Copernicus presented scientific evidence that he was correct. This guy does not.
My point is merely that Copernicus was correct, but his audience "knew" of a different "reality". There's no way we can tell if this is something similar.
...and we all know that reality is different than his "reality" shared by others with a thin grasp on existence.
One ("reality") can hit with a methaphorical bat, Star Trekkish pseudo-science, and the threat of eternal damnation. The other one (reality) will actually hit you with a bat, you'll hurt, you'll bleed, and then you'll cry.
Copernicus happened to hit reality when playing with the "reality" of his happy math equations. ("oooh the universe is perfect! circles are perfect! orbits must all be circles!!!111")