Canie-sorry, I was referring to the original post on the Silent Pole Shift. Your post and question are correct. More specifically, I was referring to the sun staying still because there was what would be termed a true polar wander. This could not have occurred 2000 years ago, or 4000, or whatever, they way it was described. By the way, my father was watching History Channel the other night, I was visiting him, and they had a show on that seems to have been recorded during the early 1980s, and the half the stuff the geologist was spouting as fact was untrue. I found that really disturbing-it is on the same level as scientific creationism-this stuff is offensive to me. So, one has to balance trying out new ideas, realizing some accepted ideas may be wrong, with the dangers of presenting nonsense in a scientific context, that may be confusing to the non-science literate.....that is where I am coming from....Chris