The importance of precession to EU theory

[celeste]

I don't understand why EU theorists don't focus more attention on the theory of precession of the equinoxes. We are all aware of the mainstream model, which says that earth precesses due to gravitational tugs of the sun and moon (and to a lesser extent, the planets). You may also be aware that they have accurately tracked the rate and direction of precession for almost the last 100 years. Their models do not, however, explain the precession they observe. This is important. Success on their part would be disaster for EU theory.
Let me explain. If they could predict exactly every change in precession, that would mean they had accounted correctly for every torque, by gravitational means alone. There would be no room for any electromagnetic torque. But if planets are charged and moving through magnetic fields, there must be torques on them. In short, the more accurate the mainstream is in calculating precession, the less room there is for electricity playing a role in our solar system.
It should come as a great relief to EU theorists,then, when someone like Walter Cruttenden comes forward and states just how spectacularly the gravitational theory of precession is failing. Specifically on two points:
First, he provides multiple arguments that the whole solar system ,(not just Earth), is precessing. Great! It is instantly obvious that the gravitational tug of our little the moon has nothing to do with precession. But if you think about it, No gravitational forces between any objects within our solar system could cause our entire system to precess. We are again free to examine precession in light of EU theory. (notice galactic magnetic forces on our solar system are a possibility)
Perhaps more important is his observation that the rate of precession has been continuously increasing for at least the last hundred years. This should be very exciting to someone like David Talbott, who is suggesting that we live in a much more dynamic solar system than the mainstream's nearly static model. Here Talbott has an observable (precession) that can be accounted for by EU theory (magnetic forces on charged bodies), changing in a consistent direction over the course of his lifetime.
Am I the only one who sees anything significant here?

[seasmith]

Celest,

A few links where precession was discussed earlier on T'bolts:

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1176
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1176
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=226

s