Saturday, September 13, 2014

Singleton's new year's cosmology hypothesis: A biblical understanding of the universe

      It's hard to know how to start a teaching.   I am about to reveal a new hypothesis of cosmology.  I have been studying science off and on for a large part of my life and I have been studying theology and philosophy as well for many years.  I can't report the many years that led me to this conclusion.  But I will work to provide a path.
  I will start with the mainstream assumption of the west; modernism, and move on to my cosmology.  I am not trained either as a scientist nor a mathematician.  But I have stolen from the best and attempt to reconcile the best research I could find with a scriptural worldview.  I regret too high a reliance on internet sources.  However I encourage the reader to check out the various sources; also there will be YouTube videos linked, which should be good for illustrating the material.  Should this article be compelling I hope to attract scientists who may help me develop this further into a theory and afterwards subject it to peer review, where the research will be more thoroughly publication based. I call it "New Year's" cosmology because the earth in it's descent acted much like the New Years Ball.  Also commonly the metallic ball is strapped which reminds one of the electromagnetic field.
  In constructing my worldview, I rejected the modern worldview because General Relativity and Big bang Theory are contradictory and lead to the irrational worldview of the holographic universe cosmology. I Show that a plasma/electric universe was a more consistent cosmology, if it had a christian worldview. I then constructed a mostly Geo-centric worldview with the electric universe as a basis. The emphasis on the North Star is the prediction that the earth "hangs" from the pole star through electromagnetic portals. That it was originally hung from  the constellation Draco.  I will address the nature of light and reveal the logical uncertainty in scaling the universe. This goes into a scenario of an electromagnetic explosion(magnetar, supernova, star quake etc) off setting a chain reaction which tilted the universe (which rotates around the earth). this would be the initiation of the flood, which I have as a combo of the hydro-plate theory and the Hovind theory.
I. A. The rejection of modernism
   Cosmology is overtly philosophical in nature.  While it provides empirical data from science; it focuses on interpretation.  Various cosmological models can be used in order to "fit the data".  As research grows older models can be reintroduced or modified to fit the data.
  I would classify modernism as a societal worldview which assumes humanity is socially evolving through the use primarily of science and other scholarship into a "brave new world".  History is seen as inferior to modern life and therefore is of little value other than knowing what not to do.  Science is interpreted through naturalism. ( though not all modernist are anti-supernatural, there are also Liberal Christians/other religions and New Agers)
 Brave New World by Aldous Huxley
  Evidence was they key to it's power.  However, it was unfaithful to it's bride.  Modernism does not rest upon absolute truth and therefore has no claim to absolute authority.  Logic is only true; because it is logical.  This is circular reasoning; which is a logical fallacy.  The evidence became less important than the appearance of evidence.  As applied to the Universe we assume a relative universe based upon the eternal speed of light.  But we only know the speed of reflected light, and that is showing itself to have been faster in the past.  As applied to the big bang theory we have ages that were never recorded.  We have fossils that never transitioned and laws of physics which were never tested outside of our solar system.  Our technology is in line with Greek philosophy/mathematics.    Modernism is fruit without a tree.  Yet if an apple falls from the Branch it will rot.
1 corinthians 2: 14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
 James 3:13 Who is a wise man and endued with knowledge among you? let him shew out of a good conversation his works with meekness of wisdom. 14 But if ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth. 15 This wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish. 16 For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work."
The modern world view is filled with envy, always ambitious for the future, yet forgetful of the past.  There is no foundation, only assault. 
The uncertainty principle)
"Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is one of the most important results of twentieth century physics. It relates to measurements of sub-atomic particles. Certain pairs of measurements such as (a) where a particle is and (b) where it is going (its position and momentum) cannot be precisely pinned down.[1]p96
Albert Einstein thought that such a quantum theory could give us only a partial description of nature.[1]p99 He thought that Heisenberg's discovery showed that human knowledge is limited, but he also thought that nature is absolute. That is, he thought that there is no "uncertainty" in nature, and that the uncertainty exists only in our knowledge about it. However, many other scientists disagree with Einstein."http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heisenberg%27s_uncertainty_principle
   If we are not absolutely certain of ourselves or the universe.  The what authority do we have?  The modernist will deny my authority of scripture.   But how can it be justified in this when they have no authority in which to rest?

The rejection  of materialism

The rejection of evolution)  It is popular today to assume that only Darwinism should be titled "evolution".  Yet evolution has been applied to the sciences across the board and still is today. Chemical evolution and stellar evolution of the cosmos from the big bang theory.
 chemical evolution "The formation of complex organic molecules from simpler inorganic molecules through chemical reactions in the oceans during the early
history of the Earth; the first step in the development of life on this planet. The period of chemical evolution lasted less than a billion years."http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/chemical+evolution
stellar evolution "noun 1.(astronomy) the sequence of changes that occurs in a star as it ages"
 http://dictionary.reference.com/stellar evolution
   A consistent naturalist cosmology depends on universal evolution.  Nothing must be capable of progressing to everything otherwise everything never began.  Without these origins, the world must be dependent upon religion and God.
    To be concise,  chemical evolution has never been proven especially abiogenesis.  Dead matter has never in and of itself turned into living tissue.  Living tissue always turns into dead tissue.
Stellar evolution which depends on theories of star formation, are in direct contradiction to Boyle's law.  Gas expands especially when heated.  There is no way that gas will naturally form stars.
Both of these theories are contradicted by the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
"The Second Law of thermodynamics is commonly known as the Law of Increased Entropy, while quantity remains the same (First Law), the quality of matter/energy deteriorates gradually over time."
the same (First Law), the quality of matter/energy deteriorates gradually over time. - See more at: http://www.allaboutscience.org/second-law-of-thermodynamics.htm#sthash.z4k5VDqZ.dpuf
is commonly known as the Law of Increased Entropy. While quantity remains the same (First Law), the quality of matter/energy deteriorates gradually over time - See more at: http://www.allaboutscience.org/second-law-of-thermodynamics.htm#sthash.z4k5VDqZ.dpuf
The Second Law of Thermodynamics is commonly known as the Law of Increased Entropy. While quantity remains the same (First Law), the quality of matter/energy deteriorates gradually over time. - See more at: http://www.allaboutscience.org/second-law-of-thermodynamics.htm#sthash.z4k5VDqZ.dpuf
The Second Law of Thermodynamics is commonly known as the Law of Increased Entropy. While quantity remains the same (First Law), the quality of matter/energy deteriorates gradually over time. - See more at: http://www.allaboutscience.org/second-law-of-thermodynamics.htm#sthash.z4k5VDqZ.dpuf
The Second Law of Thermodynamics is commonly known as the Law of Increased Entropy. While quantity remains the same (First Law), the quality of matter/energy deteriorates gradually over time. - See more at: http://www.allaboutscience.org/second-law-of-thermodynamics.htm#sthash.z4k5VDqZ.dpuf
The Second Law of Thermodynamics is commonly known as the Law of Increased Entropy. While quantity remains the same (First Law), the quality of matter/energy deteriorates gradually over time. - See more at: http://www.allaboutscience.org/second-law-of-thermodynamics.htm#sthash.z4k5VDqZ.dpuf
http://www.allaboutscience.org/second-law-of-thermodynamics.htm
   As a result of this, the premise of Big bang cosmology is refuted and rejected.  The subject of the big bang theory I covered in a previous article. http://biblesmack.blogspot.com/2013/05/what-heavens-declare.html
But one major point is the the speed of light has been decreasing.  Which implies that light was faster in the past.The rate of light speed is directly tied to the rate of radiation.
 http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/legacy-of-e-equals-mc2.html
 So If light speed was faster, then radioactive decay was faster.  Thus shrinking the age dating method of radioactive decay.  This would explain issues concerning radiometric dating of excessive ages.


B.The holographic universe
"We are all taught at school that the world is made of stuff of matter of mass of atoms.  Atoms make up molecules, molecules make up material.. everything's made of that.  But atoms actually are mostly empty.  For example if this ball[basketball] were the nucleus of an atom, a proton in a hydrogen atom for example, then the electron circling this which would describe outer limits of that atom would be out by that mountain over there roughly 20 miles away and everything in between is empty."
Dr. Stuart Hameroff   University of Arizona https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMBt_yfGKpU
Electrons do not always behave like matter
double slit experiment
The double-slit experiment or Young's experiment involves particle beams or coherent waves passing through two closely-spaced slits, after which in many circumstances they are found to interfere with each other.
In quantum mechanics the double-slit experiment demonstrates the inseparability of the wave and particle natures of light and other quantum particles (wave–particle duality). The setup used by Young, and by Newton, differs from the modern version; they passed a beam of light over a thin object such as a slip of card (in Young's case) or a hair (in Newton's case).[1][2] More recently a point light source illuminates a thin plate with two parallel slits, and the light passing through the slits strikes a screen behind them. The beams emerging from the two slits are coherent, in phase, as they are derived from the same source. The wave nature of light causes the coherent light waves passing through the two slits to interfere, creating a pattern of bright and dark bands on the screen. (However, at the screen the light is always found to be absorbed as though it were composed of discrete particles, photons.)[3][4]
Classical particles do not interfere with each other (they can collide, but that is quite different). If classical particles are fired in a straight line through one of a pair of slits they will all strike the screen in a pattern the same size and shape as the slit; if fired through the other slit the result will be similar. If both slits are opened simultaneously, the resulting pattern will simply be the sum of the two single-slit patterns. With light, although in many circumstances it behaves as particles (photons), it has been known for over two centuries that the pattern with two slits is not the sum of the separate patterns—this established the wave nature of light. The actual distribution of brightness can be explained by the alternately additive and subtractive interference of waves.[5]"
http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Double-slit_experiment.html
  So if atoms are filled with space and their borders are not even truly matter, then perhaps the universe is an illusory 2d hologram.
   At this point we have to ask the philosophical question of what reality is.  Is it an illusion?  or is it existing based upon a deeper reality?  Plato would argue an ideal world behind the real world.  Christianity would see God behind the real world. An illusion needs to be made by a real person because it is designed and designed to convince a person.  These observations of the frailness of reality point us to the need for the greater reality found in God.  Not in an irrational illusion.

C. The electric plasma universe
 Gen. 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day."
  So God created light on day one prior to the existence of sun, moon and stars.  what was the light which God created? Some argue His Glory.  but the Glory of God is eternal and uncreated.  I believe this light was plasma.
" A plasma is a hot ionized gas consisting of approximately equal numbers of positively charged ions and negatively charged electrons. The characteristics of plasmas are significantly different from those of ordinary neutral gases so that plasmas are considered a distinct "fourth state of matter." For example, because plasmas are made up of electrically charged particles, they are strongly influenced by electric and magnetic fields (see figure) while neutral gases are not. An example of such influence is the trapping of energetic charged particles along geomagnetic field lines to form the Van Allen radiation belts."http://pluto.space.swri.edu/image/glossary/plasma2.html
 "It is estimated that 99% of the matter in the observable universe is in the plasma state...hence the expression "plasma universe." (The phrase "observable universe" is an important qualifier: roughly 90% of the mass of the universe is thought to be contained in "dark matter," the composition and state of which are unknown.)"http://pluto.space.swri.edu/image/glossary/plasma2.html  Now if Dark matter is not observed then let's work with what we already have, which is a universe 99% plasma.
" The Electric Universe is a variant of Plasma Cosmology, and it is necessary to differentiate between the two. While they share more similarities than differences, it should be noted that EU ideas tend to go a step further than the generally more conservative approach of Plasma Cosmology."http://www.plasmacosmology.net/electric.html
"Hannes Alfvén from the 1960s to 1980s argued that plasma played an important if not dominant role in the universe because electromagnetic forces are far more important than gravity when acting on interplanetary and interstellar charged particles.[17]


  1. H. Alfvén and C.-G. Falthammar, Cosmic electrodynamics(2nd edition, Clarendon press, Oxford, 1963). "The basic reason why electromagnetic phenomena are so important in cosmical physics is that there exist celestial magnetic fields which affect the motion of charged particles in space ... The strength of the interplanetary magnetic field is of the order of 10-4 gauss (10 nanoteslas), which gives the [ratio of the magnetic force to the force of gravity] ≈ 107. This illustrates the enormous importance of interplanetary and interstellar magnetic fields, compared to gravitation, as long as the matter is ionized." (p.2-3)" wikipedia plasma cosmology


I thought it would be good to note Alfven's acheivements
"1942: Alfvén theorises the existence of electromagnetic-hydromagnetic waves in a paper published in Nature.[1]
  • 1949: Laboratory experiments by S. Lundquist produce such waves in magnetised mercury, with a velocity that approximated Alfvén's formula.[2]
  • 1949: Enrico Fermi uses Alfvén waves in his theory of cosmic rays. According to Alex Dressler in a 1970 Science journal article, Fermi had heard a lecture at the University of Chicago, Fermi nodded his head exclaiming "of course" and the next day, the physics world said "of course".[3]
  • 1950: Alfvén publishes the first edition of his book, Cosmical Electrodynamics, detailing hydromagnetic waves, and discussing their application to both laboratory and space plasmas.[4]
  • 1952: Additional confirmation appears in experiments by Winston Bostick and Morton Levine with ionized helium.[5]
  • 1954: Bo Lehnert produces Alfvén waves in liquid sodium.[6]
  • 1955: Eugene Parker suggests hydromagnetic waves in the interstellar medium.[7]
  • 1958: Berthold, Harris, and Hope detect Alfvén waves in the ionosphere after the Argus nuclear test, generated by the explosion, and travelling at speeds predicted by Alfvén formula.[8]
  • 1958: Eugene Parker suggests hydromagnetic waves in the Solar corona extending into the Solar wind.[9]
  • 1959: D. F. Jephcott produces Alfvén waves in a gas discharge.[10]
  • 1960: Coleman, et al, report the measurement of Alfvén waves by the magnetometer aboard the Pioneer and Explorer satellites.[11]
  • 1960: Sugiura suggests evidence of hydromagnetic waves in the Earth's magnetic field.[12]
  • 1970 Hannes Alfvén wins the 1970 Nobel Prize in physics for "for fundamental work and discoveries in magneto-hydrodynamics with fruitful applications in different parts of plasma physics".[13]
  • 1973: Eugene Parker suggests hydromagnetic waves in the intergalactic medium.[14]
  • 1974: Hollweg suggests the existence of Hydromagnetic waves in interplanetary space [15]
  • 1974: Ip and Mendis suggests the existence of Hydromagnetic waves in the coma of Comet Kohoutek.[16]"
    http://www.plasma-universe.com/Alfv%C3%A9n_wave

http://heritage.stsci.edu/2002/23/NGC4319/i0223cw.jpg

 What keeps the galaxies together?  How does the universe behave across vast distances? It would appear the electromagnetism explains more about this issue than gravity.
Nikola Tesla had similar thoughts..
"Tesla's dynamic theory of gravity attempted to formulate a theory relating gravity and electromagnetism, i.e. a unified field theory. No mathematical details of the theory are available as he died before publishing them, and Einstein's theory of General Relativity was by then already accepted.

The bulk of Tesla's research into the aether and electromagnetism was conducted between 1892 and 1894, when he was conducting experiments with high frequency and high potential electromagnetism and patenting devices for their utilisation. It was completed, according to Tesla, by the end of the 1930s. Tesla claimed that the theory provided an alternative to Einstein's general relativity, explaining gravity as a mix of transverse and longitudinal electromagnetic waves."
http://www.plasmacosmology.net/tesla.html
Job 38: 31 Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades,
or loose the bands of Orion?
32 Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season?
or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons?

Electric Stars
Are stars powered from within, or does the power come from elsewhere? This was the question asked by Sir Arthur Eddington in the 1920s. He settled for the former, and this laid the foundation for current mainstream models. Ralph Juergens asked the question again in the 1970s, and opted for the latter. According to Juergens, stars shine because they are connected to electric circuitry within galaxies. An electric star's brightness thus depends on the power of the electric current feeding it, not on the amount of nuclear fuel available to burn.
Stars thus behave as anodes in a galactic glow discharge. The many surface phenomena that can be seen on the Sun -- hot corona, sunspots, prominences, flares, et al -- can all be explained by an electric Sun, but are more difficult to understand from a nuclear point of view. Nuclear reactions take place on the surface, not in the core, perhaps explaining why neutrino numbers vary with sunspot cycles, and these reactions are almost certainly produced in the same way that we produce them in the lab -- by accelerating particles in an electric field.
Stars, galaxies, nebulae, and planets are all affected by electric currents in the plasma through which they move. If the appearance of a star is determined largely by its electrical environment, it follows that it can change relatively quickly!
"The modern astrophysical concept that ascribes the sun's energy to thermonuclear reactions deep in the solar interior is contradicted by nearly every observable aspect of the sun." Ralph E. Juergens (1980)"
 http://www.plasmacosmology.net/electric.html

Job 38:when the morning stars sang together,
and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" 

Could this be the source of cosmic background radiation?
"Microwaves are electromagnetic rays with a frequency range of 0.3 GHz to 300 Ghz. They are found between the radio waves and the infrared waves in the electromagnetic spectrum. Microwave radiation is the radiating wave movement in which microwave energy travels."http://www.wisegeek.org/what-is-microwave-radiation.htm

Are black holes real?
"actually there's very good strong evidence that goes back nearly a half a century now where we can see evidence of black holes, we can not see black holes themselves but we can see the effect of gravity of the black holes have on the material around them, things spiraling on down into them." http://creationastronomynow.com/interview-with-d-faulkner/    clip: 10:45-11:10
 Couldn't these issues be resolved more clearly with a plasma/electric understanding of the universe?   Gravity has to deal with mass and we can't measure that; since we can't even observe it.

What about Quasars?

 "The twinkles in our night sky are far more complex than we can discern with the naked eye. To get a more 3-dimensional understanding of the view from earth, the Sloan Digital Sky Survey, started several years ago, gathers and integrates massive amounts of telescopic data. (For Star Trek enthusiasts, picture the “Astrometrics Lab” on Voyager to get some idea of what this survey entails.) The project has cataloged the relative locations of thousands of galaxies and quasars. Now the survey has discovered the biggest known cluster of quasars ever found. The problem is, the cluster—known as the Huge-Large Quasar Group (Huge-LQG)—is too big to be accommodated within the assumptions underlying the big bang theory."
“This discovery was very much a surprise, since it does break the cosmological record as the largest structure in the known universe,” said study leader Roger Clowes of England’s University of Central Lancashire. Currently, the conventionally accepted cosmological model demands that nothing larger than 1.2 billion light years can exist. This far distant cluster of quasars is nearly 4 billion light years in diameter."https://answersingenesis.org/big-bang/sky-survey-discovers-big-bang-defying-quasar-cluster/

 "In the Electric Universe, quasars are plasmoids ejected, usually along the spin axis, from a plasma focus mechanism in a galaxy’s nucleus. A face-on disk means that we are looking ‘down the barrel.’ An ejected quasar would appear projected against the galaxy’s core. It would be interesting to obtain a spectrum of the tails apart from the central quasars to see if they have a lower redshift. If they do, this would be another instance of a higher-redshift quasar in front of a lower-redshift galaxy." http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2010/arch10/100212massive.htm
   Now traditionally plasma cosmologists have argued for an infinite universe, much like steady state theorist before them.  But the problem goes back to the 2nd law of thermodynamics.  The universe is breaking down.  This makes it temporal.  Where did all the energy come from to make the plasma universe?  Where did the intelligence come from to design the plasma universe?
 Also studies have shown that the earth's electromagnetic field is decreasing.  If we look back in time we would find the field increasing.  So much so that 20,000 years ago the earth would have been melted. (discussed further down paper)
If we consider this with the rest of the universe, the gravity of these questions becomes exponential.
Where did all the energy come from to make the plasma universe?  Where did the intelligence come from to design the plasma universe?

D. God's place beyond the universe.
  God the Father transcends the universe, He is outside of Space and time.  That being the case, God is larger than all things and greater in every proportion to all things.  The Greeks devised an idea describing this known as "the plenum"[the condition or quality of being full; the opposite of vacuum].  God created the World through the Word/logos which is the divinity of Christ.   colossians 1:15 who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 16 for by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17 and he is before all things, and by him all things consist."
 John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not."
 psalm 33: By the word of the Lord were the heavens made;
and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth."
Isaiah 45: For thus saith the Lord that created the heavens;
God himself that formed the earth and made it;
he hath established it,
he created it not in vain,
he formed it to be inhabited:
I am the Lord; and there is none else."

   So if our universe ultimately boils down to energy or vibrations, and it is ultimately guided electromagnetic currents who is supplying this energy? Who is guiding every step of the process?
   It is Adonai Jehovah,  my Lord Jesus Christ.
1 timothy 1: 17 Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.



God's Light Of Hope
1 timothy 6:15 which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; 16 who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.

Job 26:He stretcheth out the north over the empty place,
and hangeth the earth upon nothing.
He bindeth up the waters in his thick clouds;
and the cloud is not rent under them.
He holdeth back the face of his throne,
and spreadeth his cloud upon it.
10 He hath compassed the waters with bounds,
until the day and night come to an end.
11 The pillars of heaven tremble
and are astonished at his reproof.
12 He divideth the sea with his power,
and by his understanding he smiteth through the proud.
13 By his spirit he hath garnished the heavens;
his hand hath formed the crooked serpent.
14 Lo, these are parts of his ways:
but how little a portion is heard of him?
but the thunder of his power who can understand?

II. A. biblical cosmology
hypothesis:
A. The North Star is currently in the center of the known universe.
  Now in arguing this point.  I must make it clear that I am not arguing for the "absolute center".  While I believe that there is such a thing.  We have no way of knowing how to locate it so long as we can not locate the edges. I would argue that the earth and Polaris are at the horizontal center the universe if not extremely close to it.
Job 26: He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing."
  Here Job is describe God's miraculous creation.  In discussing  the "empty place" and "nothing"  we see Job describing outer space.  This verse is powerful, proving revelation; because the pagans would not have the earth hanging in outer space, but standing on some thing.  However another implication which we can notice is the fact that the earth is hanging.  What is it hanging from? 
  "Once east and west are established, say, by the risings and settings of celestial objects, it is a simple matter to go halfway between them and call one direction north and it's opposite south. North has a special meaning, though, because we see the earths rotation reflected in the sky.  In the Northern Hemisphere it looks as though the whole sky is spinning around a single point.  The point is called the "north celestial pole,"  and it is just a direction in space, now roughly toward the star Polaris, toward which the earth's rotation axis points."
If one travels far enough  north to stand on the earth's north pole, the sky's noth pole will be directly overhead." pg.2 In search of Ancient Astronomies Dr. E.C. Krupp 
As it turns out, Polaris is triune

"Polaris is located at a distance of 434 light-years from Earth and has luminosity nearly 4,000 times that of our sun. Polaris shines at 2nd magnitude. On this astronomers’ scale, smaller numbers represent brighter objects, with the brightest
stars and planets in the night sky at around magnitude zero or even negative magnitudes.
The North Star it is a “pulsing” star, a Cepheid variable, which appears to vary in brightness ever so slightly – only one tenth of a magnitude – over a time frame of just under four days.
If you have a small telescope and train it on Polaris, you just might notice a tiny companion star (called Polaris B) shining at 9th magnitude with a pale bluish tint. This companion was first sighted by Sir William Herschel in 1780 (just a year later, Herschel would discover the planet Uranus).  Astronomers believe that the two stars – A and B – are separated by about 2,400 astronomical units – one astronomical unit (a.u.) being the average distance of the sun to the Earth.  The orbital period of the two stars may number in the many thousands of years.
In 1929, by studying the spectrum of Polaris, a third companion star (Polaris C) was discovered.  This one, a white dwarf, lies only 18.5 a.u. from Polaris A (about the same distance of the planet Uranus from our sun).  Its extreme closeness to the far more brilliant Polaris A explains why it went unseen for so long.Polaris Physical Facts  http://www.space.com/15567-north-star-polaris.html

   Now Most of human history records Polaris as directly in line with the earths axis.  Yet it was not always so.
" In 3000 BC, the faint star Thuban in the constellation Draco was the North Star. At magnitude 3.67 (fourth magnitude) it is only one-fifth as bright as Polaris, and today it is invisible in light-polluted urban skies."  wiki ibid

 ZoPamphPic.bmp - 368118 Bytes
   Many have argued that the Zodiac constellations were originally arranged in an order to give a hieroglyphic gospel presentation.  The fact that the pole star was once in the constellation Draco may be a sign which illustrates the fall of Lucifer.
Genesis 3:15 and I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel."
   In the illustration you may nottice the constellation Draco trampled on the head by the constellation Hercules.  Hercules in Greek mythology was the son of god.
Ezekiel28:14a Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth;"
  If Draco is symbolic of Lucifer,  then we must remember that Draco would exhibit those traits.   Traditional Hebrew understanding has God seated above the earth.
 Isaiah 66:1a Thus saith the Lord,
The heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool:"  
Job 26:9 He holdeth back the face of his throne,
and spreadeth his cloud upon it.
:  So it is no surprise that the covering cherub was symbolically located due north.
Isaiah 14:How art thou fallen from heaven,O Lucifer, son of the morning!"
   This was during the period near the Flood, we have seen the axis slowly shift to polaris. Could this be analogous to the fall of lucifer?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pole_star
   The earth was probably Electromagnetically connected to the entire zodiac before the flood.The zodiac constellations were called the "Mazzaroth".
Job 38: 32 Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season?
or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons?
   It is obvious that God would rotate "bring forth" the zodiac seasonally. As we look at creation.  We can see global canopy around the earth and a parallel canopy around the universe.

Gen. 1:And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day."
     Firmament means "expanse".  God made waters which separated waters in the sky(canopy) from waters in the sea.

Gen. 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: 15 and let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so."
   The stars and sun and moon are inside the firmament, which is the celestial heaven.  So there is more than one heaven.
Genesis 2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them."  The canopy is proven because there was originally one heaven.
Genesis 1:In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 
  Even today we have an "ozone layer" separating the firmaments.

"The name stella polaris has been given to α Ursae Minoris since at least the 16th century, even though at that time it was still several degrees away from the celestial pole. Gemma Frisius determined this distance as 3°7' in the year 1547.[4]
The precession of the equinoxes takes about 25,770 years to complete a cycle. Polaris' mean position (taking account of precession and proper motion) will reach a maximum declination of +89°32'23", so 1657" or 0.4603° from the celestial north pole, in February 2102. Its maximum apparent declination (taking account of nutation and aberration) will be +89°32'50.62", so 1629" or 0.4526° from the celestial north pole, on 24 March 2100.[5]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pole_star
Assuming a young earth model Polaris has a more sturdy place.



"Ursa Minor is commonly visualized as a baby bear with an unusually long tail.
Ursa Minor and Ursa Major were related by the Greeks to the myth of Callisto and Arcas. However, in a variant of the story, in which it is Boötes that represents Arcas, Ursa Minor represents a dog. This is the older tradition, which sensibly explains both the length of the tail and the obsolete alternate name of Cynosura (the dog's tail) for Polaris, the North Star.[2]
Previously, Ursa Minor was considered just seven close stars, mythologically regarded as sisters. In early Greek mythology, the seven stars of the Little Dipper were the Hesperides, daughters of Atlas. Together with the nearby constellations of Boötes, Ursa Major, and Draco, it may have formed the origin of the myth of the apples of the Hesperides,[3] which forms part of the Labours of Hercules.[original research?] Ursa Minor with its modern associations was invented by Thales of Miletus in approximately 600 BCE, from what had previously represented the wings of Draco, the Dragon. He did so out of a desire to commemorate the location of the North Celestial Pole, then near Beta and Gamma Ursae Minoris.[4]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ursa_Minor
  We see an early time period where Ursa minor was incorporate into draco.
Revelation 12 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him."
 Here Draco could be interpreted the serpent in Eden prior to the fall.  Consequently Ursa minor may have used to represent the serpent before the curse.

Revelation 12:4aAnd his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth:"
" A starquake is an astrophysical phenomenon that occurs when the crust of a neutron star undergoes a sudden adjustment, analogous to an earthquake on Earth. A paper published in 2003 in Scientific American by Kouveliotou, Duncan & Thompson[6] suggests these starquakes to be the source of the giant gamma ray flares that are produced approximately once per decade from soft gamma repeaters. Starquakes are thought to result from two different mechanisms. One is the huge stresses exerted on the surface of the neutron star produced by twists in the ultra-strong interior magnetic fields. A second cause is a result of spindown. As the neutron star loses angular velocity due to frame-dragging and by the bleeding off of energy due to it being a rotating magnetic dipole, the crust develops an enormous amount of stress. Once that exceeds a certain amount, the shape adjusts itself to a shape closer to non-rotating equilibrium: a perfect sphere. The actual change is believed to be on the order of micrometers or less, and occurs in less than a millionth of a second."
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quake_%28natural_phenomenon%29#Starquake

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetar
 A magnetar is a type of neutron star with an extremely powerful magnetic field. The magnetic field decay powers the emission of high-energy electromagnetic radiation, particularly X-rays and gamma rays.[1] The theory regarding these objects was proposed by Robert Duncan and Christopher Thompson in 1992, but the first recorded burst of gamma rays thought to have been from a magnetar had been detected on March 5, 1979.[2] During the following decade, the magnetar hypothesis has become widely accepted as a likely explanation for soft gamma repeaters (SGRs) and anomalous X-ray pulsars (AXPs).
A recent progress in theory suggests that the energy deposition from these magnetars into the expanding supernova remnant could possibly explain some observed cases of unusually bright supernovae. Traditionally such bright events are thought to come from very large stars when they become pair-instability supernova (or pulsational pair-instability supernova). However, two papers[3][4] published in 2010 by astrophysicists at the University of California Berkeley, Santa Cruz and Santa Barbara provided semi-analytical and numerical models to explain some of the brightest events ever seen, such as SN 2005ap and SN 2008es. A research led by Matt Nicholl, of the Astrophysics Research Centre at Queen's School of Mathematics and Physics of Queen's University Belfast, the results of which were published on October 17, 2013 in Nature, has explained the newly discovered luminous transient PTF 12dam through the same mechanism.[5][6]

Job 9: Which commandeth the sun, and it riseth not; and sealeth up the stars."
Could the stars being sealed up be referring to the earth loosing it's place maintianed through electro magnetic portals?
 Job 9: Which shaketh the earth out of her place, and the pillars thereof tremble."
Perhaps a magnetar, or another electromagnetic anomaly struck the earth to it's core.





  Yet now, we have come to a reality where the North star Polaris is indeed located stationary above the axis year round. When people take a year long still photographs of the sky they see that all of the stars rotate around polaris, the north Star.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JycjBy68RSg
  If we were to go on strict observation it would appear from the earth's point of view that space rotates around the earth with the exception of Polaris.
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5472/10668557196_ac4486fbb1_z.jpg

B. The Boundaries of the known universe are currently unfathomable
Job 9: 10 Which doeth great things past finding out; yea, and wonders without number."
    I.  We never know if there is more space and stars we have not recorded.
   The distances of stars and galaxies are at such a length even if they are close, they are well beyond that discovery of the natural man.  Barring supernatural abilities we will never escape the solar system, much less, the universe in our lifetimes.
Genesis 15: And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be."
    II.  The curvature of space allows that stars could be much more closer to us directly, only that the light we observe is winded around us.
 http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=649
When we use our ultra powerful telescopes and look at stars light years away.  The vast distances determine that we are not looking in a straight line, especially if these stars are moving.  Therefore by the time they get that far out the stars in question could be quite closer.  only the line of sight has circled the universe in detecting the object.
 

  This little pond is nicknamed "The Blue Hole" at Lost River Cave in Bowling Green KY..  Ripley's "Believe it or not" recognized it as the shortest and deepest river in the world. It was once thought to be a pond.  But attempts to measure it gave  more and more extreme results.
"For over a century, one of the blue holes at Lost River Cave and Valley was thought to be bottomless.  It was later asserted that the hole has a depth of 437 feet, leading to Ripley’s Believe It or Not’s claim that Lost River is “the shortest and deepest river in the world”. Modern technology deems it to be only 15 feet.  It seems the strong current pulled the measuring ropes down and under."
 http://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC2E3FB_lost-river-cave-and-valley-earthcache
   So what was assumed to be a straight measurement, was in fact warped, because an underground river sucked the line sideways..  When observe such vast distances this can happen in space as well.

    III.   The speed of light was originally faster
"Measurements of the speed of light have been made for the past three hundred years which could potentially provide the required empirical basis. Norman and Setterfield tabulate the results of 163 speed of light determinations in The Atomic Constants, Light, and Time, and claim clear support for the decay of c hypothesis from this data set." Gerald A. Aardsma, P.H.D..http://www.icr.org/article/has-speed-light-decayed/
  This is devastating to relativity theory, as discussed earlier.  Without this constant the uncertainty principle does not stop because of the human mind alone.  But matter not achieving objectivity.
    IV.  We have yet to truly measure the one-way speed of light.
"A less-well-known aspect of Einstein’s physics is that the speed of light in one direction cannot be objectively measured, and so it must be stipulated (agreed upon by convention). This stands in contrast to the round-trip speed of light, which is always constant.
For example, if light travels from A to B and then back to A, it will always take the same amount of time to make the trip (because its speed is always the same), and that time is objectively measurable. However, the time it takes to go just from A to B, or just from B to A is not objectively measurable. So the speed of light in one direction must be stipulated. 
 The reason that the one-way speed of light cannot be objectively measured is that you need a way to synchronize two clocks separated by a distance. But in order to synchronize two clocks separated by some distance, you have to already know the one-way speed of light. So it cannot be done without circular reasoning.
We need to have a way of synchronizing clocks to know the one-way speed of light. But we need to know the one-way speed of light in order to synchronize clocks. Einstein was well aware of this dilemma. He said, “It would thus appear as though we were moving here in a logical circle.”2
Einstein’s resolution to this dilemma was to suggest that the one-way speed of light is not actually a property of nature but is instead a convention—something that we may choose! For the sake of simplicity, many physicists choose to regard the speed of light as being the same in all directions.
However, any other choice is also acceptable, so long as the round-trip speed is 186,000 miles per second. Einstein said that light’s one-way speed “is in reality neither a supposition nor a hypothesis about the physical nature of light, but a stipulation which I can make of my own freewill in order to arrive at a definition of simultaneity.”Dr. Jason Lisle
    V. Our ways of measuring light contradict themselves
"The new study by astronomers in Canada, Ukraine and Belgium confirmed the closer distance using new high-resolution observations of the star's light spectrum."
 "Scientists studying the North Star Polaris found that it is about 323 light-years from the sun and Earth, substantially closer than a previous estimate of 434 light-years by a European satellite in the late 1990s." " One light-year is the distance light travels in a single year, about 6 trillion miles (10 trillion kilometers)."
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/50031629/ns/technology_and_science-space/t/north-star-much-closer-earth-previously-thought/
"Scientists working with the Hipparcos satellite measured Polaris's distance by taking its trigonometric parallax; that is, how, over a period of months or years, the star moves across our line of sight in relation to other objects in the sky. Polaris, the team calculated, was 434 light-years away."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/20/north-star-distance-earth_n_2513621.html

So how can we be absolutely certain of the scale of the universe?
"How do astronomers measure the distances to galaxies?

Astronomers measure the distance to a galaxy in the same way we estimate the distance to an oncoming car by the brightness of its headlights. We know from experience how much light a car's headlights emits, so we can determine how far away the car is.
To measure the distance to a galaxy, we try to find stars in that galaxy whose absolute light output we can measure. We can then determine how far away the galaxy is by observing the brightness of the stars. Such stars can help us measure the distance to galaxies 300 million light years away.
If a galaxy is too far away for us to distinguish individual stars, astronomers can use supernovae in the same manner, because the light output of supernovae at their peak brightness is a known fact. Supernovae can be used to measure the distance to galaxies as far as 10 billion light years away."http://hubblesite.org/reference_desk/faq/answer.php.id=45&cat=galaxies
      So how can scientist be sure of the distance of galaxies when they deny the same method for measuring stars close up?



VI.  Is the universe really expanding?
"Looking at the angular sizes of galaxies as a function of redshift, the static universe model provides a better fit than the standard model and with the least number of assumptions. However, by suitably choosing, ad hoc, evolution in size of galaxies as a function of redshift (by orders of magnitude more than any observation), the standard model can be saved. In fact, this argument is usually turned around. The big bang model is assumed to be correct, and hence galaxies must have evolved in size over cosmic time by mergers and thus it becomes only a ‘research problem’ to find how this happened.
Taking together all the evidences presented here in parts 1 and 2 (see table 1), in my opinion, it is impossible to conclude either way whether the universe is expanding or static. The evidence is equivocal.31 It would seem that cosmology is far from a precision science, and there is still a lot more work that needs to be done to resolve the apparently contradictory evidence."http://creation.com/expanding-universe-2 Dr. John Gideon Hartnett
  If the universe is not expanding then there was no big bang.  Then the theological problem of starlight and time disappears.
"The researchers who described those nearby big black hole galaxies also identified similar-looking galaxies in distant space. But according to the Big Bang, faraway (and long ago) galaxies are supposed to look less evolved, and nearby (and recent) ones are supposed to look more mature. Instead, these and other galaxies look similar throughout space. If the universe is 13.7 billion years old, then why is there no evolutionary progression of stars and galaxies, and why do binary stars that require twice the length of time still shine in the night sky?"http://www.icr.org/article/7200/ 
Brian Thomas M.S.
VII.   The Hubble telescope is not perfectly objective.
"There are no "natural color" cameras aboard the Hubble and never have been. The optical cameras on board have all been digital CCD cameras, which take images as grayscale pixels.
Sometimes the color is as natural as possible. However, the color given to the images is not just "artistic embellishment." The images are, indeed, downloaded as black and white, and color is added for a number of different reasons – for example, to show the dispersion detail of chemical elements and highlight features so subdued that the human eye cannot see them."http://hubblesite.org/reference_desk/faq/answer.php.id=93&cat=topten
  There have been some who argued that the mirrors on the Hubble may effect the imaging.   But I will give NASA the benefit of the doubt.  However, it should be understood that these images are far less defined in reality,  that these are digitized images with a lot of guess work.


I was fortunate enough to capture this picture some time ago.  Before I grabbed my camera the glare was even brighter.  Looking straight forward One could assume that they were seeing the sun behind a cloud.  if it were not that the sun were on the right hand corner.  It is easy to get distracted by an illusion.   If we are looking out into the farthest reaches of space; Is it possible that we may confuse a star or galaxy with a reflection?


VIII. This leads to the philosophical problem with empiricism concerning space.
"Whether this answer is satisfactory or not depends on the empirical account of how we can recognize space.
  "Do we see space?  Do we hear space?  Do we smell space?  Not only is this impossible, but even when  we see a single object in space, we cannot see the distance between it and us.  We judge distances by comparing known objects.  Since we have previously seen and touched a particular table, and thus know it's size at close range, we can judge how far away we are when it appears half it's previous size.  Or, we can judge that a house down the road is a mile away because on other occasions we have walked the distance.  Space and distance therefore are matters of judgement and comparison, not of simple sensation."pg.58 Religion, Reason and Revelation Gordon Clark
   Now we have been to the moon on a couple rare occasions.  We have sent a satellite past Neptune; and a rover on mars.  Everything else is speculation of 2 dimensional objects.
Using trigonometry and mathematics can work, but is ultimately flawed as it relates to certainty.
What is 2+2+x? 
2+2=4.  But what of x?  If there is an undetermined variable the entire equation depends upon it.
perhaps it is 2 or -100 or 1,000,000,000,000.  the margin for error is extreme.

"NGC 7603 has been described as "the most impressive case of a system of anomalous redshifts discovered so far", see the paper astro-ph/0401147 for a comprehensive description which is summarized here. The configuration and redshifts are as mapped on the right: two galaxies of different redshifts, connected by a luminous bridge,and where the bridge connects to each galaxy -- precisely exactly at each of the two points -- there is a higher-redshift object. By virtue of the luminous bridge and the perfect positions of the two faint objects, it is highly likely that these four objects are physically linked and sharing the same space -- standard cosmological model or no.
The point is that any scientific claim must be falsifiable. To hold that redshift is an absolute indicator of distance must be to allow standards of evidence which will overturn that position. NGC 7603 is evidence which meets that standard, and if it is not sufficient to overturn the standard model all on its own, it is strong enough to require addressing by the proponents of the standard model."
http://quasars.org/ngc7603.htm
   According to our understanding of red shift these galaxies should not be connected, even though they are!
Another possibility has to do with the size of these stars galaxies and quasars.  If we have the distance wrong perhaps we have the size wrong as well.  Could these anomolies be microscopic pics more than telescopic pics?

hdf
 http://petapixel.com/2013/06/06/a-mind-bending-look-at-the-hubble-ultra-deep-field-photo-of-the-universe/
Remember this "deep field" photo was previously black.  As discussed earlier the colors are all added.  Is it really impossible that this could be radioactive cosmic dust? Or perhaps the ionized particles of the electronic universe?
C. The earth was stationary
psalm 19: Their line is gone out through all the earth,
and their words to the end of the world.
In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun,
which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber,
and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race.
His going forth is from the end of the heaven,
and his circuit unto the ends of it:
and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.
Joshua 10:
12 Then spake Joshua to the Lord in the day when the Lord delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon. 13 And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day. 14 And there was no day like that before it or after it, that the Lord hearkened unto the voice of a man: for the Lord fought for Israel.
   When God created the earth, there was no sun to revolve around, that would not be made for days.  When we look at scripture we don't really find a place where the earth revolves around the sun.  It has been natural over the years to seek explanations in the form of trying to get the scriptures conform to prevailing thought.  Heliocentricity is a fundamental presupposition to the western modern world.  Though "modern" it is an ancient 500 year old tradition.  But in man's science and logic there are no absolutes. Theories ought to be retested.  So does heliocentricity still remove all doubt?
 
 One need not view the existence of such centrifugal forces as originating from the motion of K’ [ e.g., the Earth]; one could just as well account for them as resulting from the average rotational effect of distant, detectable masses as evidenced in the vicinity of K’, whereby K’ is treated as being at rest.” --Albert Einstein, quoted in Hans Thirring, “On the Effect of Distant Rotating Masses in Einstein’s Theory of Gravitation”, Physikalische Zeitschrift 22, 29, 1921
     Here Albert Einstein admits that it is possible to account for motions in space through a Geo-centric worldview.  Obviously he is using technical language to to speak of such things.
"Today we cannot say that the copernican theory is "right" and the ptolemaic theory is "wrong" in any meaningful sense.  The two theories which improved by adding terms involving the square of higher powers of the eccentricities of the planetary orbits, are physically equivalent to one another."  Sir Fred Hoyle Scientific American March 1995 p. 47 also pg.88, "Nicholas Copernicus", harper and Row, publishers 1973
 http://www.geocentricity.com/conference/Frank/epicycle_conference_bible_2_final.pdf

"Although in the nineteenth century this argument was believed to be a satisfactory justification of the heliocentric theory, one found causes for disquiet if one looked into it a little more carefully. When we seek to improve on the accuracy of calculation by including mutual gravitational interactions between planets, we find – again in order to calculate correctly – that the center of the solar system must be placed at an abstract point known as the “center of mass,” which is displaced quite appreciably from the center of the Sun. And if we imagine a star to pass moderately close to the solar system, in order to calculate the perturbing effect correctly, again using the inverse-square rule, it could be essential to use a “center of mass” which included the star. The “center” in this case would lie even farther away from the center of the Sun. It appears, then, that the “center” to be used for any set of bodies depends on the way in which the local system is considered to be isolated from the universe as a whole. If a new body is added to the set from outside, or if a body is taken away, the “center” changes" (Fred Hoyle, Nicolaus Copernicus, 1973, p. 85.)
  As we look at these 2 quotes from legendary astronomer Fred Hoyle.  it is obvious that helio-centrism is a debate which is quite relative and subjective.  It seems obvious that the earth's rotation around the sun is not an objective fact as the entire Western World has been indoctrinated to believe.

If one rotates the shell *relative to the fixed stars* about an axis going through its center, a Coriolis force arises in the interior of the shell, *that is, the plane of a Foucault pendulum is dragged around*”--Albert Einstein, cited in “Gravitation”, Misner Thorne and Wheeler pp. 544-545.
  The famous evidence from the Foucault pendulum is dismissed in the eyes of Einstein as well.

I have come to believe that the motion of the Earth cannot be detected by any optical experiment.”--Albert Einstein, Speech titled: “How I Created the Theory of Relativity,” delivered at Kyoto University, Japan, Dec. 14, 1922, as cited in Physics Today, August, 1982.
    Here Einstein admits that there is no visual evidence of helio-centrism.  

 "Now at first sight, all this evidence that the universe looks the same whichever direction we look in might seem to suggest there is something special about our place in the universe. In particular, it might seem that if we observe all other galaxies to be moving away from us, then we must be at the center of the universe. There is, however, an alternate explanation: the universe might look the same in every direction as seen from any other galaxy too. This, as we have seen, was Friedmann’s second assumption. We have no scientific evidence for, or against, this assumption. We believe it only on grounds of modesty: it would be most remarkable if the universe looked the same in every direction around us, but not around other points in the universe!"-- Hawking, "A Brief History of Time", Chapter 3
   So now we come to Stephen Hawking who concedes that the solar system appears to be the center of the universe,  but that interjects a philosophical bias.  He knows that if the earth was in a special place in our universe it would mean that God design the earth with a special purpose.  The only reason Hawking rejects Geo-centrism is philosophical bias.Worse yet, southern hospitality!  Would it feel weird
    I found the demonstrations of  British engineer Malcolm Bowden to be particularly compelling on his youtube channel.
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUdaTH3T3Ok&list=UUiv63m1s0IBX5KsGhJD6JDg
   I.  The michelson-morrely experiment
"The Michelson-Morley experiment was an attempt to measure the motion of the Earth through the luminous ether. Though often called the Michelson-Morley experiment, the phrase actually refers to a series of experiments carried out by Albert Michelson in 1881 and then again (with better equipment) at Case Western University in 1887 along with chemist Edward Morley. Though the ultimate result was negative, the experiment key in that it opened the door for an alternative explanation for the strange wave-like behavior of light. 
How it was supposed to work
By the end of the 1800s, the dominant theory of how light worked was that it was a wave of electromagnetic energy, because of experiments such as Young's double slit experiment.
The problem is that a wave had to move through some sort of medium ... something has to be there to do the waving. Light was known to travel through outer space (which scientists believed was a vacuum) and you could even create a vacuum chamber and shine a light through it, so all of the evidence made it clear that light could move through a region without any air or other matter.
To get around this problem, physicists hypothesized that there was a substance which filled the entire universe. They called this substance the luminous ether (or sometimes luminiferous aether, though it seems like this is just kind of throwing in pretentious-sounding syllables and vowels).
Michelson and Morley (probably mostly Michelson) came up with the idea that you should be able to measure the motion of the Earth through the ether. The ether was typically believed to be unmoving and static (except, of course, for the vibration), but the Earth was moving quickly.
 Think about when you hang your hand out of the car window on a drive. Even if it's not windy, your own motion makes it seem windy. The same should be true for the ether. Even if it stood still, since the Earth moves, then light that goes in one direction should be moving faster along with the ether than light that goes in an opposite direction. Either way, so long as there was some sort of motion between the ether and the Earth, it should have created an effective "ether wind" that would have either pushed or hindered the motion of the light wave, similar to how a swimmer moves faster or slower depending on whether he is moving along with or against the current.
To test this hypothesis, Michelson and Morley (again, mostly Michelson) designed a device that split a beam of light and bounced it off mirrors so that it moved in different directions and finally hit the same target. The principle at work was that if two beams traveled the same distance along different paths through the ether, they should move at different speeds and therefore when they hit the final target screen those light beams would be slightly out of phase with each other, which would create a recognizable interference pattern. This device therefore came to be known as the Michelson interferometer (shown in the graphic at the top of this page)." http://physics.about.com/od/relativisticmechanics/f/MichelsonMorleyExperiment.htm
   II. Airy's failure experiment
 http://youtu.be/87M2i61N1cU?list=UUiv63m1s0IBX5KsGhJD6JDg
" Airy's "Failure" was that to observe a particular star he did NOT have to increase the tilt of his telescope when he filled it with water. This animation demonstrates what happens, proves that the Earth is stationary and therefore at the centre of the universe - as the Bible maintains."
This experiment proved that the stars were moving instead of the earth.
   III. Michelson-Gale experiment
In 1904, Albert Michelson conceived of an experiment to detect the relative motion of the earth and the ether [1]. His primary goal was to design an experiment to determine if light is entrained by the rotation of the earth, in other words, does a preferred frame of reference for light rotate with the earth or not?  He considered an experiment where it might be possible to send two beams of light in opposite directions around the earth at the equator. He argued that if the light beams are not entrained by the rotation of the earth, then one beam would be faster and the other slower, in proportion to the rotational velocity of the earth. He also conceived that the velocity difference would be proportional to "the length of the parallel of the latitude at the place.", in other words, the velocity difference would decrease as one went higher in latitude. A measurement of time difference for each beam to return to the start would then be a measure of the amount of entrainment due to the rotation of the earth."
"The result of the experiment when it was finally conducted in 1925 was that the measured fringe shift was found to be 0.230 +/- 0.005, which was found to agree with the prediction of no ether drag by rotation within the experimental error. What this means is that the speed of light is constant in the non-rotating frame, a result that is consistent with  Lorentz Ether Theory. Theories that propose that the Earth Centered Inertial Frame (ECI Frame) is a preferred frame for the speed of light also are consistent with this result, since the speed of light in this experiment is constant in the ECI frame of the earth." http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/Michelson-Gale/Michelson-Gale.html
   IV. Sagnac experiment
 "An animated explanation of how Sagnac's experiment proved the existence of the aether, thus demolishing Einstein's Theory of Relativity. Complaints by two experienced physicists that when they were at university, they were never informed about this important experiment. When other experiments - Airy's Failure, Michelson-Gale's experiment (also not taught at universities!) and of course the famous Michelson-Morley experiment- a completely different picture of the cosmos emerges - with the Earth at the centre of the universe."http://youtu.be/SWmlimH7laY
  So when push came to shove Science could not keep the classical notion of the ether alongside the centuries old notion of heliocentricism.  Einstein and colleagues decided to discard the ether.

Mach's Principle
 "Mach's Principle (Newton's law of Inertia F=m.a, is established by all the matter of the universe) is sensibly and simply explained by the Metaphysics of Space and Motion and the Wave Structure of Matter. The obvious problem of the particle conception of matter is to explain how all the distant matter of the universe could instantaneously act upon a
moving body here on earth. This paradox is completely resolved by the Wave Structure of Matter (WSM) which shows that all distant matter establishes its presence throughout the universe by their In-waves and Out-waves which produce a nearly uniform mass-energy density of space throughout Space." http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Physics-Ernst-Mach.htm
"Mach's ideas on motion like Leibniz's and Berkley's before him, were based on the conviction that physics is ultimately concerned with the relations between things and abstract space.  We believe this to be still a valid guiding principle, although of course our conceptions of the nature of things and the nature of their relations has changed.  We believe that neither special nor general relativity fulfills Mach's ideal, and we consider it important and suggestive to implement it in a prerelativistic classic framework."  Gravity and inertia in a Machian Framework  by J.B. Barbour and B.Bertotti
 http://homepage.ntlworld.com/malcolmbowden/barbour.htm
   Here we see two physicists who argue that Einstein has failed in reconciling Mach's principle with general relativity.
Several people in the sciences have complained that we have replaced empirical data with the dazzling intensity of mathematics.
"The theory [Relativity]  is like a beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king... it's exponents are brilliant men, but they are metaphysicist, not scientistsNikola Tesla   New York Times, July 11, 1935

D. As the universe turns!





"Looking northward, above the plane of our Milky Way, he found that more than half of the spirals were spinning in a counterclockwise direction in the sky. This overabundance seems small, only seven percent of the total observed galaxy sample. But the odds of it being purely due to chance are a one in a million say the researchers.
If the whole universe is rotating, then an excess number of galaxies on the opposite part of the sky, below the galactic plane, should be whirling in a clockwise direction. And indeed they are according to a separate 1991 survey of 8287 spiral galaxies in the southern galactic hemisphere."  http://news.discovery.com/space/do-we-live-in-a-spinning-universe-110708.htm   

The earth is held stationary by magnetic portals
 http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2008/30oct_ftes/

Oct. 30, 2008: During the time it takes you to read this article, something will happen high overhead that until recently many scientists didn't believe in. A magnetic portal will open, linking Earth to the sun 93 million miles away. Tons of high-energy particles may flow through the opening before it closes again, around the time you reach the end of the page.
"It's called a flux transfer event or 'FTE,'" says space physicist David Sibeck of the Goddard Space Flight Center. "Ten years ago I was pretty sure they didn't exist, but now the evidence is incontrovertible."
Indeed, today Sibeck is telling an international assembly of space physicists at the 2008 Plasma Workshop in Huntsville, Alabama, that FTEs are not just common, but possibly twice as common as anyone had ever imagined.
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sunearth/news/mag-portals.html#.VAnIMldSlGQ
"A favorite theme of science fiction is "the portal"--an extraordinary opening in space or time that connects travelers to distant realms. A good portal is a shortcut, a guide, a door into the unknown. If only they actually existed....
It turns out that they do, sort of, and a NASA-funded researcher at the University of Iowa has figured out how to find them.
"We call them X-points or electron diffusion regions," explains plasma physicist Jack Scudder of the University of Iowa. "They're places where the magnetic field of Earth connects to the magnetic field of the Sun, creating an uninterrupted path leading from our own planet to the sun's atmosphere 93 million miles away."
Observations by NASA's THEMIS spacecraft and Europe's Cluster probes suggest that these magnetic portals open and close dozens of times each day. They're typically located a few tens of thousands of kilometers from Earth where the geomagnetic field meets the onrushing solar wind. Most portals are small and short-lived; others are yawning, vast, and sustained. Tons of energetic particles can flow through the openings, heating Earth's upper atmosphere, sparking geomagnetic storms, and igniting bright polar auroras."

It appears that research on this may come quite soon, as NASA is doing a mission to study the electromagnetic field this year.
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sunearth/news/mms-milestone.html#.VAnJu1dSlGQ

1. This allowed a canopy of water to stabilize
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oM3_tLSI1cI&list=UUMkkpv1ndJHPcUIa5cWDrXQ
http://biblesmack.blogspot.com/2012/11/on-facebook-debating-canopy-theory.html

We still have some astral water clouds in the southern hemisphere
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2003/18feb_nlc/
"February 18, 2003: They hover on the edge of space. Thin, wispy clouds, glowing electric blue. Some scientists think they're seeded by space dust. Others suspect they're a telltale sign of global warming.
They're called noctilucent or "night-shining" clouds (NLCs for short). And whatever causes them, they're lovely.
"Over the past few weeks we've been enjoying outstanding views of these clouds above the southern hemisphere," said space station astronaut Don Pettit during a NASA TV broadcast last month. "We routinely see them when we're flying over Australia and the tip of South America." "

2.  This canopy would provide a greenhouse effect which would enhance vegetation and wild life.   Thus it would produce giant tree Forrest.   The canopy would provide an excess of oxygen
Canopy Picture
3.  Though there was a great deal of heat upon the earth, life was protected in 3 ways.  A.  The canopy would shield creation against excess radiation and cosmic rays.   B.  The lack of a clouds system would retard the transfer of heat to the earth.  While the giant Trees would shade life from excess heat.  C. the earth would be watered through a system of springs providing mist all over the planet.  Also the oceans would have gotten similar protection through excessive algae.


http://greaterancestors.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Tree-Height.jpg

“One tree trunk measured 896 feet in length and the upright trunks are so large that they appear from a distance to be great symmetrical columns of natural rock. These federal geologists tell the -story. They have visited this distant valley, which is split by a deep arroyo leading into the Rio Grande.” "According to an article in the Sunday, January 23, 1927 Port Arthur News,"http://greaterancestors.com/ancient-trees-more-than-twice-the-height-of-the-tallest-giant-redwoods/
 
" Fossil trees that approached the heights of today’s tallest redwoods have been found in northern Thailand. The longest petrified log measures 72.2 meters (237 feet), which suggest the original tree towered to more than 100 meters (330 feet) in a wet tropical forest some 800,000 years ago."
 http://news.discovery.com/earth/plants/giant-trees-found-in-thailand-130320.htm
  So with all these towering trees there would be more shade and protection to life below.  These forrest destroyed in the flood would provide su with the vast amounts of oil and coal we see today.

E.  The earth was rather larger.  It contained massive subterranean reservoirs and the atmosphere was encased in a protective ice canopy.  This canopy held a large amount of electromagnetic energy which protected the earth from cosmic radiation and lunar gravity(the earth was much closer at this time).
There have been discovers deep reservoirs of water remaining under the earth today.
"This new study, authored by a range of geophysicists and scientists from across the US, leverages data from the USArray — an array of hundreds of seismographs located throughout the US that are constantly listening to movements in the Earth’s mantle and core. After listening for a few years, and carrying out lots of complex calculations, the researchers believe that they’ve found a huge reserve of water that’s located in the transition zone between the upper and lower mantle — a region that occupies between 400 and 660 kilometers (250-410 miles) below our feet." http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/184564-scientists-discover-an-ocean-400-miles-beneath-our-feet-that-could-fill-our-oceans-three-times-over
Genesis 7:11 In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened."

The origin of the comets and asteroids is likely to have come from the earth
"although it has been detected[in instersteller space] by its 3.1UM absorption band, it is not nearly as abundant as expected." P.G. Martin. Mcgraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Science and technology, 6th edition (New York; McGraw-Hill Book Co.,1987), Vol9. p. 326

part2-rupture_global_view.jpg Image Thumbnail
F. The solar system revolved around the earth guided by the electro-magnetic fields, along side the turning of the ether.
Now the elliptic orbits and gravity of the sun are not in doubt.  There is simply an issue of interpretation of these orbits.

B. The Ignition of the flood
A.  God de-stabilized the portals connecting the earth and solar system with the zodiac constellations.
B.  The earth with it's solar system began to descend.
Job 9: Which shaketh the earth out of her place, and the pillars thereof tremble.
Which commandeth the sun, and it riseth not; and sealeth up the stars.


C.  After the decent stabilized, this rocked the earths electro-magnetic field.
Job 26: 11 The pillars of heaven tremble and are astonished at his reproof."
A Creationist Theory for Reversals and Fluctuations
  The validity of the data required a new theory to explain them. In 1986 I suggested that strong flows of the fluid in the earth's core could produce rapid reversals of the field during and after the Genesis flood.[9] The resulting disturbances in the core would cause the field intensity at the earth's surface to fluctuate up and down for thousands of years afterwards.
  This "dynamic-decay" theory is a more general version of the free-decay theory, since it takes account of motions in the core fluid. Dynamic decay explains the main features of the data, especially several features evolutionists find puzzling. In 1988, startling new evidence was found for the most essential prediction of my theory--very rapid reversals;[10] and in 1990, I showed a specific physical mechanism for such reversals.[11]"
Dr. Russel Humphreys The Earths magnetic field is young
 http://www.icr.org/article/earths-magnetic-field-young/
 McDonald, K. L. and R. H. Gunst. "An analysis of the earth's magnetic field from 1835 to 1965," ESSA Technical Report IER 46-IES 1 (July 1967) U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., Table 3, p. 14.


D. There was an explosion of microwave energy emanating probably from a supernova.
 "Here’s the gist of it. Since about 1998, physics has believed that there is some sort of “dark energy” causing the universe to accelerate its expansion. This “dark energy” is supposed to make up about three-quarters of the universe, with its equally mysterious cousin, “dark matter,” making up another 20%, leaving plain-old matter (like you and me and cheeseburgers) making up about 4%. However, physicists have yet to really agree on the nature of this mysterious “dark matter.” Its inclusion solves some of their baffling observations about the universe, but it remains an uncomfortable mystery.
Enter two mathematicians, Blake Temple and Joel Smoller. Their results, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, suggest a solution to the accelerating universe that doesn’t require conjuring up anything like “dark matter” — in fact, it doesn’t require conjuring up anything new at all. Their solution works with the current laws of physics we already have.
Their solution? That the acceleration seen is due to an expanding shockwave that occurred after the Big Bang–a shockwave that would have originated very near the Earth.
Did you catch that? A shockwave, plowing through the universe and spreading out the galaxies that originated near the Earth."
http://wallacegsmith.wordpress.com/2010/10/22/mathematicians-theory-means-earth-may-be-the-center-of-the-universe/
So here is a key concept.   Dark matter is not observed and mathematically unnecessary.  The results agree more with a geocentric view, as well as a plasma cosmology view. 

F. The loss of the electromagnetic field, allowed the moon to pump the under ground layer of subterranean waters to pump added to the pressure to descent.

G. An explosion of subterranean waters  alongside huge amounts of rock burst forth out of the mid-atlantic ridge  shooting roughly 3o miles in the air.
   This has been covered best in the works of Walt Brown also the work of Kent Hovind as well.  I will give a small amount of time justifying this.  However their work is highly recommended for deeper investigation.
hydroplate theory
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sD9ZGt9UA-U
 www.creationscience.com
Hovind theory
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SY0rj-TEx4o

H.  This atmosphere is not nearly that high however.  So the waters and dirt hit outer space.  The vacuum being 300-C  instantly froze the water into comets and the dirt into asteroids.
"How cold is it in space? That question is sure to prompt the geeks among us to pipe up with “2.7K”. For 2.7 Kelvin, or 2.7 degrees above absolute zero, is the temperature produced by the uniform background radiation or “afterglow” from the Big Bang." http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20130920-how-cold-is-space-really

Organic material  has been found in comets
"Organics found in comet 81P/Wild 2 samples show a heterogeneous and unequilibrated distribution in abundance and composition. Some organics are similar, but not identical, to those in interplanetary dust particles and carbonaceous meteorites. A class of aromatic-poor organic material is also present. The organics are rich in oxygen and nitrogen compared with meteoritic organics."http://www.sciencemag.org/content/314/5806/1720
This could point back to the hypothesis that the comets and asteroids were strart from the hydroplate explosion on earth.  http://www.sciencemag.org/content/314/5806/1720


I. The comets and steroids hit the moon, mars and venus violently.
"The cratering patterns observed on the moon were formed during two distinct impacting episodes. The abundant small craters on the lunar highland surfaces were caused by meteor impacts around the time of the Fall or perhaps during Creation Week itself. The large impact basins and resultant maria were formed at the time of the Flood by a narrow, intense, swarm of meteoroids travelling on parallel paths. The meteoroids were likely comets or fragments of a large comet. Those which missed the earth or moon left the solar system on a very long-period orbit." Dr. Danny Faulkner
https://answersingenesis.org/astronomy/moon/a-biblically-based-cratering-theory/
Here we see a creation astronomer in agreement.  The closeness of these celestial bodies with their craters and canyons is in perfect accord with such a past of material from the earth.

J. The remaining water shot across the canopy making it rain around the earth for 40 days.
"Again I raised my eyes towards heaven, and saw a lofty ceiling with seven cascading streams upon it; and those cascading streams flowed. with much water into one disclosed area.  Again I saw, and behold, fountains were opened upon the ground of that great enclosed area, and the water began to swell and rise upon the ground; And I saw that enclosed area until the whole ground was (comepletely) covered with water.  Water, darkness and mist accumulated heavily upon it; And I looked at the ascent of that water going up and up until it rose above that enclosed area, and was streaming above that enclosed area; And (all those on the ground) were gathered together until I saw them sinking, being swallowed up, and perishing with water.  Yet that boat was floating above the water, though all the cattle, elephants camels, and donkeys were sinking to the bottom; so I could (no longer) see anyone of the animals (for) they had no ability to come out but (only) to perish and sink into the deep water.  Again I kept seeing in the vision until those cascading streams were dissapated from that high ceiling, the fountains of the earth were normalized, and other its were opened.  Then the water began to decend into them until the ground became visible, that boat settled upon the earth, the darkness vanished and became light." 1 Enoch 89
 While this tale is fiction, it should be recognized that the author who lived prior to the days of Christ, and is reporting a biblical tale in a biblical setting to the real prophet Enoch.  At the least this could be the prevailing view of many Jews as to what happened in the flood.  At best this could be the remnant of the actual prophet Enoch.  Regardless it is a witness to the flood in total agreement to the ice canopy theory/Hovind theory.  This explains clearly how the 40 days of rain came about.


K. Meanwhile the continental shell cracked into the continental plates which we have today.  as the plates lowered water covered all the earth.
  This is described in Walt Brown's literature.   North and South America were shoved to make the antlantic ocean, as well as the smoky and rocky mountain ranges.  The Rockies being greater since they were moved West.[the same can be said for the Andes Mountains]  The water under the pacific plate was emptied and the land sank.  Which explains underwater flat top Islands.  This explains the extreme depth of the pacific Ocean.  this explains the friction which caused the volcanic pacific Ring of Fire.  This explains the uprising we see in the Chinese Himalayan mountains.   All this and more explained in Dr.  Walt Brown's book "In the Beginning"8th edition.  You can purchase at www.creationscience.com


L.    These electromagnetic tremors were causing the earth to appear to wobble and thus creating the seasons.
"George F. Dodwell served as the government astronomer for South Austrailia from 1909 to 1952.  In the mid-1930's, he became interested in past changes in the tilt of the earth's axis.  He collected almost 100 astronomical measurements made over a 4,000-year period.  Those measurements show that the tilt of the earth's axis smoothly decayed from 25* 10' to it's present 23*27'.  Based on the shape of the decay curve, Dodwell estimated that this axis shift began began in about the year2345B.C.                                                    "The gravitational forces of the sun and moon and planets do change the tilt of the earth's axis,  but much more slowly than those Dodwell measured.  An extraterrestrial body striking the earth would provide an abrupt change in axis orientation, not the smooth changes Dodwell measured.  Also only a massive and fast asteroid striking the earth at a favorable angle would tilt the axis this much.  However the resulting pressure pulse would pass through the entire atmosphere and quickly kill most air-breathing animals- a recent extinction without evidence."  Dr.Walt Brown  In the Beginning: Compelling evidence for creation and the Flood  pg 116 Barry Setterfield, "An investigation That Led to Unexpected Results by the Late Mr. G. F. Dodwell, B. A., F.R.A.S South Australian Government Astronomer,1909-1952," Bulletin of the Astronomical Society of South Australia, September 1967.
   Now assuming there was a giant electromagnetic explosion;(supernova, magnetar, star quake etc.) that knocked draco away from the polestar, probably warped the circular orbit of the universe into a tilting cycle.  Like a spinning top, this orbit is slowly growing more out of control.
The fallen world
Job9:5 Which removeth the mountains, and they know not: which overturneth them in his anger.
Which shaketh the earth out of her place, and the pillars thereof tremble.
Which commandeth the sun, and it riseth not; and sealeth up the stars.
Which alone spreadeth out the heavens, and treadeth upon the waves of the sea.
Which maketh Arcturus, Orion, and Pleiades, and the chambers of the south.
10 Which doeth great things past finding out; yea, and wonders without number.

If we look at Malcolm Bowden's explanation for the seasons.
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IcN5h8zEacM&list=UUiv63m1s0IBX5KsGhJD6JDg
Bowden's model has the solar system climbing and descending the earth.  Which he admits is not simple.  But if the earth was doing the descending and bouncing, like a bungee cord from the far away Polaris, then the model appears more simple and it seems to explain the ecliptic nature of all the solar orbits.  Since the earth was indeed knocked from it's perch.

M.  Many asteroids also fell back and hit the earth as well.
"Asteroid Killed Off the Dinosaurs, Says International Scientific Panel
ScienceDaily (Mar. 4, 2010) — The Cretaceous-Tertiary mass extinction, which wiped out the dinosaurs and more than half of species on Earth, was caused by an asteroid colliding with Earth and not massive volcanic activity, according to a comprehensive review of all the available evidence, published in the journal Science."
While I don't agree that the asteroids caused the dinosaur extinctions per se'  I believe the evidence of the asteroids falls in line with this particular scenario.


N.  The Cosmic explosion has dragged the moon backwards
"Computing the recession rate
When Apollo 11 astronauts landed on the moon in 1969, they left a reflector array there in the Sea of Tranquility. That array is part of the space agency's Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment. Scientists on Earth can bounce laser pulses off that reflector and learn a lot about the moon. For instance, they can calculate the moon's distance within 3 centimeters (1.18 inches). Data from the experiment shows that the moon moves away from the Earth at about 3.82 centimeters (1.5 inches) per year."  http://education.seattlepi.com/fast-moon-leaving-earth-5509.html

O.  The current state of solar system is relative.
   The sun has greater gravity and is the center of "solar" system.  But whatever movement the earth has can not be great, sense there is little movement from the vantage point of Polaris.  As well as the lack of current in the immediate space around the earth.  The power behind the rotation is more based upon the electromagnetic current of the universe than gravity.
 "Tides refer to the rise and fall of our oceans’ surfaces. It is caused by the attractive forces of the Moon and Sun’s gravitational fields as well as the
centrifugal force due to the Earth’s spin. As the positions of these celestial bodies change, so do the surfaces’ heights. For example, when the Sun and Moon are aligned with the Earth, water levels in ocean surfaces fronting them are pulled and subsequently rise. The Moon, although much smaller than the Sun, is much closer. Now, gravitational forces decrease rapidly as the distance between two masses widen. Thus, the Moon’s gravity has a larger effect on tides than the Sun. In fact, the Sun’s effect is only about half that of the Moon’s."http://www.universetoday.com/39280/what-causes-tides/
So How come the sun's gravity effects the tides on a smaller scale when the same gravity is hurling the earth around the solar system?  Obviously the gravity is a lesser force.


P. Most of the canopy was drawn to the North and south poles thus stimulating the arctic circle and stimulating the ice age. Though there were ice clouds for centuries and there have been some discovered still in recent times.
 The secular solutions to such anomolies has yet to be proven.
"Although the exact causes for ice ages, and the glacial cycles within them, have not been proven,..."
"Climate change on ultra-long time scales (tens of millions of years) are more than likely connected to plate tectonics."http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/earth/cause-ice-age.html
  So if we do not rely upon the ultra-long time scales, they have nothing.  Besides, how could a slow tectonic drift cause freezing and giant glaciers to cover entire continents?
 There is a growing minority who accept a rapid layering of ice.
"Geological sciences professor William Patterson, who led the research, said: 'It would have been very sudden for those alive at the time. It would be the equivalent of taking Britain and moving it to the Arctic over the space of a few months.'
Professor Patterson's findings emerged from one of the most painstaking studies of climate changes ever attempted and reinforce the theory that the earth's climate is  unstable and can switch between warm and cold incredibly quickly.
His conclusions, published in New Scientist, are based on a study of mud deposits extracted from a lake in Western Ireland, Lough Monreagh - a region he describes as having the 'best mud in the world in scientific terms'.
Professor Patterson used a precision robotic scalpel to scrape off layers of mud just 0.5mm thick. Each layer represented three months of sediment deposition, so variations between them could be used to measure changes in temperature over very short periods."http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1227990/Ice-Age-took-just-SIX-months-arrive--10-years.html
More is discussed in my previous article http://biblesmack.blogspot.com/2012/11/lets-put-canopy-back-up-defense-of.html

   Now in discussing Geo-centrism any lover of science in the western world is going to be shocked.  You may laugh or scoff.  Because the western world has made this doctrine a polemic to your basic worldview.  From the time I was a small child I studied science and was taught the earth's rotation around the sun as fundamental to my worldview.  I know that such ideas will inspire ridicule or scorn.  But hopefully as you study this material it will become apparent that this paper is not attacking scientific investigation and evidence.  It is challenging authority.  Empirical knowledge is quite useful.  But it is not ultimately objective.  There has to be a greater knowledge and a greater reality.
  As some may chuckle at this notion we must remember that cosmology is weird, because we are trying to sense things which we do not naturally conceive.  The whole of reality is a fantastic concept.  It will always be sensational in any form that we conceive.  Whether that be having billions of light years of the universe pop out of nothing, Being a planet of God's creatures protected in a cyclone of the universe, or Living on a sack carried by Atlas or the flat top of an Indian lotus.  The question is what is Reality and how do you conceive it?
  Perhaps, like Stephen Hawking or Albert Einstein,  you have found the ideas here represented rational enough.  But have a distaste of facing the reality of the omnipotent God.  Perhaps you were turned off by a preacher or Bible verse convicted you of Sin.  Perhaps you put the blame on God for all evil. It would be too hard to bear the idea that you are helpless in the hands at The Sovereign Lord. Well there is good news.


John 1: He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. 10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. 11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not. 12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: 13 which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. 14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
15 John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me. 16 And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace. 17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. 18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him."

1corinthians 15:1 Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; by which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; and that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:"John 3:12 If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things? 13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven. 14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: 15 that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."
Romans 10:10 Brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved. For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth. For Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law, That the man which doeth those things shall live by them. But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above:) or, Who shall descend into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead.) But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; that if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved."

These are God's Words to you.  Remember, If you ever want to come to him He's listening.
Revelation 22:17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.