What I'd like to see is that you ACKNOWLEDGE the people who did the work. Then I'd like to see you appreciate the fact that this poor work of science fiction is WRONG about stuff that was discovered after 1955, and is WRONG about the age of the universe to the point where it quotes a joke number for that age.* The UB nor it's authors claim to have "discovered" anything....they said "give preference to the highest existing human concepts pertaining to the subjects to be presented. We may resort to pure revelation only when the concept of presentation has had no adequate previous expression by the human mind."
........highest existing human concepts
.....previous expression by the human mind
Come on Stuu, you're better then that, I may annoy you with my beliefs, you certainly can believe what you think is right, but you are getting angry and silly about this.
* Had you actually read the UB you would know that it supports the "discovery" by scientist that this is an evolutionary world. That it is incumbent upon mankind to solve the material problems that he is confronted with.
You would also know that had our administrator "Lucifer" not become Atheist and rebelled against the wise council of his superiors then many diseases would have been eradicated hundreds of thousands of years ago. But Lucifer's default followed by Adam and Eves molestation, retarded the normal, evolutionary process for this world.
* The UB does not teach that God is some sort of Santa Clause that will heal and fix people when called upon, we are to solve these problems using science and common sense.
* I and billions of others are grateful for the work of science, where we differ is when since becomes religion and teaches Godlessness. It is no longer science when it does that.
Can you do that, or is this round abuse of science operating on two levels here, that of plagiarism and the folly of adopting provisional conclusions as dogma?
If you only ever use an encyclopedia printed in 1966 then the names of the presidents of each country will be wrong in the present day, won't they. It's exactly the same with this book.
That's RUTHERFORD of NELSON who discovered atomic structure, not MORON of MORONTIA.