"We stand on earth, therefore we must view the universe from a geocentric perspective."

I'm not so sure about this. Men have stood on the Moon, and now lived in low orbit for years now, and this perspective has been challenged. Although the vast majority of us are confined to the terrestrial biosphere those who have gone beyond can communicate their (often deeply profound) thoughts and observations and pass on this new outlook, the same way explorers have always done.

Also, I think art and science are two sides of the same coin ( I would I suppose, being a graphic artist in the day and a paleontological researcher the rest of the time). Both are concerned with our place in the universe, understanding what it means to be the universe made conscious. Discovery is a serendipitous process sometimes, although there will be a rational process that encourages chance findings. A good scientist will have a very active imagination, they too will favour creativity and whimsy as tools for interpretation and speculation. Think Stephen Hawking, a man whose imagination is broad, deep and essential to his science. Think Galileo and Copernicus, scientists who understood our geocentric view of the world was an age-old misunderstanding by a parochial people.

I see the geocentric view of the universe in the same way as I see the anthropocentric view of life on earth; an outdated concept that is part of our history but not part of our future. A distinction I would make however is that the sort of anthropocentric view of the world encouraged by the Bible is a dangerous idea and engenders the view we as a species were created above and separate to the rest of the world (or universe as is often the case these days); a concept that encourages the plunder of our natural resources and the ill-treatment of the beings we share our planet with.

As for the aesthetic value, no disagreement there :-)