her your honor!
            Judge: Sir, you’re blind.
            Witness: But I heard the gun!
            Plaintiff: I rest my case.

            “Scientist”: We came from monkeys!
            Observer: Evolution is scientifically impossible.
            “Scientist”: But my textbook said we came from monkeys!
            Observer: I rest my case.

            One can’t prove God exists directly, but one also can’t in any way disprove that God exists. However, one can prove that God exists indirectly, by pointing to the impossibilities of evolution, Earth being special in the universe, the existence of the human eye, and even simply looking out into nature or up into the sky and seeing the glory of God’s Creation. To deny your own eyes is to deceive yourself.

            There is no “galactic lottery”. You are regurgitating what you have been told, you did not come to that conclusion yourself, because you haven’t done the scientific research to learn the reason that your statement is false. There is effectively a zero chance of evolving. It is 100%, not 99.9999999999999, 100% zero chance that even the human eye could have “evolved”, because multiple things would have had to be in place at the same time. Or the cell. Or reproduction. Isn’t it amazing! Not just Man, but also Woman at the same time evolved from nothing! Obvious hogwash. It’s so ridiculous from a scientific standpoint to say that anything evolved that it is absolutely laughable.

            One of the smartest men and one of the most famous proclaimed atheists on Earth, Richard Dawkins, came to the logical conclusion that, in his mind because he refused to believe in God, that an “extraterrestrial intelligence” likely created the universe. It’s unbelievable. Richard Dawkins said that an almighty intelligence greater than the entire universe made the entire universe. What do you think God is? God is an almighty intelligence that does not come from Earth, and God made the universe. Even Richard Dawkins admitted that God created the universe, but he blinded himself to it and said it was an “extraterrestrial” intelligence, and somehow deluded himself that this was somehow not God the Creator but a *different* almighty intelligence being from outside our universe.

Share your thoughts

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *