Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
On Wed, 7 Apr 2021 21:00:08 -0400
"Rick C. Hodgin" wrote:
9) The moon might hold the New Jerusalem, as it's almost exactly the
right size for it to be inside of there.
10) If true, the crates we see on the moon are not just craters.
There are the equivalent of tugs that move the moon about when it
opens up to reveal the New Jerusalem, indicating we've gone through
many, many, many cycles, just as we go through many, many, many
harvest seasons on our fields here on this Earth.

The craters aren't the equivalent of tugs, the craters are produced by
the equivalent of tugs that have been used to align or push the moon
back closed once it opens. They extend out arms which push against the
moon in various places. Or, they maneuver the moon back into a stable
orbit. Something along those lines throughout the many cycles that
have taken place.
....


Just to be clear what a "prediction of a theory is":

A theory -- call it T -- is a statement if what is beleived to be true.
A prediction of the theory is another statement -- call is P --
which "follows" from the theory. "Follows" means
if T is true then P must be true; if P is false then T is false.

If you have a collection of statements that dont follow
from your theory that the earth is a squence of spheres
that have another layer added every 5000 years
then they are not predictions. They are either unrelated guesses
or other theories.

At this stage I think it's better to stick to one theory
and figure out what it predicts.

To start you off -- if the earth is a series of layers of
older versions of the earth then it might stand to reason
(i.e. follow) there are voids or other features trapped
between the layers that we might be able to detect.

And (to further help) we know that stanard geology has
identified some layers of the earth and I understand there are
some detected features at the boundaries of the layers
proposed by standard geology.

Given standard geology follows from the theories of
gravitation and theromodnamics and can roughly trace the evolution
of the Earth and other planets from the time they were a bunch
of gas orbiting a proto sun, your theory is not really ahead yet.

In addition, your theory also predicts that layers are built up
on the Earth every (as I understand it) 5,000 years.
One million years ago there were 200 fewer layers and we'd
expect the Earth to be lighter. Maybe lighter enough to have
a lower surface gravity. The moon would have been further away,
the tides would have been smaller and further between.
Some of these would be visibile in the height of trees
(given they need to transport water up to their tops via
capillary action + some quantum assists .

None of these things is known to be true and some of them
we suspect are false.