Tag Archives: heliocentrism

Kabbalistic Origins of the Copernican Model

The Copernican heliocentric model and the Big Bang are the basis to the understanding of the cosmology of modern science. Those who tend to look at things critically have probably found these claims somewhat questionable, and there are claims that these ideas, and others concepts of modern science, such as Evolution, are actually of occult or religious origin. There is also alleged Jesuit involvement in our current understanding of the universe. While there are certainly plenty of material on the internet about this, I decided to take a look at it myself. In this article I’ll focus on Nicolaus Copernicus and his ideas. Next time I’ll look at the Big Bang.

However before I move on, I’d like to share my take on the Jesuits, or the claim you see here and there: “It’s the Jesuits.” Jesuits are actually the first conspiratorial group I ever heard about. When I was a child learned that Jesuits embodied the maxim: the ends justify the means. I’m not sure where I learned, maybe from my parents, but ever since I had had the idea of Jesuits of being some sort of conspiratorial cabal. That was years before I even heard the names Freemason or Illuminati. Then around ten years ago, when I was getting serious about learning about conspiracies and secret societies, I heard from a Christian friend that Jesuits are actually really nice, he said they are sort of like hippies. That confused me greatly.  He seemed to be describing a completely different group from the historical Jesuits. Both because I suppose I associated Jesuits with my former childhood self, and my friend’s confusing comments, I hadn’t looked much into Jesuit conspiracy theories in my conspiracy theorist “career”, but maybe a couple years ago I saw some articles about Jesuit universities.

I’ll this article from NY Times as an example from 2013. It describes how the Jesuit Georgetown college celebrated OUTober, an LGBT gay-parade with students prancing around wearing pink shirts. My friend’s view of Jesuits must have originated from these kind of liberal, tolerant modern Jesuit colleges. The Jesuits have been, and still are, all about pursuing their own nefarious agendas and subverting society’s values. It’s just that the times are different, and they are using different methods nowadays. A few centuries ago they were probably more focused on sequestering knowledge, assassination and more traditional cloak and dagger stuff, now they are putting on a benevolent mask and are engaging in social engineering, such as LGBT agenda.

Yet I still do not agree that “it is the Jesuits”. You see and hear these people saying “it’s the Jesuits and that guy never mentions the Jesuits, so he must be a shill”. The next guy says: “No, it’s actually the Freemasons. You’re the shill.” Whereas the third guy claims: “It’s the Jews.” I think these groups, and many others are part of the secret society control system, but I do not know who or what group is on top of it all, nor do I trust anyone who claims they know the truth, unless they are a member of the group that rules over all other groups.

 

Copernicus and Kabbalah

Let’s move on to Nicolaus Copernicus and the heliocentric model of the solar system. Before Copernicus’ theories, most Europeans believed in the geocentric Ptolemaic system. According to Wikipedia, Copernicus had formulated his theory already in 1510, but his book “On the Revolutions of the Celestial Spheres” was published after his death in 1543. Interestingly in the Controversy-section of the article it states:

“The immediate result of the 1543 publication of Copernicus’s book was only mild controversy. At the Council of Trent (1545–63) neither Copernicus’s theory nor calendar reform (which would later use tables deduced from Copernicus’s calculations) were discussed. It has been much debated why it was not until six decades after the publication of De revolutionibus that the Catholic Church took any official action against it, even the efforts of Tolosani going unheeded. Catholic side opposition only commenced seventy-three years later, when it was occasioned by Galileo.”

I suppose the Catholic church created the controversy on purpose, since Copernicus’ theories had not caught on in the regular people. So they turned Galileo into this oppressed anti-hero basically to advertise the Copernican model as the new and exciting thing that the establishment supposedly is afraid. Sort of how they got a lot of people, myself included, to support Donald Trump. (Although my support of him wasn’t really so much because the establishment pretended to hate him, but because of Hillary Clinton and Pizzagate, but that’s another story.)

Let’s get back to Copernicus. His book was called “On the Revolutions of the Celestial Spheres”. Just the name itself reminds me of the Tree of Life of Kabbalah and Sephiroth spheres on it, or the Norse World Tree with the hanging worlds on it.

 

I used to think this similarity pretty much proves there is some truth to Kabbalah and the ancient myths, but now I am skeptical of the modern cosmology, so I am more inclined to think the “scientists” who have been pushing this model do so because their religion says so. Nowadays many of the flat earthers believe in the Biblical geocentric, domed-model. I suppose I am one of them, but I am happy to admit I could be wrong. There does seem to be some sort spiritual and scientific battle between these two religious concept going on. One of them could be right, and one wrong, or perhaps both are simply religious ideas.

Anyway, the heliocentric model that Copernicus was pushing is rather Kabbalistic. A Kabbala site called Revealing Science of God says: “It should be noted that the 16th century also witnessed perhaps the first scientific verification of Kabbalist teaching with the book written by Copernicus. The Kabbalists never taught the Earth to be the center of the universe, and Copernicus’ discovery proved them right.”

Another blogger on WordPress had written an article titled: “Copernicus And His Kabbalistic Methods”. He quotes Copernicus saying: “Nor is it necessary that these hypotheses should be true, nor indeed even probable, but it is sufficient if they merely produce calculations which agree with the observations…” This sort of reasoning does indeed seem Kabbalistic.

Torahscience.org has an article states that the Torah, i.e. the first five books of the Old Testament, has a geocentric universe. However, when a “holy” Rabbi Ruzhiner was presented with Copernicus’ theories, people expected him to deny them, however the Rabbi responded as follows:

“When he was informed of this, the Holy Ruzhiner remained completely composed and his response was a very special one. He said that whether the earth revolves around the sun or the sun revolves around the earth depends on the service of the tzaddikim, the righteous Jews of the generation. The answer to the question of “What revolves around what?” is not an absolute answer. If, for instance, the tzaddikim in this generation would serve God in a manner in which it would be correct to see Pluto as the center of the solar system, then in some mysterious way scientific discoveries would adapt to reflect that change.”

Those “tzaddikim” are probably the good Jews who believe in Kabbalah and the Talmud instead of the Torah.

Later on the article gives another example of this: “Accordingly, the variation between geocentricism and heliocentricism can be compared to a difference between a service of God that sees man (on earth) as the center, with God, as it were, revolving around man and caring for all of man’s needs; or perceiving God as the center, whereby man is obligated to God and His commandments.”

According to Kabbalah, it would seem, anything can be anything as long as you can bullshit and fast talk others to believe in it. Even the laws of nature and God are subject one’s ability to make stuff up. I have noticed similar things have permeated all aspects of modern society. Feminism is one example. They say rape is power + privilege, and since White women have them, they cannot be raped. Alternatively, a woman who had consensual sex with man can turn the act post coitum into a rape if she regrets later her promiscuity. Once again, twisting words around can supposedly change reality to suit one’s needs.

I do not know whether Nicolaus Copernicus had studied the Kabbalah, but he did seem to adhere to many Kabbalistic notions. I also do not know if there is any connection between Copernicus and the Jesuits. The Jesuit order was officially formed 1540 and Copernicus died 1543, so it is possible they might have had something to do with it, but I haven’t seen any actual evidence of this.

 

The Catholics

The Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy says that during Copernicus’ lifetime, the Catholic church seemed to be fine with his theories:

“Pope Clement VII (r. 1523–1534) had reacted favorably to a talk about Copernicus’s theories, rewarding the speaker with a rare manuscript. There is no indication of how Pope Paul III, to whom On the Revolutions was dedicated reacted; however, a trusted advisor, Bartolomeo Spina of Pisa (1474–1546) intended to condemn it but fell ill and died before his plan was carried out. Thus, in 1600 there was no official Catholic position on the Copernican system, and it was certainly not a heresy.”

So Pope Clement VII, who appears to have died before Copernicus, reacted favourably to his theories, and the Pope who succeeded him was Paul III to whom Copernicus dedicated his book. Had the Catholic church been hostile to Copernicus’ theories, you might interpret this as a kind of FU from Copernicus, however it does not appear that was the case. There probably were many individuals who did not appreaciate his un-Biblical cosmology, but overall, as Stanford Encyclopedia stated, the heliocentric system was not a heresy.

Interestingly, as is mentioned above, Pope Paul III’s advisor, Bartolomeo Spina, wanted to condemn Copernicus’ book, and presumably he could have influenced the Pope as well, but he fell ill and died. Convenient, wouldn’t you say? Perhaps he was poisoned. His Wikipedia page doesn’t say much, but it says Bartolomeo Spina was involved in prosecuting witches, so he probably understood the Copernical model as the occult concept that it is.

There are some claims that Nicolaus Copernicus may have been a prist. At least he did not marry, and he was a member of the Third Order of Saint Dominic, which is some sort of lay Dominican order. The New Advent website states:

“After his university studies Copernicus practised medicine for six years (1506-1512) at Heilsberg, being sought by bishops and princes, but especially by the poor, whom he served gratis. There is no document to show that Copernicus ever received higher orders. His medical practice, which was only private, would not speak against him being a priest, and the fact that in 1537 King Sigismund of Poland put his name on the list of four candidates for the vacant episcopal seat of Ermland, makes it probable that, at least in later life, he had entered the priesthood.”

So he might have died a Catholic priest. I’ve uncovered no evidence of any involvement of Jesuits with Copernicus himself. The Catholic church, however, did seem be in good relations with him.

Copernicus certainly seems to have been influenced by the Kabbalah, and it was all approved by the Catholic church.

Next time I’ll focus on the Big Bang theory and it’s obvious occult origins.

 

Links:

A Rainbow Over Catholic Colleges
How Georgetown Became a Gay-Friendly Campus: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/04/education/edlife/how-georgetown-became-a-gay-friendly-campus.html

Nicolaus Copernicus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolaus_Copernicus

One Possible History of Kabbalism: http://www.revealingscienceofgod.com/index.php?page=one-possible-history-of-kabbalism

Copernicus And His Kabbalistic Methods: https://migchels.wordpress.com/2015/04/02/copernicus-and-his-kabbalistic-methods/

Science Versus Torah?: http://www.torahscience.org/natsci/astronomy_rav2.htm

Nicolaus Copernicus: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/copernicus/

Bartolommeo Spina: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bartolommeo_Spina

Do you have a calling to be Third Order of St. Dominic?: http://www.sacredheart-op.org/Vocations.htm

Copernicus: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04352b.htm

The Jesuits & The Globe Earth: The Mother Of All Conspiracies!: https://www.worldslastchance.com/end-time-prophecy/the-jesuits-the-globe-earth-the-mother-of-all-conspiracies.html

Advertisements

Flat Earth Revisited

Recently the flat earth model of the earth has resurfaced in the alternative and conspiracy research community. Some folks claim the flat earth movement is completely made up of co-intelpro agents with the purpose of discrediting conspiracy theorists, the alt-right and other people searching for truth and sanity. To a degree I think this is true. Several flat earth proponents do seem dubious, and not very credible. Some though I find credible at least in the sense that they do believe in the flat earth model, and are not complete idiots. This doesn’t, however, prove the earth is flat, but at least there seems to be some evidence for it.

A week ago or so Stefan Molyneux had debate with a flat earth proponent, which seems to have gone viral. At least for me, Youtube was always offering the video until I decided to watch it. My regular readers probably know I don’t have much respect for Molyneux. Well, I think he’s a disingenuous prick, but he did alright in this debate in my opinion. Maybe I’d go as far as to say that he even won the debate. However, the opponent he had wasn’t exactly the foremost expert on the topic, and Molyneux isn’t the expert on the spherical earth model either, so this debate only proved people have different opinions on the shape of the earth.

One interesting point the flat earth proponent brought up was a letter written by an industrial valve expert that the International Space Station (ISS) cannot exist, because the air cylinder technology and other stuff it would have to use is miraculous. The flat earther was going to read a quote by the expert, but Molyneux shut him up. Fortunately I managed find a video by Mark Sargent where the letter is read out loud. It’s very technical, so I cannot verify what the alleged expert is saying is true, but it sounds credible at least. If the ISS is fake, it doesn’t prove the earth is flat, but it is one more note in the ever-increasing dossier pointing out that what NASA has been saying about outer space and the space program is false.

In the debate the flat earther saying something like he doesn’t believe in things he cannot verify by himself. I think this is a very reasonable position. Much of our physics and cosmology today is based in abstract mathematics and not in empirical facts. Molyneux rightly countered this by asking if he’s been to the Antarctic to see that the Antarctic is actually a ring around the flat, circular earth, since flat earther’s claim it’s not this continent down south, but a ring around the world. The flat earther, of course, hasn’t been there to verify this himself, since the governments don’t let people go there. In this respect I agree with Molyneux that it is somewhat irrational to believe in the flat earth, if they haven’t verified it themselves.

I’ve heard from several sources that the Antarctic is heavily guarded, and they don’t let people there. I do think this is significant, and they’re covering something up. However, it does not necessarily suggest the earth is flat. There could be secret military bases in the Antarctic, entrances to the hollow earth, a dinosaur park or whatever they don’t want us to see. One possibility is that exploring the Antarctic would prove the earth is flat, however, I need someone to prove this is the case before I’m willing to believe it.

Molyneux and the flat earther also discussed the religious aspect of the flat earth vs globular earth, or more specifically the geocentric and heliocentric models. The geocentric model claims the sun revolves around the earth, and the heliocentric is vice versa. Underlying assumptions often associated with these models is that geocentrists believe God, or something similar, made the earth specifically for people to live in, whereas heliocentrists believe that earth is just another planet among billions of others, and not that special. Whatever the physical, ontological fact about the models are, whether the earth revolves around the sun, or vice versa, is, I would say that theologically the geocentric model is more plausible. Human beings are very unique in all of cosmos. We are clearly more complex in many ways compared to all other known animals. And despite there allegedly being billions and trillions of stars and planets, earth is the only one with life on it. Sure, there could be life out there somewhere, but so far we haven’t seen any evidence of it. Based on the data available currently, outer space seems utterly devoid of life.

Like I said earlier, there are many dubious characters in the flat earth movement, and others seem more confused, like the guy debating Molyneux, I think there are exceptions. In the last few months I’ve seen several videos by Eric Dubay, and I must say, I enjoy listening to him. He seems intelligent, honest and genuine. This could mean two things; he’s a very good conman, or he is onto something. Last night I watched his video 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball, and found it compelling. But then again, I’m not physics major, and many of the proofs he used were somewhat technical. Maybe he is simply making arguments that sound sophisticated to the unintiated and ignorant like me. So I hope more people would watch the video, and either debunk his claims if they are incorrect, or verify them if they are true.

I for one am happy to see the flat earth debate reopened. I have not jumped that bandwagon as of yet, and I don’t see myself doing so until someone offers very drastic proofs for the flat earth, such as going to the Antarctic, and demonstrates it is a ring of ice. It is however becoming more and more apparent that much of what we’re told about the make-up of the earth and the cosmos is not all there is. Whatever the truth about the shape of the earth is, debating about it is a good thing. No science is ever settled. The truth fears no investigation, and other clichés are applicable here.

 

Links:

The Flat Earth Conspiracy Debate! Yes, Really: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsOz_J6tJVU

Industrial Valve Expert: The ISS is a LIE – Flat Earth – SW25: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7m5QqdEuvec

200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5i_iDyUTCg

The Earth is Flat!: https://concordiaabchao.wordpress.com/2014/02/07/the-earth-is-flat/

Stefan Molyneux is a Prick: https://concordiaabchao.wordpress.com/2015/01/31/stefan-molyneux-is-a-prick/

The Truth about Stefan Molyneux: https://concordiaabchao.wordpress.com/2015/02/03/the-truth-about-stefan-molyneux/

Stefan Molyneux on 9/11: https://concordiaabchao.wordpress.com/2015/02/05/stefan-molyneux-on-911/