Velikovsky

Status
Not open for further replies.
Z

zavvy

Guest
Continued from the SETI forum...<br /><br /><i>Calli said</i>:<br /><font color="yellow">Actually, although Einstein was very patient with Velikovsky ... he didn't often agree with Velikovsky. </font><br /><br />Actually, there was a lot he did agree with. Have you ever read Velikovsky's books? All of them? He admitted that he was merely hypothesizing about certain things, but there's nothing wrong with that. He was absolutley correct about the radio signals from Jupiter! <br /><br />Look what happened to Hawking recently when he had to retract a theory that he'd been flogging to everyone for years! Did anyone dismiss him as a crackpot?<br /><br />The fact is that some people just can't bear to even consider that a lot of catastrophic events occurred to the earth and our solar system in the relatively recent past. It's as if we're all suffering from a malignant case of cognitive dissonance about our true history because it's just too awful for some people to consider!<br /><br />Getting back to Velikovsky and Einstein.. were you aware that they kept up a correspondence about Worlds in Collision for over 11 years? Einstein actually died with that book opened on his desk. He wasn't as quick to dismiss Velikovsky's ideas as some in this forum seem to suggest.<br /><br />Some of the correspondence between Einstein and Velikovsky can be found at the following site:<br /><br />http://www.varchive.org/cor/einstein/index.htm<br /><br />Also, check out what Freud had to say too:<br /><br />http://www.varchive.org/cor/freud/index.htm<br /><br />In fact, why don't you peruse the entire online collection of correspondence between Velikovsky and numerous eminent professionals who seriously considered what he had to say..<br /><br />http://www.varchive.org/cor/index.htm<br /><br />You
 
C

CalliArcale

Guest
What I was pointing out in the other thread was that Velikovsky had a different impression of their relationship than Einstein himself did. Velikovksy makes a lot more of the relationship in his books than Einstein does in his books.<br /><br />They had a very active correspondance, though, that much is certain. Einstein was indeed very patient with Velikovsky. A lot of celebrities will just ignore determined correspondants, or dismiss them out of hand as crackpots, but Einstein took the time to listen and respond. As you say, he didn't dismiss Velikovsky, even if he didn't always agree with him. There's a lot to be learned from Einstein's approach. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>
 
Z

zavvy

Guest
<font color="yellow">There's a lot to be learned from Einstein's approach. </font><br /><br />Indeed. They sustained a highly respectful correspondence for over a decade, and the fact that Einstein was <i>still</i> reading Velikovsky's books at the time of his death speaks volumes... <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />
 
S

silylene old

Guest
I know I am still rather new to these forums, but should this this subject belong in the Space Science and Astronomy forum? Velikovsky's ideas aren't <i>science</i>. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center"><em><font color="#0000ff">- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -</font></em> </div><div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center"><font color="#0000ff"><em>I really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function.</em></font> </div> </div>
 
U

unclefred

Guest
Velikovsky predicted the existance of radiation belts before Van Allen discovered them. He obviously is an idiot.
 
A

a_lost_packet_

Guest
<font color="yellow">stevehw33 - Carl Sagan pretty much exposed Velikovsky's "Worlds in Collision" as nonsense years ago, and he was one of many to do so. </font><br /><br />There is an excellent "debunking" of some of Veli's theories in Sagan's "Broca's Brain." I happen to be re-reading it at the moment so your referrence came to mind. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1">I put on my robe and wizard hat...</font> </div>
 
Z

zavvy

Guest
<font color="yellow">Anyone who believes in Velikovsky, does not believe in science. </font><br /><br />What are you so afraid of, Eddie? That your entire world view will shatter if you dare to think outside that little box..??<br /><br />Linking to an official debunking site is hardly proof that Velikovsky was wrong. Many of his theories have been proven to be correct, and he didn't just pull them out of a hat.
 
Z

zavvy

Guest
<font color="yellow">There is an excellent "debunking" of some of Veli's theories in Sagan's "Broca's Brain." </font><br /><br />There's also an excellent book which explores the fraudulent nature of Sagan's claims...<br /><br />"<i>A book entitled, Carl Sagan and Immanuel Velikovsky, which exposes the miserable nature of Carl Sagan's misrepresentations of Velikovsky's book, Worlds in Collision, will soon be available at local bookstores.<br /><br />I have read the book, and it is such a powerful indictment of Carl Sagan's criticism that anybody who reads it will be shocked by the depth of Sagan's deceitful analysis. It's about time that the miserable and mean-spirited work of Sagan is finally presented to the scientific world and to the general public so that they can see the way Sagan used dishonest and underhanded forms of criticism to destroy Velikovsky.<br /><br />Martin Sieff of the Washington Post in a review of Carl Sagan and Immanuel Velikovsky has stated the following: that its author, Charles Ginenthal<br /><br />"sets the scientific record straight. He systematically examines each of Sagan's scathing critiques in detail and dismisses them with a vast body of evidence mainly gathered from the mainstream scientific literature, including other work by Sagan himself."<br /><br />"First, it is incomparably the finest and most comprehensive work yet published from the catastrophist side of the scientific debate on Velikovsky's work."<br /><br />"Second, it quotes extensively from and proves an invaluable guide to mainstream literature of the past decade... For this alone it is invaluable reading for anyone interested in the field."<br /><br />"The book is beautifully written, masterfully organized, and impeccably researched. The footnotes alone provide a guide to most of the relevant published literature on the debate over the past 20 years."<br /><br />"</i>
 
Z

zavvy

Guest
You might find the following site interesting... <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />The Velikovsky Affair<br /><br />Here's a sample..<br /><br />"<i>Velikovsky, however, had specified no date for the eruption of Venus from Jupiter, except that it had occurred some time before the Exodus. And, as Velikovsky pointed out in his book, the Babylonian tablets (Venus Tablets of Ammizaduga) cited by Gaposchkin to support her claim ascribe such erratic motions to Venus that translators and commentators have been baffled by them ever since they were discovered in the ruins of Nineveh in the last century; he also pointed out that even if the apparitions and periods of Venus recorded on the tablets date from early in the second millennium, which is disputed among scholars, they prove only that Venus already then moved erratically and quite unlike a planet. </i>"
 
Z

zavvy

Guest
<font color="yellow">Velikovsky's theories were based on mythology</font><br /><br />Yes, that was one of his points, and he set out to prove that these so-called "myths" might not be as fictional as some people thought. He also had an excellent understanding of science. Don't be so quick to debunk that which scares you... consider it at the very least. Einstein did. For years.<br /><br />"<i>Up to the time of Einstein's death, he and Velikovsky carried on private debate oral, and written, on the issue of colliding worlds and the merits of an electromagnetic solar system. Einstein remained adamant in his conviction that sun and planets must be electrically neutral and space must be free of magnetic fields and plasma. Yet when he learned only days before his death, that Jupiter emits radio noise, as Velikovsky had so long insisted, he offered to use his influence in arranging for certain other experiments Velikovsky had suggested. It was too late. When Einstein died, Worlds in Collision lay open on his desk.</i>"<br /><br />LINK <br /><br />
 
M

mental_avenger

Guest
Eddie,<br />I wouldn’t waste too much time on this “debate”. Since it is unlikely that zavvy actually believes that rubbish, he is probably either just yanking your chain, or playing the devil’s advocate just to stir things up. Also, since Velikovsky was clearly a nut, and his writings mostly unscientific superstitious hogwash, there really is nothing to refute.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p style="margin-top:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-right:0in" class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="2" color="#ff0000"><strong>Our Solar System must be passing through a Non Sequitur area of space.</strong></font></p> </div>
 
Z

zavvy

Guest
<font color="yellow"><b>FEAR: What a mindkiller!</b>.........................................><Ç((((Ç°></font><br /><br /><img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /><br />
 
A

alokmohan

Guest
Have you read any of hi books?Frankly I never know what he said .Why was the book bestseller ?What his central idea is?
 
S

silylene old

Guest
This forum is titled Space <b>Science</b> & Astronomy.<br /><br />Velikovsky isn't <b>science</b>, but fiction. This thread should be moved to the Science Fiction forum. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center"><em><font color="#0000ff">- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -</font></em> </div><div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center"><font color="#0000ff"><em>I really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function.</em></font> </div> </div>
 
M

mkofron

Guest
<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>What are you so afraid of, Eddie? That your entire world view will shatter if you dare to think outside that little box..??<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote> <br /><br />Wow, zavvy. You're working your way through the entire Woo-Woo Credo list.<br /><br />#12<br /><br />Always claim that the other guy is "closed-minded" and that you're as free-thinking as a newborn baby. Other woo-woos love the concept of "open-mindedness" and will take you into their inner circle without question. They have no tolerance for those "mean old nasty" types who demand evidence for everything.
 
Z

zavvy

Guest
<font color="yellow">You're working your way through the entire Woo-Woo Credo list. </font><br /><br />And you appear to be working <b>your</b> way through the How To Debunk Just About Anything Credo..<br /><br /><ul type="square"><li> "<i>Ridicule, ridicule, ridicule. It is far and away the single most chillingly effective weapon in the war against discovery and innovation. Ridicule has the unique power to make people of virtually any persuasion go completely unconscious in a twinkling. It fails to sway only those few who are of sufficiently independent mind not to buy into the kind of emotional consensus that ridicule provides.<br /><br /><li> By appropriate innuendo and example, imply that ridicule constitutes an essential feature of scientific method that can raise the level of objectivity, integrity and dispassionateness with which any investigation is conducted.</li></i>"</li></ul><br /><br />Since you obviously have nothing of intelligence to contribute to the discussion, and appear to be disruptive, what is your point ..??
 
Z

zavvy

Guest
<font color="yellow">This forum is titled Space Science & Astronomy.</font><br /><br />You are correct. <br /><br />This forum is titled Space Science & Astronomy.
 
Z

zavvy

Guest
<font color="yellow">Frankly I never know what he said .Why was the book bestseller ?What his central idea is?</font><br /><br />For an overview of what he said, and how he was silenced, you might want to read parts of The Velikovsky Affair, which is now available online for free... <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />
 
M

mcbethcg

Guest
Venus being ejected from Jupiter a few thousand years ago, passing near earth and dropping manna, then ending up in a circular orbit today?<br /><br />LOL<br /><br />
 
M

mkofron

Guest
<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>Since you obviously have nothing of intelligence to contribute to the discussion, and appear to be disruptive, what is your point ..??<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />Like it or not, all I'm doing is pointing out a fact.
 
Z

zavvy

Guest
<font color="yellow">Like it or not, all I'm doing is pointing out a fact. </font><br /><br />You've done so such thing except to show your immaturity, but that's besides the point. <br /><br />Nothing you have to say to me has any relevance whatsoever, and I would prefer it if you stopped your silly, vindictive games and tried at the very least to offer intellectual rebuttals in future...
 
M

mkofron

Guest
<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>Nothing you have to say to me has any relevance whatsoever, and I would prefer it if you stopped your silly, vindictive games and tried at the very least to offer intellectual rebuttals in future... <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />Just repeating your favorite tactic.<br /><br />Velikovsky was ignorant even about history he used in his claims of ancient writings and astronomy. He claimed that ancient Greeks believed Aphrodite (Venus)came from the head of Zeus (Jupiter). When in reality ancient Greeks believed Athena came from the head of Zeus.<br /><br />
 
Z

zavvy

Guest
Perhaps I mistitled this thread. I should have named it "Velikovsky and Einstein" since that's what we were talking about originally over in the SETI forum. Reading my intitial post should clear this up.<br /><br />The fact is that Einstein and Velikovsky were extrememly close. They both lived in Princeton and, in addition to their correspondence, got together on a regular basis to discuss their theories. Einstein would often ask Velikovsky to interpret his dreams for him. Einstein greatly admired and respected Velikovsky, although he disagreed with some of his ideas. <br /><br />Einstein had offered to use his influence to help Velikovsky after he learned that radio signals had been confirmed from Jupiter -- something Velikovsky had predicted years ealier, along with high temperatures on Venus.<br /><br />Tragically, Einstein died a few days later with Worlds in Collision opened on his desk...<br /><br />And this is my point. People who don't understand Velikovsky and haven't studied his books are far too quick to dismiss him based on something they read in an article or on the Internet. All I'm saying is that what he proposed isn't as far out as some might think, considering we don't really know that much about our solar system. There's a very good reason our ancient ancestors wrote down the things they did, and only a fool would dismiss it all as 'myth'.<br /><br />Ten years ago I watched Shoemaker-Levy slam into Jupiter, a gas giant, and read all the nervous predictions from scientists about what might happen as a result of this and other cometary impacts. Nobody knew.<br /><br />I still wonder...
 
Z

zavvy

Guest
<font color="yellow">What in the world do you mean, "we don't really know that much about our solar system"? </font><br /><br />Exactly what I said. There's a lot we don't know and a lot that's just plain old theory.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">Rubbish! LOTS of people knew this was a possibility, and speculation about the results of such impacts goes back for decades. Where are you aquiring these silly notions? How old are you, anyway? </font><br /><br />Ah ridicule again, eh? Read what I wrote.<br /><br />Thanks for your input.... <img src="/images/icons/rolleyes.gif" />
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY