It is good to see Velikovsky still cited today; I have most of his works and have read them, but decades ago. More recently I have seen much criticism of his historical chronologies but no 'proof' that he is amiss.
I remember the days of the first manned moon shots; Velikovsky cautioned NASA to note the position of recovered rock samples so that scientists could determine the magnetic poles of the moon. NASA just laughed about amateurs getting involved in space science; the moon was 4 billion years old and had not had any tectonic activity for countless ages.
When NASA brought the rock samples back to Earth they discovered that they had magnetic properties. . . . Eventually they brought Velikovsky in to NASA for a lecture - but I doubt they paid much attention to him :^/
Thanks, glad to hear it. It's too bad he didn't publish Ages in Chaos first (which in his words, took the lion's share of the toil), he might have not been just blown off. His reconstruction of ancient history has not only held up, it has been strengthened by new finds since his death almost 40 years ago. It's amusing and bemusing how the fringe authors (I'm acquainted with a bunch of 'em) often don't have any idea what they're talking about regarding what IV actually wrote, and in some cases, they don't have any idea what they themselves are writing about. :^)