>>9408058>>9408091heres the next slide.
another interesting "electric theory" is that of Miles mathis
I have taken some notes from his papers:
http://milesmathis.com/venus2.pdf>EU physicists still haven't penetrated the difference between the charge field and the E/M field, so although they are near to the correct analysis, they are still missing the bullseye, forcing them cram new data into their models when it doesn't really fit. So although it is true that EU explanations are much much better than mainstream explanations, they still aren't correct. >The main problem with the EU model is that it explains everything in terms of the E/M field, ignoring or taking for granted the underlying "charge field". Theirs is an electrical universe, while mine is a charge universe. >Electrical and magnetic interactions are taking place between celestial bodies, as they claim, and even the mainstream recognizes that. But none of these interactionsand none of the E/M or plasma fields can be explained without the underlying charge field. And when it comes to explaining winds, hot and cold poles, and other phenomena, my fields explain the data much more cleanly and clearly than EU models.
continues....
