So apparently psych is a pseudoscience...

[Dark Jaguar]

In some of the "deeper" parts of the south, Christian schools actually teach geocentrism...

Now, let's be fair here. Ptolomy (that's how it's spelled right? I still don't know how it's pronounced as I've only read the name...) did come up with a model that accuratly explained what he managed to see at the time when he came up with that old geocentric model. It was hardly "wrong" based on the data he had available at the time. The thing about science is it always updates itself as new data comes around. Today's currently held theories may become tomorrow's outdated ones, but that hardly makes them stupid. Ptolomy did create a stepping stone that later fellows like Copernicus would build on using better observations. Keep in mind sometimes building requires tearing down some things :D.

So, geocentrism does have it's place in that it was a good mathematical model to explain the phenomenons they had observed at the time. However, later stuff showed that the only way to hold on to geocentrism was via extremely convoluted mathematical models. Later still, we would actually be able to go there, and as such the only way to hold onto it with that new perspective and the data from that is to assume very extreme and farfetched things, such as odd space/time warps occuring in space that don't occur on Earth that make light change paths. In the end though, you have to go with the most plausible model that works. It's too messy to go the convoluted route. Heck, someone long ago was of the mind that the universe was actually inside out, with the Earth curved the OTHER way, us INSIDE the sphere, with the sun at the center of the Earth and so on. Various mathematical models of all shapes and sizes were thought up and worked out to explain all manner of observations that might otherwise suggest a simpler model where outer space was on the outside and so were we, and they WORKED (to a degree, with such complicated models a lot can go wrong, and it did), but ya gotta go with the more plausible. After his death, lots of observations were made that really put the nails in that revised coffin, what with no one adding on more mathematical models to make all those observations work in an inside out universe. It's just best to go with the simpler explanation as the prefered one. THAT'S why occam's razor is an important guideline to keep in the back of your mind. Just remember, an explanation that could actually work is that our universe is a digital world maintained by computers in a "real" world above experimenting with virtual reality (where humans AREN'T some perpetual motion machine like in the Matrix), but is that all that plausible? Isn't that a bit much when our world being at the top is just a smarter way to go until we get evidence otherwise?

And there's the problem with those messed up schools trying to prove that geocentrism (or various other stuff) is better than "conventional" science. Sure you can struggle all over and actually make it work sometimes, but isn't it better to go with what seems a lot more likely, plausible, or simpler? If the universe seems to be telling us that (and this goes beyond heliocentrism, itself eventually being proven wrong, since as it turns out the sun isn't the center of the universe either) no frame of reference is absolute, and calculations done from any will yield correct answers, then why not just accept it until evidence shows something else to be a more accurate representation of reality?

So yeah, those schools are nuts...