OK, here's what I've come up with over the last few hours. It looks to me like I could spend days or even weeks on these topics alone, but I think I've come up with enough information to respond sensibly. I don't know if this topic even belongs here, but this is where it came up, so here goes!

1. DARK MATTER of an unknown form makes up most of the matter of the universe. This matter is not predicted by the standard physics models and science does not understand what this substance is.
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter - "In astrophysics and cosmology, dark matter is matter of unknown composition that does not emit or reflect enough electromagnetic radiation to be observed directly, but whose presence can be inferred from gravitational effects on visible matter." and "It has been noted that the names 'dark matter' and 'dark energy' serve mainly as expressions of our ignorance, much as the marking of early maps with 'terra incognita'." In other words, we don't yet know what it is, but we know it's there and we're searching for the answers. This is the cutting edge of astrophysics. It's not surprising that it doesn't fit into the standard models.

2. THE LAW OF GRAVITY appears to be seriously broken. Experiments have found that Foucault pendulums (pendula?) veer off in strange directions during solar eclipses. Interplanetary NASA satellites are showing persistent errors in trajectory. Neither of these is explained or predicted by the standard theory of gravity.
Regarding the question of the Foucault pendulum, it appears that this was first noticed back in 1954, but there has been little or no study on it until recently. I haven't yet found where scientists have determined the cause, but what I've seen indicates that the very short duration of a solar eclipse, and the small area of totality, make study difficult. However, the movement of the Foucault pendulum is a response to the Earth's rotation, not to Gravity.
As for the trajectory of interplanetary satellites, I haven't been able to find anything, yet, about this except this statement on the Synchronized Universe web page. My intuition tells me that these errors, if they exist, are caused by encounters with objects which were not predicted by those who developed the course/orbit of the satellites. And though you may not like the statement, there are still things out there we don't know about. Before Einstein's relativity theory, in the late part of the 19th and the early part of the 20th centuries, Newton's equations regarding gravity worked extremely well. So well that at least one planet was discovered based on deviations in the orbit of another. But there was a problem with the orbit of Mercury. Something was affecting Mercury's orbit, causing it to act against Newton's equations. Many scientists believed that there had to be another, massive planet between Mercury and the Sun. Some even claimed to have seen it. Then Einstein came along, and his famous equation said,in effect, that the energy which the Sun emitted has a mass equivalent.Once this equivalent was plugged into Newton's equations, Mercury's orbit exactly fit the prediction. The equations weren't wrong, only the interpretation of the data. This is very common in science, and one reason why science works so well to explain the world we live in.

3. COLD FUSION. The Cold Fusion phenomenon violates physics as we understand it, and yet it has been duplicated in various forms in over 500 laboratories around the world. Present day physics has no explanation for how it works, but it does work.
Whew! This one's controversial as hell! But the general concensus is that, No, it does NOT work. At least not yet. There's little doubt that SOMETHING is happening in these experiments but no one can seem to say exactly what it is. In fact, despite a lot of money being thrown at this one, there has been little or no advancement in the last 20 years. The experiments are not reproducible all of the time. Some have made it work, others have not. There is no evidence of fusion byproducts even when it DOES work, and there is no theoretical model to explain what IS happening. This one is still in the "wait and see" stage, but it doesn't look too good.

4. CHARGE CLUSTERS. Under certain conditions, billions of electrons can "stick together" in close proximity, despite the law of electromagnetism that like charges repel. This indicates that our laws of electromagnetism are missing something important.
I have to admit, the physics of this one are beyond me. But see http://www.padrak.com/ine/FB97_1.html for a seemingly detailed study. From what I can gather, charge clusters seem to be quite well understood and do not violate any laws of electrodynamics. Just as heavy objects can seemingly defy gravity by being lifted in a tornado, some sort of toroidal effects hold these clusters together against the repulsive forces of the electron charges. It looks to me like Dr. Claude Swanson is wrong about this one.

5. COSMOLOGY. Quasars, which are supposed to be the most distant astronomical objects in the sky, are often found connected to nearby galaxies by jets of gas. This suggests that their red shifts are due to some other, more unusual physics which is not yet fully understood.
Looks like he's wrong on this one, too. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quasar states that the concept of the redshift of quasars being caused by something other than distance went out in the 70's and "today the cosmological distance of quasars is accepted by almost all researchers." And apparently a quasar does not necessarily HAVE to be very distant but the mechanism which creates them, as we understand it, was much more prevalent in the early universe, and is therefore more common in very distant galaxies.

6. SPEED OF LIGHT, has been exceeded in several recent experiments. Certain phenomena, such as solar disturbances on the sun which take more than eight minutes to be visible on the earth, are registered instantaneously on the acupuncture points of instrumented subjects which apparently respond to solar events by some other force which travels at a much higher speed than light.
Whoops! Three in a row for Dr. swanson. See http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2000/...ght000720.html and we find that "their experiment only disproves the general misconception that nothing can move faster than the speed of light. The scientific statement "nothing with mass can travel faster than the speed of light" is an entirely different belief, one that has yet to be proven wrong. The NEC experiment caused a pulse of light, a group of waves with no mass, to go faster than light."

As you stated, this guy is trying to sell his book. It seems to me that he is stressing those areas where there is still some controversy within scientific circles, such as cold fusion, or he is reviving outmoded theories which have been shown to be inadequate or just plain wrong. And it seems to me that he's using these borderline items to reinforce his beliefs in the paranormal.