The parallax of nearby stars is the result of the Earth moving around the Sun. As far as I know, there is no reasonable alternative explanation for it.
Because of Ptolemy. This was a case of both secular and religious authorities forcing a theory (which was proven wrong in the ancient world) to be the received wisdom, due to a reluctance to accept new theories. It is taught to scientists nowadays as a warning, to always be on the watch that they do not grow so comfortable with a theory that they will struggle to defend it, even against overwhelming evidence to the contrary..
Yes of course it is. However some 'Hoax Believers' think its not and say that they have evidence against it. The Apollo 18 mission was not as "famous" as the previous moon landings. It sometimes happens that the HB (Hoax Believers) found some reliable evidence but NASA can Always turn it down with proof.
Aristarchus of Samos (c. 310 - c. 230 BC) was the first we know of (heliocentric is a greek word, not polish). He identified the "central fire" with the Sun, and put the other planets in their correct order of distance around the Sun.
Heliocentric
its against
Evidence, in a scientific context, is an observation that confirms, is consistent with, a falsifiable explanatory model. If a mathematical model is based on sound (consistent with observed reality) premises, and the results from this model are consistent with expectations based on the model under scrutiny, then it is true that the observation that the results are consistent is evidence for the model. If they're not consistent, then the statement that the observation of inconsistency is evidence for the model is false - although this does not necessarily imply that the observation of inconsistency is evidence against the model.No. Most of the theory for evolution comes from fieldwork and personal observation and not mathematical models.
Brahe believed in a geocentric worldview. In spite of his challenge against older ideas that the heavens were changeable, he opposed Copernican heliocentricism.
they went against the long accepted geocentric theory.
Geocentric theory was the first explanation of the solar system that completely explained and predicted the apparent motions of the planets. The church also embraced this theory and defended it against the heliocentric theory.
There are many arguments for and against DNA evidence. One argument is that it cannot be disproved as deciding evidence.
Evidence can prove, or disprove, the case against you.
under observation
Word against word, or testimonial evidence, can be considered in court but is generally weaker than other types of evidence such as physical evidence or documents. It can be challenging to determine credibility and reliability in a situation where it is one person's word against another. Additional evidence or corroboration may be necessary to support a case based solely on testimonial evidence.
"The evidence for evolution countervails over the arguments against it." THis means that evidence for evolution counteracts the arguments against it.
you should find more supporting evidence!
The Exclusionary Rule's purpose is to keep certain evidence from being used against you in a criminal trial. Police procedure in gathering evidence against you is heavily dictated by cases interpreting the Fourth Amendment. Evidence gathered in violation of your Constitutional rights is subject to the Exclusionary Rule.
Likes: Created Copernican Theory, proposed heliocentric theory, great astronomer Dislikes: Went against Church's theory, went against Bible's theory, disagreed with geocentric theory.