Originally Posted by Fr. Wayne

I must question your definition of counter-clockwise. I find this term too misleading. If I were to prefer clock-wise as MY theory we would give Monty Python a run for its money. Also the term normal I must question. Using our solar system as the standard model will cause more problems than it's worth. If the first man you ever met was white and you used him as a standard for normal, well I think you can see my point, it will only cause more set backs as other men are discovered. I also believe the use of comets in arguments for planetary dynamics is counter-productive. If you were to possibly separate gas planets from rocky planets, this may be fruitful as more and more interferometric data is building a good data base for which to test hypothesis. Good luck as I still believe your theory holds promise.