[Doctor Stochastic]

While the standard theory does predict a change, Satterfeld (the main hero of the stem posting) had nothing to do with such theoy. Satterfeld is just a nut. WorldNetDaily's article only discredits WND's (not that they had much to begin with) journalist standing. Not only is WND not a scientific publication, articles like this call into question their entire journalistic output (but I never found WND to be reliable anyway.)

[Alamo-Girl]

Er, in defense of WND, they have never claimed to be a peer-reviewed scientific journal. They have also clearly mentioned that Setterfield's views are not generally accepted in the conventional science journals.

I am glad there are outlets for fringe theories and speculations. They make for very interesting reads and - after all - even a broken clock is correct twice a day.