Pat Flannery wrote in message ...
[snip]
Remember the contortions that philosophers went through in an attempt to
make a geocentric cosmos work? Those would look simple compared to what
one would have to go through to make a moon-centered one work! You'd end
up with something with as many layers as a onion hooked together in
incredibly convoluted ways- the whole thing would be so complex to even
try that I'd bet that it never would be even seriously considered before
the correct sun-centered view arose.

Not only that, but don't forget the planet looming over
half the moon. It would be many times larger than the
full moon and would hang nearly motionless in the sky
(due to tidal locking). That sorta thing leads away
from a "my local spot is the center of the universe"
concept. And once you've demoted your own planetary
body from the center it's much easier to continue from
there, so even if you start thinking the planet is the
center of the universe you can more easily and
naturally move to a Sun centric model once you have
basic data. Compare, for example, the shift from
geocentric to heliocentric to the shift from
heliocentric to galactocentric etc. Plus, you can do
the kind of astronomy Kepler and Tycho did with your
bare eyes.