But it can't possibly be true

[gerald]

But it can’t possibly be true.

Immanuel Velikovsky ‘s book “Worlds In Collision” was published in 1950. He was a psychiatrist and psychotherapist, some of his writings appeared in Sigmund Freud’s journal “ Imago” . Velikovky founded the journal “Scripta Universitatis” and sometimes collaborated with Albert Einstein regarding physics and mathematics. Velikovsky helped establish the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, and In 1939, moved to New York to continue his research , an intermediate stop on his way to Princeton. In his research he came upon ancient Egyptian texts, these and others lead him down “the rabbit hole” to his writing of “ Worlds In Collision”. Based upon these ancient texts, myths, etc. from around the world he made what he called” advanced claims” and “prognostications” .There were some (actually many) in the science community who did not want “Worlds In Collision” published. They tried to block its publication but failed. The book became a best seller in the “common man’s market”.

Velikovsky states, among claims, that the planet Venus first appeared in our solar system as a comet about 3,500 years ago, brilliantly lighting the sky, moving erratically and creating havoc for centuries before settling into a stable orbit. Venus was “born” (ejected ) from Jupiter after another celestial object impacted Jupiter. Needless to say the science community was appalled by “Worlds In Collision” and because of who Velikovsky was they felt they had to attack him in every way they could. Why? Because he was a threat to uniformitarianism which was required to support Darwin’s theory of evolution and also the idea of a gradual formation of our solar system ,an astronomical premise, etc.

In 2012 Laird Scranton published “The Vilikovsky Heresies”. (Scranton is an independent software designer who studied ancient myth, language , and cosmology and has authored several books.)

Scranton states “Worlds In Collision” questioned modern science’s “ Church of Progress” .The ferocity against Velikovsky was seldom seen since 1610 when the church prosecuted Galileo for challenging the then prevailing Earth-centered concept of the solar system.

Scranton quotes a letter written in 1963 to Velikovisky by Harry Hammond Hess chairman of the Space Board of the National Academy of Science.

“We are philosophically miles apart because basically we do not accept each other’s form of reasoning- logic.”
“I am not about to be converted to your form of reasoning though it certainly has had success. You after all predicted that Jupiter would be a source of radio noise, that Venus would have a high surface temperature, that the sun and bodies of the solar system would have large electrical charges and several other such predictions. 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.”

Harry Hess then goes on to say ---

“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.

Whether you are right or wrong I believe you deserve a fair hearing.”

Hmmmm

In “The Velikovsky Heresies”, Scranton lists 16 additional predictions that appear to be true. Including -- that a 360 day year existed before around 750BC because around that date a change was made in the calendars around the world from a 360 to a 365 day year.

Hmmmm

So what is the general consensus regarding Velikovsky today? Wikipedia should give us some idea.

From Wikipedia ---

“Velikovsky's ideas have been almost entirely rejected by mainstream academia (often vociferously so) and his work is generally regarded as erroneous in all its detailed conclusions “.

It is interesting that Wikipedia also says --

“The scientific press, in general, denied Velikovsky a forum to rebut his critics. Velikovsky claimed that this made him a "suppressed genius", and he likened himself to the 16th Century heretical friar Giordano Bruno, who was burnt at the stake for his beliefs in 1600.” --- --- and what were those Giordano beliefs that remain unmentioned in the Velikovsky Wikipedia post?

Giordano Bruno --- “He proposed that the stars were just distant suns surrounded by their own exoplanets and raised the possibility that these planets could even foster life of their own (a philosophical position known as cosmic pluralism). He also insisted that the universe is in fact infinite and could have no celestial body at its "center".

Giordano was burned for heresy. – The definition of heresy is “opinion profoundly at odds with what is generally accepted”.

Then why the problem with Velikovsky’s ideas?

Is it possible that we can’t deal with a non-stable Earth in a non-stable solar system? And that we live in an environment that could drastically change in short order? --- We like stability. Don’t bother us with the “facts”?

And/or is the issue compounded by the desire or need of the vested interests to maintain their standing and control?

If such thinking is true in science, what about politics and economics? --- Just look around at the mess.

But it can’t possibly be true.