Dean... thanks for your immediate answers - and comments. I've read all, but am printing this off to digest more thoroughly. About Pratt, he did mention Cater directly in a favorable manner on at least one point, but Pratt's several analyses of conflicting scientific beliefs of OTHERS, though not addressing Cater specifically, seemed to conflict with some general Cater ideas you've posted. Can't be specific at this moment, have to re-read Pratt to recall accurately.
About BIOLOGICAL history, I am completely surprised to learn that Cater believes "SOFT PARTICLES" are also Prana or Life Force! The "thread of his book."
"Soft Particles" seem to be THE universal "energy" or THE universal "quality" responsible for most physical and biological phenomena. In his books, does he assign qualities beyond the preceding? Does he assign qualities of "Universal Mind" (choosing Frode's favorite label) to "soft particles?" In other words, are "soft particles" endowed with the intelligence and purposes of "The Universal Mind?"
I'm attempting (if possible) to compare Cater's universal "soft particles" with Churchward's concept of the Creator, "God," (or Universal Mind) being THE One Primary (intelligent) "Force" that has created Secondary Forces, His "agents," which carry out His purposes throughout the physical universe.
Obviously each of these Seconday "Forces" are also "Spiritual" (in a sense), and must be endowed with "portions" of the "Universal Mind's" intelligence. They've been assigned specific MOTIVES and PURPOSES in physical creation. They purposefully operate the "elemental" universe's parts and set them in motion, from the smallest particle to the largest celestial body... Attracting, Repelling, Combining, Separating, etc., etc. Never by chance or accident.
Dean, from what you have so far described about Cater's universal conception of "soft particles," they seem to be THE most important Secondary emanation from the Universal Mind. Because "soft particles" appear to affect and be responsible for most physical universe phenomena, they seem to me to (nearly?) be The Universal Mind "Himself" - in action. The "God" Force in action. What is Cater's view on this? And yours? Does Cater assign "Universal Mind" intelligence to "soft particles?"
Universally responsible as they seem described, I can't conceive of Cater assigning just "mechanical" physical universe properties or qualities to them. Which leads to another question, what is Cater's general concept of "God" or "The Universal Mind?" Similar to yours? Nathan writes Cater believes "The Elders" created Earth. What does he mean by "Elders?"
BUT, Dean, having said all above, I have some criticisms...
I am TERRIBLY disappointed in your report about Cater's apparent UNCONCERN for the GEOLOGY of Earth and apparent lack of knowledge about orthodox and unorthodox explanations of past geological events. I admire Pratt for including Earth's geology throughout his thorough analyses. Haven't you? I expected to hear Cater's views on the important questions (especially geological ones) that I posed to you. Aside from non-geological comments, what you've communicated to me, is that his book is not concerned with geology. He doesn't discuss geology. What about in his PRIOR books?
How can Cater have ignored Geology? He regularly makes assertions about GEOLOGICAL phenomena (earthquakes, mountains, volcanoes, what happens in Earth's geologically formed caverns and central hollow, etc.) in relation to his theory of "soft particle" physics. AND about what happens in the "geological" body of the Sun. Dean, this doesn't make sense to me. It seems a giant gap in his awareness. If Cater lacks knowledge of Geology (as you imply), or doesn't understand Geology in general, how can he be sure his "soft particles" theory is not flawed? Or wrong? How can you be sure he isn't as off-base as other physicists you've doubted?
Surely Cater has SOME opinion about the ICE AGE (real or a myth)? That "event" is paramount in Geological history. If he has ignored earth's geological rock strata, and how they (and the entire crust and the Hollow) were formed, how can he be certain "soft particles" "transmute" anything in earth's crust? Where are his proofs, consistent evidence in physical phenomena to support his ideas
According to explorer and self-taught historian, geologist, biologist, mineralogist, physicist, astronomer, Steel manufacturer and mystic, James Churchward, there were TWO MAJOR causes of earth's past catastrophic events. You can examine the history of past geological changes and compare them with his explanations and come to your own conclusions. Churchward claims those two major causes are the following...
(1) The constant movement of hot, explosive VOLCANIC gases as earth's centrifugal force drove them upward, emptying them from earth's original gas-filled center and from deep pockets in the crust (resulting in earthquakes, submersions and emersions of land areas, later uplifting of mountains - and countless tidal waves caused by the former that wiped out many past populations)., Volcanic actions were the cause of MOST past catastrophes.
and (2) MAGNETIC CATACLYSMS, periodically occurring since earth formed, after the Sun's magnetic forces tipped the super magnetized north polar area toward the Sun, beyond the normal extreme mean position.
Earth's centrifugal force and GYROSCOPIC force eventually regained control and, like the rebound of a rubber band, sent the pole back toward mean, a re-balancing,... each time causing the loose ocean waters to continue rotating in the former direction, spilling over land areas, drowning all on them.
Until the last (and he thought final) magnetic cataclysm, only waters spilled over the lands. The last one, sometime since 20,000 years past, collected newly accumulated ice at the north pole and as the giant waves with carried ice and rocks swept over the pole down onto Canada and the upper United States, they ground to a pulp all life and vegetation in the path... and scratched the stationery rocks over which they traveled.
Those "scratches" on the stationery rocks and the signs of melted ice, are THE "evidence" that convinced orthodox geologists that a giant ice age glacier, miles thick, covered the entire northern top of the earth (and another equal one covered the South pole) It is the mythical ice age, a freezing ice box condition on earth, lasting thousands of years. If you can still believe it!
Now how could Cater have ignored the above GEOLOGICAL volcanic and ice age catastrophes and not have formed some opinions, some explanations for himself, about them? Surely, Dean, Cater must OTHER writings about such known phenomena that you are presently unknown to you!
Had Churchward not provided solid PROOFS about the above (and many other of his assertions), I would never have come to hold him in high esteem.
No matter how fascinating a theory may appear, without real-world proofs and evidence, it remains just a fascinating theory. Many physicists, like Michio Kaku, today present "string" theories and "alternate universe" theories that are fascinating but have absolutely not a shred of evidence to support his fascinating conclusions. Guess that's why he is labeled a (Great, in his opinion) "THEORETICAL PHYSICIST," who is never pressed to "prove" anything he has "theorized." Who cares about Proof?
I DO, Dean! I demanded it, when reading Churchward (or ANY other books that pretending authoritative knowledge). I demand it of prophetic "Seers" who predict global catastrophes and economic, political events. And so far, over nearly 72 years, have found most of such Seers lacking. (There are exceptions). And I must demand similar real-world proofs and evidence that support Cater's theory about "soft particles" being universally responsible for most physical phenomena, gravity, lightning, biological life, and on and on. If you have such proofs and evidence, I'd appreciate you advising me about them.
Dean, perhaps you are correct that Cater is aware of James Churchward. But I personally doubt Cater has ever earnestly read any of Churchward's 5 books. Near total Ignorance about Churchward seems "universal" among nearly all physicists, geologists, biologists and astronomers - orthodox and unorthodox - of the present. Cater, with his apparent disinterest in the diverse (but intimately connected) important subjects explored by Churchward, seems to be in the ranks with the majority of unaware scientists.