mirrored file at http://SaturnianCosmology.Org/ 
For complete access to all the files of this collection
	see http://SaturnianCosmology.org/search.php 
==========================================================

"Age of the Universe" is pure poppycock. There is no "age of
the Universe". The "Big Bang" was created by Christians and the like who
felt that if God had created everything, then he had to start at some
point in time. The imposition of this philosophical stance on cosmology
has been astounding. It has been like completing a crossword puzzle with
all sorts of sensible words, yet getting each of them wrong. I cannot say
that, for example, the Universe was forever, but I also cannot say
anything about it having an "age".

Matter is being created constantly, God's intentions notwithstanding. The
Earth has doubled in size in the last 400 million years, which is why the
oceans are not filled with miles and miles of mud and muck -- they are,
geologically speaking, clean, bare, and 'new'. That was an immense
surprise discovered in the 1950s. The ocean bottoms can be dated, and the
oldest rock -- off the East coast of China -- dates to the Jurrasic. It is
not 4 billion years old.

Continents do not drift and then plow under, they separate when the
cracks in the oceans fill out with new rock. The mountains at continental
edges are not due to old continental material being melted underneath,
they are due to the fact that the same continents now have to assume a
shape of less curvature. Witness the central continental mountains: these
certainly are not due to plowed-under old continental material.  India is
not plowing into the Himalayas, it is breaking away. 

The new depressions between the continents filled with water -- the same
water that was always in the past identified as "shallow inland seas" in
central continental areas. Or water was being created along with the
silicon-oxygen compounds -- known as "rock."

If the earth doubled in diameter, then gravity would have increased
because of the new mass, and at the same time the surface gravity would
have decreased because of the increased distance fom the center. A simple
calculation shows that the net result would have been to nearly double
gravity -- whcih adequately explains the very large dynosaurs, the giant
early mammals, and the massive trees of the past. Note that all of these
consistantly decrease in size over time. And it explains why your back
hurts.

But even the most iconoclastic scientists cannot handle the fact that "new
matter" is being added to Earth every day. They will suggest unspecified
electrodynamic theories for gravity rather than to think such weird
thoughts. And the calculations for Solar Wind delivery just do not add up,
even over a span of 4 billion years.

It gets worse: Matter is not only being created, but matter increases its
mass with time. That is what Alton Arp suggests in looking at quasars
being emmitted from gallaxies in pairs from their poles. The quasars start
as streams of ions, and end up as child galaxies. Our Milky way can be
traced to a galaxy in Virgo -- our 'mother galaxy.' And we can identify
sets of child and grandchild galaxies sprung from the Milky Way.

Arp (in concert with an Indian mathematician) suggested simply that matter
increases as the square of time: m(t) = m(0) t exp 2. That would account
adequitely for the 'red shift' associated with the quasars. It is also
frightening to many people to suggest that, yet there is nothing in
physics today whcih bars these concepts, and as a matter of fact seem to
follow from Quantum Physics.

/jno