Along comes a guy named Velikovsky, who published two books: Worlds in Collision, and Earth in Upheaval.
In these books, Velikovsky argues that Venus is a new member of our solar system, born in a gigantic cataclysm that occurred not in the distant geological past, but within human history. Velikovsky boldly predicts that Venus is still cooling off, but should have a surface temperature hot enough to melt lead (if his thesis is correct). Velikovsky is mocked and reviled by the scientific community, but in 1954 the first microwave temperature measurements prove him right.
The scientists knew that their theories of our solar system's evolution could not account for the temperature on Venus, and to allow any consideration of a cataclysmic explanation would have supported Velikovsky. They had to produce a theory to explain the high temperature, that also allowed Venus to be as old as the rest of the planets. Eventually, they produced a theory that blamed the CO2 which makes up 96% of the Venusian atmosphere. This was the "greenhouse" effect.
It was this theory that started all of the worry about earth's "greenhouse" gasses like CO2 and methane, but few are willing to go back and reconsider the data from Venus, and wether it supports this theory. For any who are interested, here is a link:
Velikovsky died in 1979, and although his books once made the best seller lists, they are no longer in print.
"The scientists knew that their theories of our solar system's evolution could not account for the temperature on Venus, and to allow any consideration of a cataclysmic explanation would have supported Velikovsky. They had to produce a theory to explain the high temperature, that also allowed Venus to be as old as the rest of the planets. Eventually, they produced a theory that blamed the CO2 which makes up 96% of the Venusian atmosphere. This was the "greenhouse" effect."
Oh, puhleeeze.
Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
Velikovsky was a loon. He exemplifies the danger when an expert in one field comes to believe he is an expert in all fields.
Velikovsky was quite thoroughly dispatched by Isaac Asimov in his essay, Worlds in Confusion.
Velikovsky (I am working from memory here) claimed that Venus had an atmosphere made of hydrocarbons. This is false.
He could not account for the lack of eccentricity in Venus' orbit.
He could not explain why Venus' orbit follows the Bode-Titus law.
And, most laughable of all, Velikovsky admitted his theories were incompatible with Newton's Laws of Motion, and then recommended that Newton be revised to match his (Velikovsky's) theories!
--Boris
That's too bad. They are goldmines of good info, even if the conclusions are a stretch.
You can still find both hardcover and softcover editions in most used bookstores ... a very interesting read ...
... but only if you read it as science fiction.