ROCKAGE THEORY

This is the newest theory of life. Heard here first. This is a VALID theory and many hypotheses have been tested to prove this a true theory. I call it the Theory of Rockage. Pronounced ROCK-AGE. You may find yourself enlightened or you may choose to stubbornly stick to your unprobven ideas of EVOLUTION or even worse the simple-minded idea taken straight from the Genesis, CREATION. Several new theories have come up in the past century, but with the dawn of a new millenium comes the most sensible conclusion. If you were to come back to this earth in a later life in 3 more centuries, you will find ROCKAGE is the theory that the majority of the PLANET bases its beliefs on. This may seem similar to evolution, but the origins are completely different. Ask your questions, send me email at sprout008@hotmail.com, and I will put up your good questions on the FAQ page, now up. I may create a message board and more when I get the time from the creation of this page on. In the meantime, the most sensible place to go is a newsgroup like talk.origins where discussions on this topic may be soon arising as word gets out, and there will be skeptics as with all great theories of the past, which have been touted insane when first heard of, but later they say they always knew it was true. Back on topic. The day this page was created, January 9, 2000, marked the beginning of the realization of the true origins of life. I have shared this theory with no one but a few close colleagues before this date. So enough with the babble, I know you're wondering what the theory is or else you're about to press "back". OKAY. Time before this realization: 43.25 billion years. The theory of evolution starts with a simple cell. So does rockage. Up until the proteins, rockage agrees with evolution. After proteins are formed, they band to form one simple mineral. As time goes on, the cells continually split and new proteins are developed, leading to hundreds of this one mineral. Some may be different because of a cell error. We will use the accepted name of mutation for this event. A whole new mineral is formed from the different band of proteins. The process is much slower so no carbohydrates are formed. It is pure protein. The proteins multiply as a result of the cell divisions, and minerals join. Some minerals end their growth and do not join other minerals. Their "life" is then over. The minerals that join create pure minerals, "pure" used in a diffetrent sense in this theory of rockage. Pure minerals are minerals which are about the size of the supposed first bacteria, at this stage. Time before now: 43.24 billion years. How can minerals reproduce, you say? They don't. Rain, gas, helium--they create an atmosphere for the minerals to take on different forms and form clusters, megaclusters, those like galaxies. After all, it is the beginning of the earth. No oxygen yet. Time before now: 41.5 billion years. Asteroid particles account for many of the rocks passed through the then-gaseous earth. These new "earthly" minerals cling onto asteroid particles and form what we may call rocks (or moonrocks) today. They get caught in the gaseous rotation and mineral/asteroid particle formations are now everywhere in this sphere. Time: 39.9 billion years. The gases are so strong that the rate of "rock" formations multiply, adding density. Before now: 36.5 billion years. Solar firestorms, which at the dawn of the earth reached out far enough to alter the formations, molded many formations together and one large spherical formation would be found at the center of the gaseous rotation. Today it is the core of the earth, its state unknown. It could be igneous, still solid, or hollow. If you thought it was known, you need to learn about the logistics of soil. It only goes so far. No one has ever been to the center of the earth. Period. Time left: 31 billion years. Back on the topic, the low heat of the core formation (somewhere below -40000 degrees Farenheit) gives way to a ring around the core, and a friction among the gases. Time till today:

26 billion years. Energy grows within the gaseous/ringed rotation, and new formations multiply within, outside of the core and its ring. The same thing happens outside of each formation: rings are formed and gaseous energy increases, forming new formations at the outermost gaseous layer. At this time earth looked like a really bumpy object with rings way out far around it. Who knows if gases were visible. Time left: 24 billion years. The heat, over time, grew enough to cool the ice rings down and bring plasmatic substances to the rocky formations. Till now: 19 billion years. Gases, plasma, and rocks all had quite a turbulent relationship. Any minerals floating around at this point were "fossilized" in the plasma. Left: 17 billion years. As one gigantic rock formation filled the etire sphere, plasma resided in openings throughout the rock and on the entire surface, with a layer of several gases around that. This was all contained within the spherical rotation of what was starting to look similar to Pluto today. How long till: 14 billion years. Rings grew closer to the formation and broke layers of gases right through to the plasmatic surface of the new planet. New gases were formed. Hydrogen made its debut at this time. The energy was so high that the plasma's temperature reached nearly that of the sun's firestorms. Time left: 13 billion years. The gaseous layer surrounding the earth was now thin, allowing new particles and gases from space to enter the orbit. The moon was likely caught in our orbit at this time. "Moonrocks", really large particles from space, dropped to the earth, creating new openings in the plasma. Time: 11 billion years. Rock matter began to rest above plasma, and the lower energy allowed the gases to thin to a mere atmosphere within the earth's rotation. 10 billion years left. Plasma thinned and cooled, leaving gases including oxygen in the atmosphere. How old: 9 billion years. Minerals were now varying according to location on the planet. A mineral in a hot, plasmatic area would be completely different than one in a cold, rocky area. Time now left: 7.8 billion years. Gases from the core formation heated the earth, and plasma spread to the surface of the globe. Till now: 7.3 billion years. Surfaces under the plasma everywhere were smoother, and over time the atmosphere cooled plasma on the surface to liquids, resembling today's H20. There was no "ice age". Time left until now: 6.2 billion years. Minerals in water were completely different and cells had properties to divide and form multicell structures, nothing like particles. These developed rapidly and also developed reproductive organs. Time remaining: 6.0 billion years. Water forms were the first to reproduce, looking like today's plankton. 5.4 billion years left. These forms eventually spread onto rock, and decayed into living bacteria. This process is very in-depth and can be explained here. These bacteria reproduced and small insect-life forms were next. Now at: 4.9 billion years left. Rock forms would cross-produce with liquid forms and create new forms, like today's sandcrabs. Instead of "adaptation" and "speciation", liquid forms moved onto rock and rock forms into water, and produced completely new forms. They had the ability to multiproduce (several forms producing together simultaneously), forming new features and larger forms. These would be correctly called organisms. Until now: 4.4 billion years. The same production processes occured, and organisms resembling amphibians and fish were formed. All this time, the planet was cooling and gases were settling, and eventually organisms processed oxygen. Breathing organisms were much larger in size because of all the new organs required for the process, resting up to 2 feet long. Skip one billion years. Front feet served new purposes, such as attacking and only centuries later, eating. Time now left until now: 3.3 billion years left. If this life spurt would be called evolution, then most of it happened in a 3-billion year time span, while this did not happen the other 40 billion years the earth existed. And if it sounds like creation, then, well, that just doesn't make sense because the first life forms were indeed bacteria...and it remained so for over a billion years. BACK ON THE TOPIC. 3.3 billion years left. First signs of human form. The "homosapien" came into the picture here. So did the dino. The flinstones were right, believe it or not. Time elapsed. Forms came, forms went. 2.5 billion years left. Rocks rarely came flying into

the earth. Yet one rather large asteroid particle made it through the dense atmosphere. Dinos' lungs were not strong enough to handle it. Aquatic forms survived. Homosapien faded, yet cave dwellers made it. Reproduction. Survival. 1.9 billion years left. The air finally clear. Life forms back in action, yet none new. Rocks were calmer, yet in areas not covered by the cooled asteroid particles--now minerals or "land". There was activity which still exists today, yet fading slowly (volcanoes, earthquakes). No new forms could be created with this "dead" rock. No major turbulence. 1.1 billion years till today. Intelligence developed ever so slowly, perhaps another result of the calmed minerals. Exploration. Implantation. 500 million years left. Homosapien intelligence advanced greatly and rapidly due to the mineral-rich surroundings of their dwellings. Approximately 350 million years ago, new homosapiens produced developed different skin tones according to the food and surrounding minerals. Time till today: 300 million years. Skin tones were clearly different. Groups separated and found new areas. About 220 million years left. Homosapiens found unity with some other life forms, such as the cat or bear. Time remaining until now: 200 million years. Hair was cut off newborns, whom remained hairless throughout their life, and more homosapiens were hairless, resembling what we would today call man. The ones who wished to keep their hair were coincidentally also less intelligent, and we would now identify them as apes. 160 million years till now. Some cross-produced with other life forms and with intelligence new forms came up within a 50 million year span. We would call them cow (horse & bull), dog (bull & pig), cat (dog & hyena), kangaroo (human & hyena), etc. 110 million years. Most life forms found then found today. Extinction events common due to overlooked oblivious mistakes made by the life forms themselves and too many forms at war. Homosapiens (hairless) most intelligent form. More advantages for war and consumption because of bodily features. Time until now: 60 million years. Bodies and intelligence perfect combination for the most intellectual form of speaking (now way past grunting-now clear language, yet one throughout planet. 45 million years remaining till now. Location separation results in different languages among all life forms. Hairless homosapien's languages most clear and punctuated. Discrimination sprouted. History goes a little slower than in the books, up until about 2000 years ago, when Christ was born. Ages of realization sprouted. Racial discrimination sprouted. Less than 150 years until now. Darwin's ideas influence some intelligent homosapiens, yet he is just one hairless homosapien. His theory is not proven. The theory of rockage is. Welcome to TODAY.

Fish Ape Dinosaur Man? WRONG. Mineral Earth Life forms ROCKAGE.

Frequently Asked Questions

How do you explain the sudden existence of the cell? The cell of course has always had a nucleus, and the nucleus is of course formed by molecular structures in which atoms reside. And atoms are the building blocks of the universe. Can different life forms still cross-produce today? Studies have been done, and unfortunately, a misstep in hairless homosapien intelligence has made it impossible for humans to cross-produce with any other life form. Yet 98% of all other life forms on earth (Yes, all life forms ARE known...no fossils whatsoever) have the ability to cross-produce. Take the well known liger, for example, the result of the cross-production of a lion and a tiger. At the less well known end, only one life form has been found produced by a cat and a dingo, the cango, resembling a ferret. The dingo is of course lower than the cat in the life production chain, the result of a dog and a kangaroo. And of course, we all now know where the kangaroo came from. So can life forms grouped in separate genera and families, etc. by scientists still crossproduce? The answer is yes. The rules created by some scientists that life forms have restrictions because they are walled off by scientists own created groups are totally proposterous and absolutely ludichris. Evolution screwed up everything. How come the earth is so much older than scientists concluded it was in the Theory of Evolution? We have learned that evolution is wrong, and it has brainwashed billions of people to believe the earth is the age Lyell came up with, just because it sounded good. Absolutely ludichris. More proof that the theory of evolution has screwed up everything. And I emphasize everything. Dont even bring up creationism. What about Darwins finches? He may be truthful about his findings, but his theories are completely off. Birds flocked to different islands according to the other life forms on that island. In general, birds with large beaks seeked rather large animals to mate and cross-produce with. Birds with the smallest beaks mated with large crustaceans. Darwin didnt see that the food varied throughout each island entirely. His ideas were ludichris.

The pictures that turned skeptics into believers

A kangaroo embryo.

Accurate representation of asteroid particle shower which proves the central theory of Rockage.

E-Mail rockage discussion no.1

Adam Cheney, qualified evolutionist --my conversation with Mr. Cheney himself-From: "J. Sprout" (sprout008@hotmail.com) To: adam_cheney@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Your theory... Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 01:55:03 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [63.53.27.54] Received: from 63.53.27.54 by lw10fd.law10.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;Sat, 13 Jan 2001 09:55:03 GMT ??From: "Adam Cheney" (adam_cheney@hotmail.com) To: sprout008@hotmail.com Subject: Your theory... Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 12:32:13 -0000

AC: G'day Sprout, I read your web-page today, and I have a few questions for you: AC: How old are you? MJS: Fact, theory or fiction? ok. 29. AC:??What prompted you to come up with your theory? MJS: My stand against evolution and my research throughout the past several years. I really just started supporting con-evolutionism in my Junior year of college. Reasearch had finally paid off. AC: Sorry, don't really understand this.? What did you research?? What on earth is 'conevolutionism'?? How did your research pay off? ????What prompted you to doubt the other theories that are around? MJS: The fact that evolution is not a fact. It is the most widely supported, because of the evidence. I am not saying fossils were made up or there is no such thing as an embryo. But how do you explain the mammoths? Certainly not by the creationist theory, which has many counterattacks already shown by evolutionary theories. I would say the evolutionary theory is the most accurate and that is why that is my sole target, to show how much more accurate rockage is. AC: Your statement "The fact that evolution is not a fact" needs to be examined further.? I think you need to make a distinction between Darwin's 'The Origin of Species', which is also known as the Theory of Evolution, and evolution, which simply means change and is used as a general term by biologists who wish to represent the variation in population's genetic alleles over time; evolution is undoubtedly a fact - it has been observed in repeatable lab conditions.? The theory commonly called 'Theory of Evolution' is nothing more than a theory, although it is supported by all the peer-reviewd evidence that I know of, and contradicted by nothing that I am aware of. Darwin's theory is really very simple, and much misrepresented on the internet - especially by YE creationists.? It makes no attempt to provide a chronology, in fact most of the timeline has been established since his death, makes no attempt to explain how life started, how the earth came to be here or how the universe came into being.? All it is concerned with is life on Earth and how it came to arranged into so many species.? Its central tenet is simply that all living things are related by descent from a common ancestor - the nearer the relationship, the more

recent the ancestor. How do I explain the mammoths?? Well, as far as I know, this is strong evidence for the current shape of the Theory of Evolution.? Closely related, based on morpholgical evidence from fossils, to modern elephants, populations of these creatures had obviously been selected for their adaptions to the cold - specifically their size (a very common evolutionary strategy for combatting cold) and their coats (probably adapted from the meagre coats that modern elephants have inherited from the common ancestor they shared with mammoths). Further down that particular paragraph, you also claim accuracy for your theory.? Can you demonstrate this?? What predicitions has it allowed you to make, and how did you verify that they are more accurate than predictions made by other theories, particularly the Theory of Evolution? ??You say: "Darwin's ideas influence some intelligent homosapiens, yet he is just one hairless homosapien. His theory is not proven. The theory of rockage is."? So, where is your proof? MJS: Look at a rock. Split it in half. What do you see? Any rock...age rings. All scientists with any archaelogy or geography knowledge know this. How long have minerals existed? You certainly cannot say only since the beginning of the earth (or sooner). If so then how were all the other planets created? I will be adding proof and support, as well as several of my colleague's words, and soon scientists' criticisms and takes on this theory, on my site. So far I have put up two images. I don't have the money for a business-type website, and I simply wish for the theory to be known, simply. AC: Actually, I'd contend your assertion about rings in rocks.? I have split open plenty of rocks and found no age rings.? Further, I'd suggest that only a rock formed by crystallisation processes would have such rings.? Further still, I'd suggest that 'age rings' is an disingenuous term, given that the processes that lay down these rings have no measurable temporal reference. I'd also like to know, if this is the basis of your theory, how you extrapolate this information to make some of the claims that you have; including an Earth age that is considerably older than the currently accepted age of the universe, and an age for our species that is more than 500 times older than currently accepted. ?? ??Hope you can answer. Adam... MJS: Thank you for your questions. M. Sprout ----

Qualified supporters of the theory of rockage give their stand

Richard Quirry: The theory of rockage is the most innovative idea to exist in years. Few great minds have shone in the past several decades, but this is a true thinker that should be placed along with minds like Thomas Edison, Albert Einstein, Plato, and Socrates. Darwin wasa great mind but was overrated. His ideas were taken as popular and everyone jumped on the bandwagon. This is the severe prolem with society which is the truth." David Young: His theory is so logical. The facts, the debunking of evolution, the proof, it is all there to back up rockage. Logics lie in every word of the theory. It is true. Emily Herington: [M. Sprout] told me about the theory just a few months ago, right before Thanksgiving day, and I was stupified. It sounded crazy at first, but I knew he would have proof and facts against all other theories because of his work in the past. It was actually back in 1991, in Memphis, when he told me he was making a strong case against evolution. We were both neutral, at the time. He never published his cases but instead met with colleagues, evolutionists, to debate them. It was December 1, 2000, I remember, clearly, the day he gave me a rough copy of his theory, his first written copy. The facts were all compiled on this report. Astonishingly, he went to the web and published the same exact theory online, every word intact. He put up some of the proof he showed me and our colleagues also. Oh the proof is trememndous. I think there are two, or three, pictures on the web site and that is all the proof online. There is way more, just as convincing as what is up there now. I am no longer neutral. Michael Langley: The damn skeptics in Evolutionary Societies and bias online discussion groups such as talk.origins are out of their minds. But I didnt study sociological habits for nothing. Ever since Darwins evolutionary theory, the in thing has been to go with it and believe. What a brainwasher society is. Until rockage is more widely accepted and the skeptics see how hypocritical they are, everything in a sense is jaggedly screwed. Aaron Hull: Rockage. Rockery. Rockism. Rockolution. Whatever you call it, it is true. Trudy McGregor: Clearly ape did not evolve into man against his will. He did not like his hairy suit, so he clenaed it up. Thats basically the theory. Sarrah Kendel: [M. Sprout] did it again. Made the skeptics eat their words. They ate their words and swallowed them. [M. Sprout] has a nation soon following. Jason Tallmadge:

Those f[---]ing morons at FSU have something coming. I know [M. Sprout] and every idea he tells me about is extraordinary and is true as an idea can be without destroying his reputation; the only ones attempting to make him out to be a liar or a moron are the morons themselves looking for a scapegoat. Those damn f[---]ing morons are pathetic. And they call themselves qualified those f[---]ing morons. Isley Moore: Earth is 4.6 billion years old? The simple idea that the earth is nearly 200 times that age led me to the conclusion that ROCKAGE is correct. Kathryn Nelson: His sheer brilliance is unmeasurable. His IQ alone is in the top 8 percentile of the human race. A colleague of 8 years, I find his works authentic, surprisingly innovative, indpendent, sometimes shocking and difficult to accept but true, and a reflection of his brilliance. The evidience supporting his theory of rockage is countless. One word to describe this man and his work? Magnificence. Mark Harrison: Scientific creationism: a religious dogma combining massive ignorance with incredible arrogance. Creationist: (1) One who follows creationism. (2) A moron. (3) A person incapable of doing math. (4) A liar. (5) A very gullible true believer. The Theory of Evolution/Evolutionary Theory: a society following with beliefs accorsing to one loon. Evolutionist: (1) One who follows evolutionism. (2) A follower. (3) An idiot. (4) A liar. (5) A very gullible true believer. The Theory of Rockage: a scientific theory compiled by many facts and much evidence appealing only to logical and intelligent thinkers. Rockagist: (1) One who follows rockagism. (2) A self-thinker. (3) A well-educated fellow. (4) A realist. (5) A very intelligent true new believer. George Habistalo: Who knew the flinstones were right? Who knew kangaroos were the result of guys getting it on with hyenas? Who knew rocks had a love life? I didnt until I read this. His artistic photographs just show us how true it is. How true it is. Chris Hannah: How do you spell ludicrous? In talk.origins it can be ludichris or ludicrous. Anywhere else, anti-rockagism.