# Dr. Tom Bridgman Weighs in on Geocentrists Flunking the Lagrange Point Challenge

www.nasa.gov/solarium/

Physicist Tom Bridgman has written a lot of great material over the years critiquing geocentrism (you can access a summary of his material here.)  Over four years ago Dr. Bridgman issued the Lagrange point challenge in response to geocentrist Rick DeLano’s breezy claim that Geocentrism perfectly accounts for LaGrange points”. Although hardly shrinking violets when it comes to challenges, the geocentrists did not say boo about this for more than four years. Then earlier this year they strutted out with their answer, which turned out to be nothing more than a combination of basic math errors (in the part that they actually tried to do themselves) along with a more detailed Lagrange point derivation that was plagiarized wholesale from two other scientists (on the science/math blunders see here and here, on the outright plagiarism see here and here.)

Now, in a new article Geocentrism: Flunking the Lagrange Point Challenge, Bridgman weighs in with his own commentary on the failure of the new geocentrists to meet his challenge.

Some excerpts:

I commend Dr. MacAndrew for his analysis.  He exposed the flawed math in the first section, when Bouw tried to remap the physics into a rotating geocentric frame using the standard Newtonian analysis.  Compare Dr. Bouw’s math to that presented at Wikipedia: Centrifugal force (rotating reference frame).  Dr. MacAndrew identified a serious mathematical error in the section.  So far, there is NOTHING in this analysis that makes Earth a preferred frame in any absolute sense.

+++++++++++

If a student had been caught turning this in as part of a physics homework assignment, the instructor would certainly be justified in reporting the student for disciplinary action for plagiarism.

Additionally, there is NOTHING in this equation set that relies on the existence of an absolute fixed location, such as Earth (as the Geocentrists insist).  This analysis works with a ‘center’ as Earth (for the Earth-Moon Lagrange points), or the Sun (for Sun-Earth or Sun-any other planet Lagrange points).

+++++++++++

Sungenis invokes Mach & Einstein to bolster his poor position.  But Mach and Einstein expanded on Newton’s work,  which expanded the concept of no absolute spatial reference frame to include time as well, and that reference frames and ‘centers’ can be chosen for the convenience of solving the problem at hand.  The methodology defines NO absolute position.  I wrote more on Geocentrists invoking Mach at Geocentrism: Mach, ‘Aether Drag’ and Aberration.

+++++++++++

It is difficult to interpret Dr. Bouw’s ‘article’ as anything other than a document created to deceive.  Combined with Sungenis’ defense of it, they appear to document two violations of the Ten Commandments.:

1) Thou shalt not steal
2) Thou shalt not bear false witness

As Jesus noted in Matthew 7:15-23, his followers will be recognized by their actions more than their words.  Such explicit acts of deception are yet another reason I regard the Geocentrists and Young-Earth creationists as the ‘wolves’ which Jesus warned his followers about (see Creationist Junk Debunked).

## See the whole article: “Geocentrism: Flunking the Lagrange Point Challenge”

This entry was posted in Credibility, Science. Bookmark the permalink.