Probably no other area of interest in the Papers has received as much attention as that of the scientific content. In 1961 William Sadler and Alvin Kulieke published a two-volume set titled Science in the Urantia Book. This was a summary of scientific material but they did not discuss the validity of the presentations. Three separate symposiums were conducted around this subject: Nashville in 1988, Oklahoma City in 1991, and again in Oklahoma City in 1994. In 1991 Ken Glasziou, Matt Neibaur, Dick Bain, and Frank Wright published a small booklet through the Brotherhood of Man library called The Science Content of the Urantia Book. Many other papers and presentations have been given. Refer to the Urantia Book Fellowship web site at, which has a section entitled "Exploring Science and The Urantia Book," and another by Glasziou titled "Science, Anthropology and Archeology in The Urantia Book.."

Much of the scientific discussions have centered on the "false" science found in the Revelation, with attempts to reconcile it to our current understanding. Glasziou has written books and papers discussing difficulties he finds with the scientific statements of the Papers. See especially his journal series titled Innerface. Glasziou's later work has been motivated by desire to refute the "false science" assertions made by Martin Gardner in Gardner's two chapters on science in "Urantia, The Great Cult Mystery." Glasziou spent a major portion of his life trying to "prove" the Papers through science.

Dick Bain proposed that the science errors in the Papers were "time bombs," intentionally placed there by the Revelators to prevent us from making a scientific fetish out of the Revelation. Sooner or later we would discover the "false" science, and turn our attention to the religious aspects of the Revelation. Dick's proposal was an attempt to make sense out of the difficulties, but not many people bought it.

For many years I took a similar attitude. I thought that perhaps the "false" science of the Papers was intended to prevent us from concentrating on the material aspects of the Revelation, and to force us to seek the greater truths and spiritual content. Would we condemn the Revelation for its "false" science, rather than clinging to its insuperable truths? Did the Revelators use this technique to determine who had their hearts centered on God, and who would be trapped in the material orientations of today's world?

My view was reinforced by the famous (or infamous) statement given in the Papers:

P.1109 - §3 "Mankind should understand that we who participate in the revelation of truth are very rigorously limited by the instructions of our superiors. We are not at liberty to anticipate the scientific discoveries of a thousand years. Revelators must act in accordance with the instructions which form a part of the revelation mandate. We see no way of overcoming this difficulty, either now or at any future time. We full well know that, while the historic facts and religious truths of this series of revelatory presentations will stand on the records of the ages to come, within a few short years many of our statements regarding the physical sciences will stand in need of revision in consequence of additional scientific developments and new discoveries. These new developments we even now foresee, but we are forbidden to include such humanly undiscovered facts in the revelatory records. Let it be made clear that revelations are not necessarily inspired. The cosmology of these revelations is not inspired. It is limited by our permission for the co-ordination and sorting of present-day knowledge. While divine or spiritual insight is a gift, human wisdom must evolve.

Does this mean that we must deal with a caveat which permits most any kind of false science, or at least of science compared against knowledge (popularly) current at the time of the revelation?

As Ken Glasziou wrote:

In Section 5 of Paper 101, the revelators state, "Science deals with facts; religion is concerned only with values." 

A major concern of the authors of the Urantia Papers appears to have been to provide us with a synthesis of "the apparently divergent sciences of nature and the theology of religion into a consistent and logical universe philosophy." (1105) 

One such restriction proscribes impartation of unearned or premature knowledge, but this is a restriction that is qualified by permission being given to the authors to impart key information when considered essential.

In providing us with a revelation that will achieve its purposes, the revelators were required to balance themselves on a knife edge, with the balance point adjusted, not in the direction of scientific fact, but on universe values. Wherever there was conflict, they give "value," not "fact," the priority. And, except in special circumstances, the science component had to remain anchored at the level of knowledge available to us humans prior to the mid-1930's. 

This story is meant to endow us with a concept of how and why we came to be on this planet. It is not meant to be a collection of scientific "facts" by which lay people might impress others with their accurate advance knowledge of planetary history, nor is it meant to be an infallible science text for correcting the errors that scientists may make in their search for truth.

While I agree with Ken's sentiments, it seems we should hold to a rule that the Revelators would not intentionally provide false statements. Why would holy and divine beings purposely misguide us?

How do we justify so many confusing contradictions that scientifically informed persons reject the Revelation, even though they may have a keen interest in God?

We might ask other questions.

Why the science of the early 20th century, as Glasziou claims? Did the Revelators expect the mental framework of the 1920's to prevail in the first generation Urantians? Did they cater to general public attitudes in the early stages of the Revelation, to get it off the ground, so to speak, and to make it compatible with those world views?

On the other hand, it seems that the Revelators intended to caution us about the impact too much revelation would have on our natural development.  If they went too far they would force unnatural intellectual evolution. If they limited their information to "near theories" or "moderate discoveries" they would not greatly modify our cultural evolution.

Their attitude about our level of scientific understanding is captured in this brief statement:


P.973 - 1 Ancient magic was the cocoon of modern science, indispensable in its time but now no longer useful. And so the phantasms of ignorant superstition agitated the primitive minds of men until the concepts of science could be born. Today, Urantia is in the twilight zone of this intellectual evolution. One half the world is grasping eagerly for the light of truth and the
 facts of scientific discovery, while the other half languishes in the arms of ancient superstition and but thinly disguised magic.

We are in this twilight zone, not because half of the world "languishes in the arms of ancient superstition," but because we, as a planet, are so ignorant about higher universe "physics," even though we are so proud of our scientific accomplishments.

What is meant by "additional scientific developments and new discoveries." Does it refer to "major" scientific developments and "new" discoveries of universe processes hitherto unknown?

Would the statement --

P.1863 - §12 "This world has never seriously or sincerely or honestly tried out these dynamic ideas and divine ideals of Jesus' doctrine of the kingdom of heaven. But you should not become discouraged by the apparently slow progress of the kingdom idea on Urantia. Remember that the order of progressive evolution is subjected to sudden and unexpected periodical changes in both the material and the spiritual worlds. The bestowal of Jesus as an incarnated Son was just such a strange and unexpected event in the spiritual life of the world. Neither make the fatal mistake, in looking for the age manifestation of the kingdom, of failing to effect its establishment within your own souls."

-- provide revelation of "new" discoveries if there would occur a sudden and unexpected periodical change in the material world? That, indeed, would be a dramatic development, and would thoroughly shift our scientific understanding. It would throw out a whole range of scientific views about "slow evolutionary changes" and would bring back to mankind the knowledge that "sudden and unexpected" periodical changes actually do take place in the material world.

Or, as it has been revealed to us:

Isa 24:1-- Behold, the LORD will lay waste the earth and make it desolate, and he will twist its surface and scatter its inhabitants. 

Isa 24:19-20 -- The earth is utterly broken, the earth is rent asunder, the earth is violently shaken. The earth staggers like a drunken man, it sways like a hut; its transgression lies heavy upon it, and it falls, and will not rise again.

Luke 21:25-26 -- "And there will be signs in sun and moon and stars, and upon the earth distress of nations in perplexity at the roaring of the sea and the waves, men fainting with fear and with foreboding of what is coming on the world; for the powers of the heavens will be shaken.

That forthcoming event certainly will change the current godless attitudes of mankind.

See also my discussions of the periodical geophysical changes in our planetary history under "The Legacy of Adam and Eve."

If we are to understand the motives behind the Revelation design we should try to gain higher insight into the purpose of the Revelators before bringing bald charges against them for "false" science. Perhaps if they had included overt statements about future "scientific discoveries" they would have hopelessly undermined the spread of the Revelation. They did not tell us "too much" for fear many souls would have rejected it.

On the other hand, outright errors exist. We must deal with them.

I have another proposal.

In offering this proposal I do not intend to engage in the worthiness of scientific details. My purpose is to do a brief survey to cast another light on the scientific controversies encountered.

Is it possible that corruptions occurred to the Urantia text which would cause us to go off into endless and fruitless debate? Were they introduced, not by the Revelators, but by Caligastia?

Although of engineering training, with some scientific background, I am not sufficiently competent in science to wade through the Revelation to rigorously examine all of its scientific content. Nor is anyone else because so many of us are so tightly bound to scientific specialities. I decided to catalogue the errors which have been published. Martin Gardner's work was especially important, not because he was a blind believer, but rather a ruthless commentator. Gardner may be one of the few individuals in this society who is more versed generally in science. Therefore, he makes a good source for such research.

Neither Sadler nor anyone else associated with the Revelation was competent to evaluate the scientific accuracy, especially if it was pulled from current scientific papers and books.

In the following I do not include scientific theory, merely established scientific fact. We could debate the big-bang theory for ages; it is only a theory. Therefore, I shall not discuss the contradictions in the Papers with such theories.

Martin Gardner spent two chapters of his book on exposing scientific errors. Perhaps it would be helpful to pick up where Gardner left off. If we go through his list, can we find patterns which would suggest intentional errors in the Papers?

In his expose Martin Gardner did more than fault the Revelation because of false facts. He also faulted it because of inadequate theories of science, and because of foolish ideas of (his) reality. He took the position that all-wise and all-knowledgeable intelligence should know better than to present foolishness, and that if foolishness were found it had to be of human origin. He claimed that the inadequate theories were based on current (1920's to 1940's) scientific speculations and that those theories came out of written works in circulation at the time, with borrowing by William Sadler when Sadler edited the channelings of Wilfred Kellogg.

While such suggestion might appeal to more thoughtless persons, more reflective persons were not attracted by such nonsense. Even a cursory examination of the Revelation revealed a depth of conceptual structure and provoking spiritual insight that went beyond the capacity of primitive minds who might plagiarize current printed sources. Something far more was going on than grasped by Gardner in such harebrained proposals.

Clearly, Gardner was appealing to the thoughtless masses. His work was an emotional response to a serious challenge of his personal world-view.

My method is this:

I shall list some of the "good" science of The Urantia Papers. I shall then list some of the "bad" science. I shall attempt to show how damaging it may be to our appreciation of the Revelation. This review may provide us with a larger perspective of how the revelations on science will affect the future.

I illustrate twenty-four examples. These were obtained from the discussions by Glasziou, Gardner, and others. The initials MG refer to Gardner's comments.


The following fifteen examples show interesting scientific discussions, or "predictions" by the Urantia Papers.

Age of the Solar System

P.655 - §9 4,500,000,000 years ago the enormous Angona system began its approach to the neighborhood of this solitary sun. The center of this great system was a dark giant of space, solid, highly charged, and possessing tremendous gravity pull.

Moyer: Agrees with current estimates. A good value in 1935. Not outlandish. Would not bring a scare in scientific views, nor cause a sudden interest in scientific investigation.  

Dark Islands of Space

P.173 - §1 The Dark Islands of Space. These are the dead suns and other large aggregations of matter devoid of light and heat. The dark islands are sometimes enormous in mass and exert a powerful influence in universe equilibrium and energy manipulation. The density of some of these large masses is well-nigh unbelievable. And this great concentration of mass enables these dark islands to function as powerful balance wheels, holding large neighboring systems in effective leash. They hold the gravity balance of power in many constellations; many physical systems which would otherwise speedily dive to destruction in near-by suns are held securely in the gravity grasp of these guardian dark islands. It is because of this function that we can locate them accurately. We have measured the gravity pull of the luminous bodies, and we can therefore calculate the exact size and location of the dark islands of space which so effectively function to hold a given system steady in its course. 

MG: The UB (173) explicitly identifies "the dark islands of space" as "dead suns and other large aggregations of matter devoid of light and heat. It correctly describes these black stars as having an unbelievable density that can be calculated by their effect on nearby luminous suns. It may well turn out that such stars are more plentiful than supposed, and may contribute to the mysterious "dark matter" that today's cosmologists are searching for.

Moyer: Statements would not bring undue excitement from astronomers, although insightful for 1935.  

Andromeda Distance  

Moyer: Thought to be 2 million light-years at the time of the Revelation. Since revised to UP value of one million light-years.

Magnetic Sensing  

P.378 - §7 The four points of the compass are universal and inherent in the life of Nebadon. All living creatures possess bodily units which are sensitive and responsive to these directional currents. These creature creations are duplicated on down through the universe to the individual planets and, in conjunction with the magnetic forces of the worlds, so activate the hosts of microscopic bodies 

MG: One of the UB's most successful predictions about future science is on pages 378-79.

MG: As early as 1855 the Russian biologist E. van Middendorf conjectured in a paper that migrating birds are able to sense the earth's magnetic field.

MG: Note that the UB says magnetic "bodies" were first found in Urantia life forms "about the time of this narration." This implies that evidence for such bodies had been claimed by someone prior to 1955 when the UB was printed.

MG: Sure enough, in 1947 Life (September 22, pages 105-108) ran an article titled "How Homing Pigeons Find Their Way." It described research with army pigeons conducted by H. L. Yeagley, a physics professor at Penn State.

Moyer: Gardner was attempting to show that these statements could have been added to the Revelation after publication of Yeagley"s report in 1947.

Space Heat  

P.473 - §4 Gravity presence and action is what prevents the appearance of the theoretical absolute zero, for interstellar space does not have the temperature of absolute zero. Throughout all organized space there are gravity-responding energy currents, power circuits, and ultimatonic activities, as well as organizing electronic energies.

MG: That space cannot be absolutely zero was obvious long before the UB was published because too many atoms are floating around out there, a large proportion of them produced by nova explosions Indeed, all the heavy metals, including calcium (UB 461-62), were then known to come from the stars.

MG: The only discovery after 1955 was how high this heat was.

Moyer: Gardner is askew. The fact of bodies in space, whether atoms or stars, does not provide evidence for "space heat." This "space heat" is so-called black body radiation that pervades all space. Gardner again is attempting to degrade the worthiness of UP statements.  


P.479 - §1 The charged protons and the uncharged neutrons of the nucleus of the atom are held together by the reciprocating function of the mesotron, a particle of matter 180 times as heavy as the electron. Without this arrangement the electric charge carried by the protons would be disruptive of the atomic nucleus.

MG: In 1935 Japanese physicist Hidekai Yukawa conjectured that just such a particle exists. Because it had to have a mass between that of a proton and electron, he called it a "meson," meaning "middle.. Some physicists preferred to call it a mesotron. Two years later, in 1937, the meson was finally observed. Its mass was estimated as 200 times that of the electron. This was close to the UB's estimate of 180.

Moyer: Gardner believes this discovery by Yukawa in 1935 was the source of the UP discussions. He persistently denies that the statements could have come from invisible spirit beings.  

Sun Energy Carbon Catalyst  

P.464 - §3 In those suns which are encircuited in the space-energy channels, solar energy is liberated by various complex nuclear-reaction chains, the most common of which is the hydrogen-carbon-helium reaction. In this metamorphosis, carbon acts as an energy catalyst since it is in no way actually changed by this process of converting hydrogen into helium. Under certain conditions of high temperature the hydrogen penetrates the carbon nuclei. Since the carbon cannot hold more than four such protons, when this saturation state is attained, it begins to emit protons as fast as new ones arrive. In this reaction the ingoing hydrogen particles come forth as a helium atom. 
MG: Hans Bethe announced in 1938 that carbon plays a catalytic role in the sun's nuclear reactions.

Moyer: Same Gardner assignment to human borrowing.  

Supernova #1: Crab Nebula

"Mother" star.  See page 464.

MG: Search began long before UP. Confirmation in 1960's

Supernova #2: 1572

P.458 - §5 The most recent of the major cosmic eruptions in Orvonton was the extraordinary double star explosion, the light of which reached Urantia in A.D. 1572.

MG: Because the supernova of 1572 was Type 1, the belief that it resulted from the merging of two stars was the opinion of most astronomers long before 1952 when the remnants of the nova's explosion were first observed.

Moyer: Gardner does not consider the Revelation statements as worthy or attention. Just guesses, based on current 1935 understanding.  

Moon Recession

See comparison with James Jeans below

Moyer: Well known fact. Not revelation.  


See comparison with James Jeans below.

Moyer: Well know fact. Not revelation. Conflicting theories of origins.  

Suns X-rays  

P.463 - §1 The internal temperature of many of the suns, even your own, is much higher than is commonly believed. In the interior of a sun practically no whole atoms exist; they are all more or less shattered by the intensive X-ray bombardment which is indigenous to such high temperatures. Regardless of what material elements may appear in the outer layers of a sun, those in the interior are rendered very similar by the dissociative action of the disruptive X rays. X ray is the great leveler of atomic existence.

MG: Such rays from the sun were detected in the late thirties, and accurately measured in 1949, six years before the UB was published. In The Universe Around Us (chapter 5) Jeans has many pages on X-ray radiation from all stars. "A star is in effect nothing but a huge X-ray apparatus . . . the rate at which they are generating X-rays is merely the rate at which they are radiating energy away into space.

Moyer: Gardner views these discussions as mere elaborations on current knowledge. He does not perceive the exquisite form of the statement.  

Christmas Star  

P.1352 - §3 These wise men saw no star to guide them to Bethlehem. The beautiful legend of the star of Bethlehem originated in this way: Jesus was born August 21 at noon, 7 B.C. On May 29, 7 B.C., there occurred an extraordinary conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn in the constellation of Pisces. And it is a remarkable astronomic fact that similar conjunctions occurred on September 29 and December 5 of the same year.

MG: Belabored discussion why this conjunction would not be regarded as "one star."

Light From The Sun

Light emanations are discussed. So also are the flinging into space of electrons.

MG: Don't understand why Bains would make an issue of this. In a section on solar radiation the authors refer to sunbeams as "highly heated and agitated electrons."

Moyer: This is a bad error by Gardner. Refer to UP discussions.  

Atomic Interior

P.477 - §4 Within the atom the electrons revolve about the central proton with about the same comparative room the planets have as they revolve about the sun in the space of the solar system. There is the same relative distance, in comparison with actual size, between the atomic nucleus and the inner electronic circuit as exists between the inner planet, Mercury, and your sun.

MG: This planetary model of the atom had been proposed by Bohr. Why did Sadler not remove it from the UB?

Moyer: Gardner did not complete his homework. Note the following:

P.478 - §2 While atoms may contain from one to one hundred orbital electrons, only the outer ten electrons of the larger atoms revolve about the central nucleus as distinct and discrete bodies, intactly and compactly swinging around on precise and definite orbits. The thirty electrons nearest the center are difficult of observation or detection as separate and organized bodies. This same comparative ratio of electronic behavior in relation to nuclear proximity obtains in all atoms regardless of the number of electrons embraced. The nearer the nucleus, the less there is of electronic individuality. The wavelike energy extension of an electron may so spread out as to occupy the whole of the lesser atomic orbits; especially is this true of the electrons nearest the atomic nucleus.


P.397 - The Orvonton life patterns are configured as twelve inheritance carriers. The differing orders of will creatures are configured as 12, 24, 48, 96, 192, 384, and 768. On Urantia there are forty-eight units of pattern control--trait determiners--in the sex cells of human reproduction.

MG: In 1923 a false count of chromosomes yielded the 48 number and it was accepted as correct until 1956

MG: Unfortunately, in 1956, a year too late to give Sadler a chance to correct, the number was positively established as 46. Both males and females contain in each cell the same 22 pairs of non-sex chromosomes, known as "autosomes.- Females have a 23rd pair of XX sex chromosomes. Males have a 23rd pair of XY sex chromosomes. Each person, therefore, has 23 pairs of chromosomes, or 46 individual ones.

Moyer: Perhaps statement is styled to current knowledge of the 1930's.


The following nine examples show false scientific statements from the Revelation. Where they display the hand of Caligastia I so note.

Sun's Energy

P.463 - para 4: ". . . the sources of solar energy, named in the order of their importance, are:
Annihilation of atoms and, eventually, of electrons."

P.463 - §13 These solar temperatures operate to enormously speed up the ultimatons and the electrons, at least such of the latter as continue to maintain their existence under these conditions. 

MG: Sir James Jeans in The Universe Around Us: the sun's energy "originates out of the annihilation of electrons and protons. The sun is destroying its substance in order that we may live."

Moyer: Now known as thermonuclear reactions where "hydrogen is converted into a variety of helium" Actual mechanism had to remain unrevealed in 1935. Would have caused considerable excitement to nuclear physicists of that period. However, time of anticipation was not great. I view this "elementary" explanation as one in the category to refrain from attracting premature attention to the Revelation.  

Sun Temperature  

P.463 - §2 The surface temperature is almost 6,000 degrees, about 35,000,000 degrees in the central regions. (All of these temperatures refer to your Fahrenheit scale.) 

MG: The sun's interior temperature is indeed based on the Fahrenheit scale, but its surface temperature of 6,000 is based on the Kelvin scale

MG: Jeans, on page 241 of The Universe Around Us, (1929), gives 6,000 for the sun's surface temperature, using the Kelvin scale. On the Fahrenheit scale it is about 10,000. It is hard to comprehend how a superhuman intelligence could make such an elementary blunder, but easy to understand how a human, reading Jeans hastily, would be unaware that Jeans gave temperatures in the Kelvin or absolute scale.

Moyer: This is a typical Caligastian insertion. Merely by adding the simple offending sentence he could introduce the error.  

Mercury and Moon Rotation

P.657 - ". . . tidal friction acting as a brake on the rate of planetary-axial revolution until axial revolution ceases, leaving one hemisphere of the planet always turned toward the sun or larger body, as is illustrated by the planet Mercury and by the moon, which always turns the same face toward Urantia."

Moyer: Bad science. Mercury rotates with a cycle of 3/2. Moon rotates with a cycle of 1/1. Neither Mercury nor Moon stop axial revolution.

Moyer: I believe this is another example of simple insertions by Caligastia. Although the rotation of Mercury was not known until after publication of the Revelation, the rotation of the Moon was well known. Only unlearned minds would subscribe to the statements about the Moon.  

Geologic Ages  

P.674 - §4 The marine life was much alike the world over and consisted of the seaweeds, one-celled organisms, simple sponges, trilobites, and other crustaceans--shrimps, crabs, and lobsters. Three thousand varieties of brachiopods appeared at the close of this period, only two hundred of which have survived. These animals represent a variety of early life which has come down to the present time practically unchanged. 

MG: The Life Carrier of Nebadon, assigned to Urantia, in his description of the Cambrian period (Paper 59, page 674), made a glaring mistake. He makes crustaceans such as shrimps, crabs, and lobsters contemporaneous with the trilobites, when actually the crustaceans appeared on Urantia much later.

MG: A few Urantians have tried to justify this howler by saying that it was a typing or printing error.

Moyer: Another example of a contradiction introduced by Caligastia to bring doubt to the Revelation. Again, the insertion is simple, and does not involve complex discussion.  

Maximum No. of elements  
P.477 - §6 The local universes are of decimal construction. There are just one hundred distinguishable atomic materializations of space-energy in a dual universe; that is the maximum possible organization of matter in Nebadon. These one hundred forms of matter consist of a regular series in which from one to one hundred electrons revolve around a central and relatively compact nucleus. It is this orderly and dependable association of various energies that constitutes matter.

P.478 - §1 In Orvonton it has never been possible naturally to assemble over one hundred orbital electrons in one atomic system. When one hundred and one have been artificially introduced into the orbital field, the result has always been the well-nigh instantaneous disruption of the central proton with the wild dispersion of the electrons and other liberated energies. If a 1O1st electron is added, the element instantly disintegrates.

MG: Now 100 was a good guess in the 1950s because fermium, which has exactly 100 electrons, was discovered in 1953. Unfortunately, in 1955, the year the UB was printed, mendelevium, with 101 electrons, was found.

Moyer: Since then chemists have created elements with 102 through 111 electrons. (The last two were created in Germany in 1994.) Ken Glasziou has discussed this problem in some depth. Would require elaborate alteration of text to bring deception.  This would be another example of more serious textual changes, illustrated by the 40-day Pentecostal problem.

Moyer: The caveat that the word "naturally" would cover those artificially created is denied by the further assertion of the "well-nigh instantaneous disruption." Some of the extra-100 elements have extended half-lives.

Moyer: Note that this passage was one of those arbitrarily changed by Sadler for the second printing.

Origins of Solar System  

"planetesimal hypothesis"

Moyer: No longer accepted by current science. Now origin attributed to accretion out of nubular dust cloud. Gardner gave the following as the "source" of Sadler's "borrowing."

MG: Oranges inside the hollow globe similar to Eddinton's tennis balls inside the hollow globe. Moulton's Astronomy (1931). James Jeans, The Universe Around Us (1929). Eddington, The Nature of the Physical World , 1927

Moyer: Theory dead by 1940. Gardner asks why Sadler did not change it. Difficult to assign to Caligasita. May be accommodation to current scientific notions.  

Continental Drift

Moyer: Papers infer drift of continental land masses on liquid basalt to separate continents. Contour "fit" of continents well known long before Revelation.

Moyer: Gardner assigns to Wegener theory, well known in the 1920's but discredited in the 1930's. Theory now based on "sea floor spreading," or the circulatory rise of liquid basalt along major crustal rift lines from the interior of the globe.

Moyer: Probably accommodation to current scientific views.  

Age of the Universe

Oldest recorded event: 987,000,000,000 years stating that conditions were favorable for "materialization."

Moyer: 10-15 billion years, currently estimated from various data. Until we obtain other information this revelation cannot be confirmed. Many conflicts in current universe theories. Seems that Caligastia would have wanted to deny the revelation.  

Number of Galaxy Stars  

1,013,628, pg 655

Moyer: Gardner was in error on his assignment. He did not recognize the difference between local nebular system and galaxy.

Moyer: Billions according to current science. Could be assigned to Caligastia.

From this review I would assign only four cases to the hand of Caligastia:

Sun temperature
Mercury and moon rotation
Other crustaceans--shrimps, crabs, and lobsters

Maximum number of elements (Doubtful)
Number of stars in galaxy

However the obvious contradictions on the sun temperature, mercury and moon rotation, and other crustaceans would be enough to bring denial of the Revelation. Only one bad case is sufficient.