 |
||
| · join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · | ||
Posted on 10/03/2009 8:26:10 PM PDT by SunkenCiv
Immanuel Velikovsky was too eminent a scholar to be dismissed outright as a kook, and he counted some respected people among his friends... Nevertheless, his Catastrophism was rejected outright by a scientific establishment that couldn't stomach an interdisciplinary challenge to its dogmatic Uniformitarianism, even after Velikovsky's predictions about the temperature of Venus and radio activity from Jupiter were proven true.
Stephen Jay Gould summed up mainstream scientific opinion, saying, "Velikovsky is neither crank nor charlatan -- although to state my opinion and to quote one of my colleagues, he is at least gloriously wrong ... Velikovsky would rebuild the science of celestial mechanics to save the literal accuracy of ancient legends." Velikovsky would counter that "the ancient traditions are our best guide to the appearance and arrangement of the earliest remembered solar system, not some fancy computer's retrocalculations based upon current understanding of astronomical principles."
(Excerpt) Read more at freedominion.com.pa ...
|
||
| · join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · | ||
I have a couple of his books! Passing them down to future generations. Along with some UFO books from the early days.
parsy, who thinks outside the box but not as far as him
:’) Thanks P.
If you want on or off the Electric Universe Ping List, Freepmail me.
But i don't see it happening anytime never.
“Worlds in Collision” should be must reading for all.
Earth and Mars do not resemble that in any way, shape, or fashion, and you have to figure that, at least viewed as a collection of rocks, they are older than that. Not hundreds of millions or billions of years old of course, but older than 5K - 10K.
Sagan's super greenhouse theory for explaining the surface temperatures on Venus in particular is patently idiotic and the scientific establish has not done themselves any favors by buying it. The light on the surface of Venus is entirely local; probes see pitch darkness in the middle cloud layers and then light increasing as they approach the surface, that being some combination of electrical discharge and chemical reactions. Again, the claim that such temperatures could be genned by a non-measurable uv flux which cannot re-radiate as IR due to the CO2 cloud layers would be idiotic even without the knowledge that any such sunlight would be a drop in the ocean of the local light sources at the surface.
When those temperatures were first ascertained there should have been a line of scientists five miles long in front of Dr. Velikovsky's door waiting to apologize.
Velikovsky is/was awesomely accurate. I have no argument with his ideas.
Thanks!
Velikovsky said Venus was the loose cannon in the solar system in ancient times. Donald Patten said it was Mars. They both draw upon ancient history to establish their theory. Which is right?
I'd figure there were a half dozen or so starting points for trying to understand ancient history, or at least as much of it as we have. You might have noticed the funny thing about our supposedly being around in one form or another for a million years or more and for some inexplicable reason only having 3000 or 4000 years worth of history...
I mean that would at least do for starters.
Velikovsky said both Venus and Mars had been “loose” in recent BC times, i.e. within the last 3500 years.
But which, or was it both, that caused consternation on the earth in ancient times?
When Albert Einstein died in 1955, a heavily annotated copy of “Worlds in Collision” was the book found on the table next to his hospital bed.
Both, albeit Venus created the larger problems.
Velikovsky was a man who believed in what he had found. He is NOT someone to be laughed at.
It all makes sense to me...
“The Origins of Consiousness in the Bicameral Mind”...one of the deepest books I’ve ever read. Sagan’s “The Dragons of Eden” is right there also.
July 8, 1946
Dear Mr. Velikovsky:
I have read the whole book about the planet Venus. There is much of interest in the book which proves that in fact catastrophes have taken place which must be attributed to extraterrestrial causes. However it is evident to every sensible physicist that these catastrophes can have nothing to do with the planet Venus and that also the direction of the inclination of the terrestrial axis towards the ecliptic could not have undergone a considerable change without the total destruction of the entire earth’s crust. Your arguments in this regard are so weak as opposed to the mechanical-astronomical ones, that no expert will be able to take them seriously. It were best in my opinion if you would in this way revise your books, which contain truly valuable material. If you cannot decide on this, then what is valuable in your deliberations will become ineffective, and it may be difficult finding a sensible publisher who would take the risk of such a heavy fiasco upon himself.
I tell you this in writing and return to you your manuscript, since I will not be free on the considered days.
With friendly greetings, also to your daughter,
Your
Albert Einstein
http://www.varchive.org/cor/einstein/460708ev.htm
It seems apparent that academia and the Scientific Community™ are in a symbiotic relationship with government funding and dinomedia propagandists, not to mention the gatekeepers at scientific journals. To what purpose is the question I have. What is there to gain by stifling dissent from the collective conventional wisdom of the scientific cabal? Mostly a rhetorical question I've been asking for years. I'm sure there are some "indsiders" on this forum that have a pretty good idea concerning the whys of this scam but I've yet to see a reasonable answer.
Just wondering out loud if the modern day scientific cabal is Galileo's Catholic Church? Their "religious dogma" has to be protected at all costs? Is this about power? Prestige? Seems unlikely it's just about $$$'s.
BTW Civ, nice workaround on getting this article posted. ;^)
Thanks for the ping. I’ll always respect Velikovsky, the vast range of his knowledge base and the independence of his thought amaze me, and have for decades since I first read his popular books.
“Government science” has really given itself a black eye with the global warming idiocy.
What? You tellin’ me somthin’....???
Velikovsky’s Ghost Returns
http://www.thunderbolts.info/velikovsky-ghost.htm
essay excerpt:
“A costly misunderstanding of planetary history must now be corrected. The misunderstanding arose from fundamental errors within the field of cosmology, the ‘queen’ of the theoretical sciences. Mainstream cosmologists, whether trained as physicists, mathematicians, or astronomers, consider gravity to be the controlling force in the heavens. From this assumption arose the doctrine of eons-long solar system stability-the belief that under the rule of gravity the nine planets have moved on their present courses since the birth of the solar system. Seen from this vantage point, the ancient fear of the planets can only appear ludicrous.
“We challenge this modern belief. We contend that humans once saw planets suspended as huge spheres in the heavens. Immersed in the charged particles of a dense plasma, celestial bodies ‘spoke’ electrically and plasma discharge produced heaven-spanning formations above the terrestrial witnesses. In the imagination of the ancient myth-makers, the planets were alive: they were the gods, the ruling powers of the sky-awe inspiring, often capricious, and at times wildly destructive.”
It has been said that no great advance has ever been made without controversy. More than 5 decades after the Velikovsky firestorm, questions first posed by Velikovsky can no longer be ignored. At stake here is not just the billions of dollars NASA has wasted chasing chimeras, but the very integrity of scientific exploration. Also at stake is the ability of the sciences to attract and inspire new generations. And nothing is more inspirational than a sense of being on the edge of discovery.
No matter the outcome of this long-standing battle, the time of reckoning is at hand. The voice of Velikovsky’s ghost WILL be heard.
LINK TO FULL TEXT: EARTH IN UPHEAVAL
http://www.archive.org/stream/earthupheaval010880mbp/earthupheaval010880mbp_djvu.txt
Thanks for your vote of confidence!!
I bet you have some interesting views of religions, too!
Ain’t life grand?
He came to the (wrong) conclusion that human societies had evolved into a state of being guided by systems of what he called "auditory hallucinations" and I assume this was because he was limiting his view to an age from around the Exodus to about the time just prior to Alexander.
What he DIDN'T consider was the true antediluvian age as described in Genesis and by Plato and other classical authors, and whether the scheme he had discovered might in fact have been the normal basis of workable human communications prior to the event associated with the tower of Babel. In other words, there is reason to think that human "language" pror to the flood and the tower of Babel was basically telepathic.
Thanks Fred. It occurs to me after seeing your post, my previous statement about having read Ages in Chaos is inaccurate. I in fact have not read AIC, but WIC and EIU. I’m sure you’ve read Ages in Chaos; any thoughts on it?
“...I’m sure you’ve read Ages in Chaos; any thoughts on it?
It’s a three-course meal...WIC,EiU,AiC.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/12603312/agesinchaosvolum008120mbp
AGES IN CHAOS. A fascinating read.
Serious scholars who have followed in Velikovsky’s footsteps over the past 50 years despite the cost have split into two major groups, i.e. the group associated with the kronia.com and thunder bolts.info websites and who are primarily interested in reconstructing the antediluvian history of the world and particularly the question of the antique Saturn/Jupiter system, and then the group centered more in NY and Europe which is more interested in the sort of question involved in Ages in Chaos. The principle players in that later group are Gunnar Heinsohn, Emmet Sweeney, and Charles Ginenthal. The conclusion they have come to is that Velikovsky erred on the side of sticking with bible chronologies and did not reduce the accepted chronologies as much as is indicated.
The principle players in that later group are Gunnar Heinsohn, Emmet Sweeney, and Charles Ginenthal. The conclusion they have come to is that Velikovsky erred on the side of sticking with bible chronologies and did not reduce the accepted chronologies as much as is indicated.Also in that group is Jesse Laskin.
Shh! It’s a secret. ;’)
Thanks!
It never occurred to me to look for an online copy. MORE reading! Thanks, I think...
Wow, you’re seriously into V’s work! Who knew??? From what little I’ve learned of the man, he seems to have been a free spirit that let his well documented research into the earliest accounts of Man’s encounters with the elements lead him where they may. Good on him! I gather his defenders never wavered and in fact their ranks have even blossomed over the years. Somewhere V’s spirit is smiling.
:’) My interest goes back into the 1970s; Dr V died in, hmm, 1979 or 1980, so not long after my first reading of his books. IMHO his Ages In Chaos series is much more important, and should have been published first, just as its existence preceded that of WiC, and in fact led to it.
Well said.
Well, Fred Nerks posted a link to the online version of Ages In Chaos which I haven’t read yet, so I’ll get on that one as time permits. Thanks for the insights.
:o])
If you liked Ages in Chaos, you’ll love Emmet Sweeney’s books. You can get a flavor for it easily enough doing google searches on ‘joseph’ and ‘imhotep’. For that matter, ‘Joseph’ is clearly not any sort of a normal Israelite name and after the Joseph described in Genesis, there is no mention of anybody being given that name again until the time of King David. “Joseph” and “Hotep” are almost the same word; the one might in fact be the root form of the other.
Also in the file is the info that Sweeney is/was a 9/11 Truther.Hatshepsut, The Queen Of Sheba And VelikovskyLet's look first of all at the term Queen of the South. In his article, Lorton asks the question: "Why would [the Gospel writers] ... have said 'queen of the South' when they might so easily have said 'queen of Egypt'?" In the same vein, Bimson comments on what he describes as "the total lack of reference to Egypt in connection with the Queen of Sheba." "If the visiting queen was Hatshepsut," he says, "she should be described as the Queen of Egypt by the Old Testament writers." If Lorton and Bimson had done their research more carefully they would have found that the name "ruler of the South" was a recognised biblical term for the Egyptian monarch. Thus for example in the Book of Daniel the Ptolemaic pharaoh is repeatedly called the "King of the South". It is true that this was not the most common biblical designation for the Egyptian ruler, but its occurrence in Daniel, without any explanatory comments, proves beyond question that it was a well-recognised form.
by Emmet Sweeney
Here's two of Velikovsky's Theses, which were published in 1945:Ramessides, Medes and PersiansHeinsohn's work on Mesopotamia made him realise that a contraction of ancient timescales much more dramatic than anything even Velikovsky had envisaged was called for. Above all, by 1987 he became convinced that the Mitanni, an Indo-European-speaking people who controlled most of Mesopotamia during the time of the 18th Dynasty, had to be one and the same as the Medes, the great conquerors of the Assyrian Empire, who, according to the classical authors, had ruled much of the Near East during the 7th and early 6th centuries BC. If the Mitanni were not the Medes, then no trace of this great people and kingdom could be found anywhere in the region.
by Emmet Sweeney
from "Ages in Alignment:
Velikovsky's Chronology of the Ancient World Defended"
| 189. | The treaties of Subliliumas with Azaru of Damascus, with a patricide prince of Mitanni, and with the widow of Tirhaka, make plausible his identity with Shamash Shum Ukin. This would signify also that Nabopolassar was a son of Shamash Shum Ukin. |
| 190. | The people and the kingdom of Mitanni did not "disappear" in the thirteenth century. Mitanni is another name for Medes; the northwest part of Medes retained this name as Matiane (Herodotus). |
My pleasure.
The remaining titles of the AiC series can be found on the V site:
Dark Age of Greece:
http://www.varchive.org/dag/index.htm
The Assyrian Conquest:
http://www.varchive.org/tac/index.htm
EGAD!!! I’ll never finish!
The two books I’d recommend for starters would be ‘Pyramid age’ and ‘Genesis of Israel and Egypt’. I’m not sure how much if any of Heinsohn’s works have been xlated into English at this point.
This is the other branch of the neocat family which is primarily interested in antediluvian reconstructions.
Thanks wendy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.