The follwing was sent to me off-list by the moderator of another list I subscribe to. IMO, many of Velikovsky's theories are well worth pondering; so I've decided to share. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Velikovsky Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 19:08:17 -0700 (PDT) From: Nonconformist Fool <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I read an unpublished work a couple years ago by a friend of one of my brothers, and of course, Mormon. His name is Steve Mark Alvis or something like that. If you're interested, I can call my brother and see whether he still has the files saved somewhere or if the book has finally been published. Among other things, he claims that the geological evidence suggesting the world is much older than 6,000 or 12,000 years can be explained by a theory of catastrophic phenomena built on Velikovsky's "Worlds in Collision" and "Ages in Chaos." He claims that the earth and solar system have periodically passed through plasma fields and that the catastrophes associated with this are the source of many myths and ancient religions as well as the geological layering and other scientific anomalies. This is how it works: (supposedly) 1. The earth passes through the plasma field, the atmosphere is compressed at the point of impact sometimes actually exposing the crust to the vacuum of space. (Father sky and Mother Earth metaphors.) 2. The rest of the earth then passes though the plasma field with the "Thunderbolts" striking along the way. 3. The pressure of the plasma on the surface of the earth dislodges the crust from the mantle and it slips around for a while, sometimes latitudinally (explaining such myths as the sun standing still or "reeling to and fro like a drunk man,") and sometimes even longitudinally until it stabilizes again with the ice caps again on the poles (explaining such things as the polar reversals and the legends of Egypt supposedly recording that for a time the sun rose in the west and set in the east.) 4. When the crust slips over the mantle, it superheats the gases in the mantle creating fusion explosions that eject massive burning gobs of mantle out into space (the rising of the Sun Gods, the offspring of Father Sky and Mother Earth. (the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, the flaming dragons of the Chinese and their astronomical observations of 10 suns rising into the sky, the Celtic "Wheel of Fortune," a large wooden wheel with spokes lit on fire which they then rolled down a hill to commemorate some legendary event, it goes on and on. In "Last of the Mohicans," the movie (I don't know if it's in the book, admittedly, not the most reliable source material, but I think it's reliable enough) when hawkeye talks about the Mohican myth of creation "At the birth of the sun and of his brother the moon, their mother died, so the Sun gave to the Earth her bodyfrom which was to spring all life, and he drew forth from her breast the stars. And the stars he threw into the night sky...") He claims that there is scientific evidence that suggests the earth was much more massive in the past than it is now, something about evidence that the magnetic field was much stronger or something like that. He claims that the earth has lost about 60% of it's mass over the last 6,000 years. Furthermore, he claims that these ideas came to him by revelation, dreams and visions. Considering the possible holographic nature of the mind and of the universe, I would theorize that at some level, he may have access to a source of knowledge that most people don't have access to. Of course, his religious beliefs have most probably interfered with his interpretation of his dreams and visions. Still, although I'd like to believe he's close to the mark as far as the mechanisms involved, the rapid melting of the ice caps might have been able to distabilize the crust enough to dislodge it, that doesn't jive with the dating of the 10 suns legends of the Chinese or the Egyptian sun rising in the west and setting in the east. Most of the other myths could have originated some 12,000 to 15,000 years ago at the end of the last Ice Age. I had dismissed the idea of a plasma field as improbably until I read this article. Interesting. > UNSTABLE SOLAR SYSTEM > Much of the emphasis of this book will be on the > dynamic and > unpredictable roles of planets and moons, when they > moved through > highly active electrical fields. Planetary motions > observed today > are not a reliable guide to solar system history. > But it seems > that over many centuries observational science came > increasingly > under the spell of a predictable and uneventful > planetary > arrangement, and now certain questions are rarely if > ever asked. > How stable is the solar system? Have the planets > always moved on > their present courses? > > For many years, a principle called uniformitarianism > has ruled the > sciences. The principle says that evolutionary > processes > occurring in the past can be deduced from processes > observed now. > It is assumed, for example, that by noting uniform > natural > processes today, an observer can deduce how long it > took the crust > of the earth to shift and mountains to rise, for > wind and water > erosion to occur, and for lava flows and regional > floods to sculpt > the Earth's unique surface features. > > With the arrival of the space age, the same > principles were > applied to the natural events shaping the surfaces > of planets and > moons. As our probes sent back vivid images of > planetary surfaces > and the surfaces of the remote moons of Jupiter and > Saturn, > geologists drew primarily on a count of craters to > "date" the > surfaces. They simply projected theoretical impact > rates > backwards across great spans of time, and the > results were the > presumed "dates" for different surfaces, typically > ranging from > millions to billions of years. > > Such suppositions as these have guided data analyses > throughout > the space age. But are these suppositions really > justified? > Suffice it to say, if their assumption of uniformity > is incorrect, > planetary scientists have directed many billions of > dollars toward > asking the wrong questions. > > >From the nineteenth century onward, the uniformity > principle > remained unchallenged. Undoubtedly that underlying > supposition > constrained the thinking of historians as they began > to explore > the world of our early ancestors and to offer > translations of > previously unknown ancient texts. > > Antiquarians--ethnologists, archaeologists, and > students of the > archaic languages--assumed without question that the > celestial > forms celebrated in the great "sky religions" answer > to the Sun > and Moon and other bodies as they appear in our sky > today. But > what would happen to our understanding of the > myth-making age if > we set this supposition aside just long enough to > ask the > question: What were the sky-worshippers seeing in > the heavens > when they invoked the prodigious forms of the gods? > And what did > they mean by the gods' awe-inspiring weapons of fire > and stone? > > IMMANUEL VELIKOVSKY > > We would be remiss if we failed to make clear that > both authors of > this volume were independently inspired by the work > of Immanuel > Velikovsky, one of the most innovative and > controversial theorists > of the 20th century. In 1950, Velikovsky's > bestseller, Worlds in > Collision, presented evidence for global > catastrophes in > historical times. He wrote that only a few thousand > years ago > planets moved on erratic courses and more than once > the Earth > itself was disturbed by errant planets. These > upheavals, > according to Velikovsky, were memorialized around > the world in > myth, art, ritual, language, and architecture. > > Three principles were paramount in Velikovsky's > hypothesis: > > 1. Unstable motions and near-collisions of planets > have produced > large-scale terrestrial catastrophes on the earth. > > 2. Ancient cultures preserved massive records of > these > catastrophes. > > 3. Taken as a whole, historical records suggest a > vital role of > electricity: In catastrophic episodes, great bolts > of lightning > passed between planets. > > Velikovsky's approach was interdisciplinary. He > used the > insights of a professional psychoanalyst and the > methods of a > trained historian to investigate the astronomical, > mythical, and > religious traditions of diverse cultures. He > discerned deeply > rooted themes which others had failed to see. These > cultural > records told the story of traumatic events, > apparently experienced > on a global scale. Using a comparative method, he > pieced together > a coherent story. > > In support of his reconstruction he found physical > evidence from > geology, paleontology, and archeology. He also > formulated a series > of predictions-consistent with his hypothesis, but > unexpected by > previous theories. He predicted that the planet > Jupiter would > emit radio signals; that the planet Venus would be > much hotter > than astronomers expected; and that craters on the > moon would > reveal remanent magnetism and radioactive hot spots. > Velikovsky's > ability to anticipate scientific discovery produced > a surprising > statement from the renowned geologist Harry Hess (in > an open > letter to Velikovsky in 1963): > > "Some of these predictions were said to be > impossible when you > made them. All of them were predicted long before > proof that they > were correct came to hand. Conversely I do not know > of any > specific prediction you made that has since been > proven to be > false. I suspect the merit lies in that you have a > good basic > background in the natural sciences and you are quite > uninhibited > by the prejudices and probability taboos which > confine the > thinking of most of us." > > For ourselves, the authors of this work believe that > Velikovsky > was incorrect on many details of his reconstruction. > But his > place among the great pioneers of science will be > secure if he was > merely correct on the underlying tenets of his work: > an unstable > solar system in geologically recent times; close > encounters of > planets marked by interplanetary electrical > discharges; > catastrophic disturbances of the Earth; and human > witnesses to > these events; all with the most profound effects on > human > imagination and on the collective activity of early > civilizations. > > In the 50 years since Worlds in Collision was > published, the > viewpoint of orthodox science has changed > dramatically, leading > some to say that the only mistake Velikovsky made > was presenting > his theory at the wrong historical time. Over the > intervening > decades various innovators began to investigate > catastrophic > possibilities previously ignored. > > One of the milestones in this trend was the > hypothesis of Leo and > Walter Alvarez, claiming dinosaur extinction by > asteroidal impact. > While the initial response of official science was > ridicule, over > time the hypothesis began to gain general acceptance > within the > scientific community. Soon thereafter, the > respected biologist > Stephen Jay Gould acknowledged the occasional > catastrophe in a > theory of "punctuated equilibrium." And the > British astronomers > Victor Clube and William Napier opened the door even > further by > postulating cometary or asteroidal disasters so > recent as to have > inspired vivid human stories (myths) of these > events. > > Then several other astronomers, astrophysicists, and > geologists > added support to such speculations. Among these > theorists are the > eminent astronomers Fred Hoyle and Tom Van Flandern. > According to > the latter theorist, an "exploding planet" > devastated the surfaces > of Mars and other bodies in the solar system, > perhaps leaving its > scars on human imagination as well. > > And now, a half century after Worlds in Collision, a > few well- > accredited catastrophists, including > dendrochronologist Mike > Baillie, are beginning to admit a debt to > Velikovsky, usually with > the disclaimer that of course he was wrong about > unstable planets > being involved in these events. This general > assessment of > Velikovsky is shared openly by the popular science > and science > fiction writer, Jerry Pournelle, on his website > <http://www.jerrypournelle.com/science/moremusings.htm>: > > "Taken as a whole, Velikovsky's specific hypotheses > are, in my > judgment, quite beyond belief. On the other hand, > his general > hypothesis, that there were astronomical terrors in > the Bronze Age > and memories of them have come down to us in myths > and legends, > has always seemed to me to be well worth taking > seriously and is > in fact very probably true." > > We want to make it clear at the outset that the > authors of this > upcoming book stand with Velikovsky--if not on all > the details of > his reconstruction, then certainly on the general > principles. > When it comes to solar system stability we believe > that Velikovsky > was fundamentally correct, though it is certainly > understandable > that many intelligent writers find the errant > planets of Worlds in > Collision "quite beyond belief." > > Indeed, belief itself may be the greatest obstacle > to objective > investigation on this subject, given the inertia of > prior > assumptions. The very idea that wandering planets > could quickly > settle into their present highly uniform and > predictable orbits is > simply too much to countenance under accepted > principles of > Newtonian gravity and energy conservation. > > But in fact, the issue can be resolved > dispassionately. The belief > in uniform planetary motions over millions of years, > though > understandable, is just a belief. Placed within a > wider field of > evidence--a field ranging across the global > testimony of ancient > cultures and into a vast library of space age > data--the very > foundations of the belief will collapse. > > Newton developed the concept of gravitation in 1666, > eight decades > before Franklin flew his kite and more than two > centuries before > Maxwell wrote his famous equations. Astronomy > developed in the > gaslight era before electricity was known. > > In this volume we intend to show that something is > missing from > the standard treatments of planetary history and > celestial > dynamics. That missing component is electricity. > > Dave Talbott > ***************************************************** > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints! http://photos.yahoo.com <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html <A HREF="http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
