First, Todd Wood (an interesting YEC biologist) has a report from the "First Annual Catholic Conference on Geocentrism" (not that the Church government approves or is really happy with it).
In part 3, Wood references Galileo's letter, which I am reading with interest. Much fisking shall come of this!
I've also been reading up on the Coriolis force, which will make some heavy statements about geocentrism (specifically, the notion of a stationary Earth).
First, from part 2 of Wood's report:
"According to Wyatt, the whole universe 'rotates' around the earth every day, which is 'kinematically exactly the same' as earth rotation."This is correct, but brings us to the Coriolis force (also the Foucault Pendulum experiment).
The Coriolis force is best visualized by watching water flow down a drain (although Wikipedia claims the Coriolis force in this case is not the primary cause). Regardless, the force is real, and should be explained.
Now, it is correct (true) to say "the Earth is stationary and everything revolves around it". It is also true that "the Earth is rotating and revolving around the Sun". You can argue about which is "more pleasing" or "makes better intuitive sense". The fact is, the two systems are going to have their advantages, depending on circumstances.
However, the geocentrists would say that their system is the "one true frame" (representative of what is physically happening) - which is wrong according to relativity (I need to do a "Relativity, Causality, FTL - pick 2"). Relativity says that no one frame of reference is absolute (they are all "relative" to one another).
Ironically, many of those who want to use geocentric errors against creationists are also wrong! The heliocentric frame is not "the one true frame" either.