In 1972 I suggested that for my theory to work that there had to be a ring of semi-molten iron rich rock orbiting the sun, located inside the orbit of Mercury. In 1983 a ring was found within two solar widths of the sun. I do not know if it is molten or not. It seems overwhelmingly probable that this material has been ejected by the sun and was molten at that time, and may still be so. My prediction of its existence was proven correct.

I claimed that cold rocks, pebbles, dust, hydrogen gas, etc., could not clump together in space, millions of miles from the sun and fuse together, since the forces necessary to accomplish this did not exist in that environment. Science confirms that planets formed more from the hydrogen and silica of the nebula and that existing solids where only a minor contributor to it. Results of analysis from Chandra's X-ray telescope have confirmed that the only place that can convert hydrogen and helium into all the elements we know of is in the center of a star. So, in view of that, the question the experts asked was, 'How did this material get out to the planet orbital regions'. Genesis Continuous, answers that question. And Chandra has confirmed me right.

The Chandra results should have turned the whole astrophysical fraternity upside down, but no, they have remained silent with their eyes fixed on the relevant pages of the old text books that they would stubbornly resist removing.

To illustrate this; in spite of these earth shattering Chandra results being published in the last remaining weeks of the last century, scientists 18 months later blindly believe that the asteroid EROS, now being sampled by the probe, NEAR resting on its pebbly surface, expects to confirm that the asteroid is made up of randomly gathered pebbles and rocks somehow all glued together into a solid conglomerate mass.

It will surely be a great surprise to them that EROS is, in my view, plus the view of the Chandra findings, a solid rock that once, many billions of years ago was molten, and it now orbits around the sun in the company of tens of thousands of other rock ejecta so formed. All the bigger ones will have coatings of rocks, pebbles and dust that they have collected from space over their billions of orbits. So, the bulk of this loose material is foreign to the original asteroid.  However, there could well be signs of cratering where some rocks struck the asteroid when it was semi-molten, but certainly not after it solidified. We should soon know. 6th March 2001!!!!!

The asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter is a loose ring of ejecta that missed out becoming the core of a planet some 12 billion years ago when those same rocks were orbiting two or three solar widths away from the sun.

(The age of 12 billion years for the asteroid belt may or may not be correct. I have used a time frame comparable with that which science has provided, plus the addition of four billion years to comply with the Genesis Continuous theory. All age references in Genesis Continuous are based on the same figures).

The scientific 'Made In Their Existing Orbits theory', has now been challenged by other scientists creating planets on computer. The problem they find is that Neptune and Uranus are too large to have occupied their current orbital positions, because there would not have been sufficient hydrogen and other stuff available within their collection zones to give us the giants that they have turned out to be. So, how do they sneak out of that one? By telling us that they were not formed out were they are now, (End of Fixed orbit theory) and were formed much closer and inside Jupiter's orbit who whipped them away in a slingshot event and landed them very nearly in their Bode predictable orbits. Well, well, well. That IS convenient. Good old Jupiter. No mention of Saturn though, and what part it might have played in this miraculous event. Oh well, it was probably over the other side of the sun at the time and totally missed the action.

The Fixed Orbit theory also states that a distant, conveniently timed stella explosion was responsible for the gas nebula to collapse and form the sun. - This suggests that every star in existence had to be created that way and that's a lot of explosions, since there are supposed to be more stars in the universe than there are grains of sand on all the beaches of the world.

I think the reality is very different and the confusion over this problem has been due to not realizing the vital part Solar-wind plays in the making of a star and its planetary family. A nebula of gas, hydrogen, is a gravity created mass. Providing that it exist in space, its collection, say around an old lost planet, will continue putting the center of the mass under an ever increasing pressure. In other words, there is nothing to stop it growing. Finally that central pressure reaches a flash point where something has to give. The atoms of gases are crushed and an implosion takes place. New heavier elements are formed that take up far less space than the original compressed gas. A glowing ball is formed that suddenly gets hit by an onslaught of more primary gases that rush in to occupy the space given up by the previous implosion. This sets off another implosion that probably causes the newly formed elements in the ball to implode again forming new elements higher up the atomic scale. So it goes on and on, time and time again until the glowing ball reaches a size that produces enough force from its solar-wind to push the last of the nebula gases out of reach. It is the solar-wind that provides a shutoff of star growth. Gravity started it and the solar-wind ended it. Why should remote explosions have anything to do with it?.

There are more stars in the universe than there are grains of sand on all the beaches of the world, (so it is said), so surely each and every one owed its existence to mechanisms right there within its own womb of creation.

Genesis Continuous has set a framework of star and planet formation that must exist throughout the universe. Planets, moons, comets, etc. etc. are a natural part of that genesis and the Organic Phase, that is now with the planet Earth, is also a part of that evolution. Mars was the life support planet before earth and Venus will be the one after Earth. One only has to look at the atmosphere and surface composition of Mercury, Venus, Earth and Mars to see the evolution.

Doesn't this make for a whole new understanding about our place in the universe? Haven't we a responsibility to ensure that the ecosystem of our planet is preserved for billions of years into the future so that a transfer of species can be achieved when Venus is ready for it?

Within one hundred years of powered flight man has landed on the moon, has sent earth made vehicles by remote control to Mars, landed them there and driven them around on its surface. He has retrieved photographs of its surface, analyzed some of its soil and collected vast amounts of virtually first hand information about this distant world. And he has only just begun....Could anyone in their wildest dreams back in 1900 have expected such technology to eventuate? With that in mind, what will be achieved in the next thousand years, and the next million. And even that will be too soon to play God and write the new Genesis. This planet could be biologically killed in the next 100 years if the negative changes we are making to it are not completely halted, and if possible, reversed by massive replanting of forests all over the globe. And that's just one thing.............

Many species on earth could well have started with generation one right here, but I believe that trilobites, dinosaurs, reptiles, mammals and birds were incubated here by an intelligent group of beings, some thousands, perhaps millions of years more advanced technically than we are. Man is a member of a hugely successful mammalian group of creatures, but technically advanced as he thinks he is, cannot prove our primeval origins as having occurred on earth. There are loads of theories but no proof that mammals had a common ancestor nor who or what that ancestor was or where it originated on our planet. The cutoff comes where fossils with complex structures appear from nowhere as recognizable animals and there is no obvious ancestral linking sequence prior to that. When I say 'ancestral' I mean a blob of organism that can be proven to have the complete potential of becoming a mouse or human in x millions of years. All the excitement surrounding discoveries of humanids in Kenya, to me, is like finding another human being just as complex as we are. But the generation chain back from their time to their beginnings is vastly longer.

All animals, birds, fish, reptiles etc. are mobile chemical factories. They make hormones, digestive juices, lubricants for their joints, sweat glands to opperate when overheated, eyes to see with, ears to hear with, sense of smell and taste, etc., etc.,: . Their means of reproduction relies on the production and use of hundreds, if not thousands of complex chemicals being produced by the body's systems, applied just in the right amounts, exactly where and when needed, to perform the vital and highly intricate tasks from before conception right through to giving birth. We are as yet bewildered by its sheer complexity, and I feel sure that Tyrannus Rex and a field mouse could never have multiplied unless all those capabilities where in place, functioning in absolute perfection right from the beginning of their existance, because trial and error would not have allowed for the fact that there has never been a lost generation of any living thing; only extinction. Trial and error had no place in evolution; only adaption which was brought about by a will to survive and environmental changes. And even the will and strategy required to survive suggests a highly developed genetic memory component, which, had it been missing during early development, but relied upon evolution to become active later, an earlier extinction would have been hard to avoid. Chance and luck had to be replaced by brain, skill and physical prowess. However, did it all happen that way? The truth is, we haven't even found the really ancient links in the chain to have a clue.

Thousands or perhaps millions of generations of our descendants have the right to a quality of life as good, if not, better, than we have. We have no right to take more of anything from the resources of this planet whilst we are here, yet that is exactly what we are doing. Iron, copper, zinc, lead, alluminium, nickel, manganese, tungsten, and indeed everything we have to mine from the earth, are all elements limited in quantity, yet they are disposed of in rubbish dumps, in waterways, in the atmosphere, all over the planet. Wornout motor vehicles, food cans that go out with almost everyone's rubbish collection, old roofing iron, and ships that are often sunk by war, storm or are simply scuttled are good examples of the robbery we commit against future generations. It is ironic that we make these valuable unrenewble resources so difficult and costly to reclaim. Or are we relying upon the possibilitry that in 50 years or so we will be able to capture an asteroid now and then, to replenish our smelters. After all, I'm the one who is saying that all the elements will be contained in those rocks, untouched for billions of years since being thrust from the solar furnace. Perhaps they will build smelters and refineries on the moon and make the surface there a gigantic slag heap. The mind boggles.- But, anyway, that's not my worry, is it???????? (Isn't the irony of it all absolutely rivetting). - Sorry about that chief -.

Among the many things that Genesis Continuous has taught me, even away back when I first thought of it, was to realise the responsibility that mankind should have for our planet's biological future. It occured to me then that if the religions of our species had been more concerned for all of God's creation, instead of just their own member's personal salvation, we probably wouldn't be so money mad and selfish today. I remember stopping the car one Xmas Eve just opposite a church in a rich suburb and was amazed at the large number of cars in the carpark. There were lots of very expensive autos there. Most times during the year there was only a handfull of worshippers each Sunday. I thought about the 'Camel and the Eye of the Needle' story, - Why did I think that most of the folk inside that church may have never read it? And yet they would be saying their prayers, believing that God and Heaven were exclusively theirs. They say it takes all sorts to make a world, and it seems to me that it takes all sorts to break it as well.

Just arrived - September 13th, 2007del.icio.us Digg Reddit Netscape StumbleUpon
Planet Survives its Star Becoming a Red Giant

Written by Fraser Cain

When a star like our own Sun nears the end of its 10 billion year life, it expands up into a red giant, consuming any planets foolish enough to orbit closely. But what happens to the more distant planets? Astronomers have discovered just such a planet, orbiting a red giant star. Perhaps this gives us hope for the fate of our own planet Earth, when the Sun expands too. Not so fast.

An international team of astronomers from 15 different countries announced the planetary discovery, and their article will be published in the September 13th edition of the journal Nature.

Search this site

mailto:David Hardy

Genesis Continuous - Complete

Homepage

is Continuous Conclusions