The Velikovsky Heresy:, 'Worlds in Collision', Catastrophism versus Uniformatarian theology.
Einstein admitted in a letter to Velikovsky that catastrophism rang true. So why does 'The Science' ignore proofs contrary to its narrative of endless time? What does 'Science' actually know?
“Plato, citing the Egyptian priest, said that the world conflagration associated with Phaethon (a comet or blazing star) was caused by a shifting of bodies in the sky which moved around the Earth. As we have reason to assume that it was the comet Venus that, after two contacts with the Earth, eventually became a planet, we shall do well to inquire: Did Phaethon turn into the Morning Star (Venus)?
….This may be found not only in legends and traditions, but also in astronomical books of the ancient peoples of both hemispheres…By asserting that the planet Venus was born in the first half of the second millenium, I assume also that in the third millenium only four planets could be seen and that in astronomical charts of this early period Venus cannot be found.” (which is indeed appears to be the case)
Velikovsky, pp. 167-8, Worlds in Collision.
Velikovsky’s books:
1950: Worlds in Collision
1952: Ages in Chaos: From the Exodus to King Akhnaton
1955: Earth in Upheaval
1960: Oedipus and Akhnaton (Ages in Chaos series)
1977: Peoples of the Sea (Ages in Chaos series)
1978: Ramses II and His Time (Ages in Chaos series)
Published posthumously
1982: Mankind in Amnesia
1983: Stargazers and Gravediggers — Memoirs to Worlds in Collision
Velikovsky’s bibliography.
This is part 1 of 2.
The Heretic
Immanuel Velikovsky wrote many works on ‘catastrophism’, which is the concept that the Earth, the solar system, the universe at large, has been in flux, change and prone to disasters in times not so far distant in the past. Velikovsky was a secular Russian Jew, trained in mathematics and psychology (we can forgive him this sin), who attempted to align the Old Testament miracles with catastrophism.
Velikovsky maintained that there were two interactions with Venus (or a comet which became Venus), which caused the catastrophes which ended Bronze Age civilisations. These are recorded in the Old Testament, and across the world in every culture, in both written and oral tradition. Namely, there was an upturning of the Earth, its geology and its natural composition was deranged and changed. Every culture across the planet has extant traditions of the ending ‘of an age’ dating back to the middle of the 2nd millenium BC. It was not a ‘local event’.
Worlds in Collision is his most famous book. Earth in Upheaval is perhaps his best work, cataloguing the proofs of catastrophism around the globe, which is anathema to a society bludgeoned to insensitivity by endless propaganda on long ages, stable states, gentle and unchanging time, ‘evolving’ mutation-driven-life forms over billions of years (mutations destroy, they don’t add value), infused by the Gods of magic, enabling species metamorphosis, with the shrew becoming you. Modern ‘Science’ is entirely built on Darwinian Uniformitarianism and an endless, stable state. It cannot suffer models of catastrophism.
Velikovsky’s heresy
The ‘scientific establishment’ had a nuclear meltdown after the world-wide best seller, Worlds in Collision was published in 1950, with its theme of cosmic catastrophe, starring Venus as the chief villain, a new planet formed from a comet, assaulting and over-turning the Earth. Velikovksy maintained that Venus was only known and worshipped starting from about 1500 BC (if true, this is very interesting), and is a new planet, formed out of a comet, which overturned the Earth.
‘The Science’ would have none of this and categorised the Velikovsky heresy as ‘pseudo-science’ or a variety of ‘science fiction’, far removed from their truths of ‘Evolution’ or ‘The Big Bang’ with their parade of miracles, immaculate conceptions and mathematical resurrections.
Not everything that Velikovsky proposed made sense. Some issues are discussed below.
Unfortunately for ‘The Science’, the Russian was also right in many areas that ‘The Science’ denied, including magnetism, planetary signals (covered in the next post), the 1000F temperature of the surface of Venus which indicates a young and immature planet, and why myths and religions venerate a brilliant, threatening Venus when today, it is not a ‘bright star’ and is barely noticeable. Was Venus so brightly incandescent in the ancient world, because it was ‘new’ and its reflective atmosphere gave off a dazzling light?
Catastrophes
Pace Velikovsky, there were 2 major catastrophes in the Bronze and Iron ages.
The first occurred circa ~1500 B.C. when a comet, which later became Venus, overturned the Earth. Every culture on the globe faithfully recounts this event and this collision is reflected in the Old Testament’s Exodus account, the Bibilical plagues, the Sun and Moon standing still for Joshua son of Nun’s war against the Canaanites, amongst other Biblical and extant literary and oral traditions.
In this first catastrophe, the poles were reversed, the Earth’s spin was reversed, the axial tilt was changed, mountains were formed, volcanoes erupted in furious emissions, sea beds were raised, earthquakes shook and destroyed, hurricanes and tsunamis’ roared, plagues, darkness, fire and hailstones enveloped the planet. Civilisations such as the Minoan and Egyptian were ended. Comet and space debris rained down on the Earth, pouring chemicals such as iron and red pigments which coloured the Nile and the Sea of Reeds which became the Red Sea, and delivering ‘manna’ from heaven or a dew-formed type of honey from the tail of the comet which contained carbohydrates.
The comet Venus possessed a glowering head and tail, giving rise to traditions which described its entanglement with the Earth as that of a dragon fighting God, a many tailed beast overthrowing its master, or a demonic power or fallen angel (Lucifer) trying to usurp the creator. All cultures lamented the ‘falling sky’, the endless fires and roiling oceans, the destruction of rivers, land, cities, farms and people.
The second global dislocation occurred some 750 years later, in the time of Isaiah the great Hebrew prophet, when Venus became entangled with Mars, discharging electromagnetic waves which impacted the Earth. This catastrophe again realigned the Earth, its poles, its magnetic orientation, its spin and orbit. Calenders across the globe were amended and Mars became a pre-eminent deity of war, fighting with Venus or the ‘morning star’, equated with Lucifer or the fallen angel (Satan, Shaitun), who had attacked Earth.
Before 1500 BC, according to Hindus, Greeks, Babylonians, Chaldeans, the Chinese and others, the Sun rose in the West and set in the East (until Venus appeared).
The deposition of abundant hydrocarbon energy, especially near the surface of the Earth, can be explained by an entanglement with a comet, which would drop hydrogen and carbon in great quantities. Burning petroleum and bitumen led to ‘fire worshipping’ in Iran (Zoroastrianism) and in parts of the Middle East and beyond, maybe inciting the myth of Prometheus the fire-giver.
All of these events can be mapped and aligned to Biblical sources as well as cultural artefacts from around the world. Thus, the miracles of the Old Testament, for example the Sun and Moon standing still for Joshua as he warred on the Canaanites, can be resolved through natural phenomena which emanated from a collision between the Earth and a comet.
An interesting question is if the Earth is mobile, why didn’t Joshua ask God to immobilise the Earth? Wouldn’t that be easier? Why were the Sun and Moon rendered immobile if the Earth is moving? (it might well move, but the question still remains)
Joshua 10:13: ‘So the sun stood still, and the moon stopped, Until the nation avenged themselves of their enemies. Is it not written in the Book of Jashar? And the sun stopped in the middle of the sky and did not hurry to go down for about a whole day’.
Sources
Given such global disruptions, Velikovsky stated the obvious, that ‘evolution’ and uniformitarianism (a non-science if there ever was one), is entirely incorrect and cannot explain even the most basic geological facts and observations, which can only be formed by catastrophe; nor can it explain the extant oral and literary traditions which describe in great detail, these catastrophes. The author fully agrees with Velikovsky’s end analysis and in the paradigm of catastrophism which can be viewed all around us and is amply recorded from our ancient ancestors including the Noahic global flood.
The above claims by Velikovsky are thereby rather fascinating and do contain a ring of truth. An obvious issue with these claims is that in his books, Velikovsky does not provide detailed source and manuscript references. Most of the attributions are second hand, namely from historians, interpreters, philosophers such as Plato, and even missionaries.
This makes it difficult to cross validate a claim, when he says for instance, inter-alia, that the Mayans in their oral traditions, maintain that the end of an age did occur in fire, presaged by hurricanes, we would like to see the underlying Mayan source material, or its Dominican (religious order) interpretative surrogate, being referenced. It is not shown. In the author’s view this is the most serious defect of his thesis and lays the work open to claims of being pseudo-scientific, or even, just made up. This is difficult to understand given that Velikovsky spent much of his life dealing with primary and secondary sources.
Worthy of investigation
If we accept the underlying source material, the information provided is enthralling and intellectually invigorating. Velikovksy eloquently articulates some of his suppositions.
“This behavior of the comet, which lost a large portion of its atmosphere as well as much of its electrical potential, withdrew from the earth, but did not break away from its attraction. Apparently, after a six-week interval, the distance between the earth and the globe of the comet again diminished. This new approach of the globe could not be readily observed because the earth was shrouded in the clouds of dust left by the comet on its former approach as well as dust ejected by volcanoes. After renewed discharges the comet and the earth parted.
….That a comet, encountering a planet, can become entangled and drawn away from its own path, forced into a new course and finally liberated from the influence of the planet is proved by the case of Lexell’s comet, which in 1767, was captured by Jupiter and its moons. Not until 1779 did it free itself from this entanglement. A phenomenon that has not been observed in modern times is an electrical discharge between a planet and a comet and also between the head of a comet and its trailing part.
The events in the sky were viewed by the peoples of the world as a fight between an evil monster in the form of a serpent and the light-god who engaged the monster in battle and thus saved the world.” (Worlds in Collision, pp 92-93).
The shadow of death. The famous Psalm might be based on darkened skies, endless gloom and a lack of light due to prolonged volcanic eruptions which followed the catastrophe of ~1500 B.C.
“If the eruption of a single volcano can darken the atmosphere over the entire globe, a simultaneous and prolong eruption of thousands of volcanoes would blacken the sky. And if the dust of the comet of -44 BC (after Caesar was murdered there are many accounts that the world was in darkness, shorn of light), had a darkening effect, contact of the earth with a great cinder-trailing coment of the fifteenth century before this era could likewise cause the blackening of the sky. As this comet activated all the volcanoes and created new ones, the cumulative action of the eruptions and of the comet’s dust must have saturated the atmosphere with floating particles.” (Ibid, p 137).
“Thou hast…covered us with the shadow of death” (Psalms 44:19).
Manna:
“The Maoris in the Pacific, the Jews on the border of Asia and Africa, the Hindus, the Finns, the Icelanders, all describe the honey-food being dropped from the clouds, dreary shades of the shadow of death, that enveloped the earth after a cosmic catastrophe. All traditions agree also that the source of the heavenly bread falling from the clouds with the morning dew was a celestial body. The Sibyl says that the sweet heavenly bread came from the starry heavens.” (Worlds in Collision, p 145)
His works are littered with many dozens of similar examples where cosmic catastrophe might align with theology and ancient myths. Instead of dismissing age old traditions and cultural stories, Velikovsky embraces them and tries to understand what they mean. This is exciting and needs further exploration.
‘Science’ and its dogma
Velikovsky with erudition, dismantles ‘Science’ and unveils its ignorance. As a general category of truth, or at the very least, as another model worthy of inspection, catastrophism lays bare the banal trumpeting from the established Church of Science. What does ‘Science’ actually know?
“He (mankind) does not know how this solar system came into being…He knows only that the solar system was constructed billions of years ago.
He does not know what this mysterious force of gravitation is….although he regards the phenomenon as the ‘law of laws’.
He does not know what the Earth looks like five miles under his feet.
He does not know how mountains came into existence or what caused the emergence of the continents…or where they came from - again hypotheses.
He does not know why, only a short time ago, a thick glacial sheet pressed upon most of Europe and North America…nor how palms could grow above the polar circle….
He does not know where the salt in the sea came from.
Although man knows his has lived on this planet for millions of years, he finds a recorded history of only a few thousand years.
What caused the legend of the Flood to originate in all the countries of the world?
…some of these questions will be answered, but only at the cost of giving up certain notions now regarded as sacred laws in science — the millions of years of the present constitution of the solar system and the harmonious revolution of the Earth — with all their implications as regards the theory of evolution.” (Worlds in Collision, pp 25-26)
The above is beautiful and spot on. The list could be expanded ad infinitum.
Reaction of ‘The Science’
One can imagine the ‘scientific’ reaction to Velikovsky. Apoplectic epileptic spasms of violence were interspersed with roars of hate and bile, punctuated with threats of professional and corporeal death. His themes were absolutely anathema to ‘The Science’. With demonic energy, they sought to destroy Velikovsky. The template for destroying critics and heretics of ‘The Science’ was created in the demolition of Velikovsky (as well as Herbert Dingle who apostasied from the Church of Relativity).
Ad hominems, criticising fragments, taking text out of context, lying, ignoring the evidence, questioning the man’s character, intelligence, and his sanity, were all deployed. Velikovksy was censored, silenced and rubbished. His name never to be uttered in within the halls of ‘The Science’ and its chapels and churches. The same was done during the recent Corona Plandemic to any and sundry who dared to challenge the corrupt ‘consensus’ and the powerful.
Many observations and facts since the 1950s have, however, proven Velikovsky correct. We will discuss these in the next post - especially his theories of electro-magnetism which were dismissed in the 1950s and 1960s but which are entirely accurate. If he was right about electro-magnetism, should Velikovsky’s comet theory be considered that inane or implausible, especially given that Venus is a planet with a very immature (young) atmosphere?
Staffordshire Sentinel - Tuesday 18 March 1969
Bottom Line
Velikovsky was a Russian secular Jew trained in mathematics, psychology and general science. Unfortunately he was friends with Freud. Not everything he proposes in his works is sensible or can be confirmed. His great genius was the compilation of global myths, stories, traditions and beliefs which give support and real sustenance to the idea of catastrophism.
The fact that Velikovsky was attacked, pilloried, condemned, slandered and debauched indicates that not only were some of his ideas controversially innovative and breathtaking in their scope and vision, but probably at least in part, apposite and factual.
Worlds in Collision, and Earth in Upheaval are well worth a read given their unique viewpoints of aligning global traditions and religions, with cosmic catastrophe and natural phenomena. Many of the threads and claims are difficult to prove, reliant as they are on both extinct and extant traditions and stories. That however, does not perforce make them invalid or without merit. Such an attitude is the hubris of modern naturalism and materialism, which will only countenance their own dogma.
In the next post we will discuss Einstein’s reaction to Velikovsky’s heresy. We will repost his letter to Velikovsky which is revealing and insightful about what Einstein actually thought about ‘The Science’. Einstein was one of the few mandarins and high priests within the ‘scientific’ establishment to give Velikovsky a hearing. He might have died with an open copy of ‘Worlds in Collision’ on his desk1. It is fair to say he became in part, a disciple of the Russian polymath.
All hail.
====
1Claimed by Laird Scranton, in ‘The Velikovsky Heresies: Worlds in Collision and Ancient Catastrophes Revisited’ 2012 (“…that Worlds in Collision was the one book found open on Albert Einstein’s desk at the time of his death”). The author is somewhat sceptical of this claim, but Einstotle undoubtedly read, contemplated and reviewed Worlds in Collision.
You may be interested in this recent summary
https://unbekoming.substack.com/p/worlds-in-collision
Great summary of Immanuel Velikovsky's most well-known tome. I strongly suspect that one of the main reasons there was such a hysterical backlash against Velikovsky by "The Science" was because, even though he wasn't writing it for Christian apologetic reasons, the secondary tendency of his work is to show the Bible to be historically accurate. How is "The Science" supposed to vindicate its porn, premarital sex and other forms of moral rebellion, if the Bible is more than just a fairy tale? Notice how once of Velikovsky's most vocal critics was Carl Sagan, who is often seen as something of a patron saint and guiding star among the hordes of bitter, unattractive low-status Reddit Atheists. The same thing happens in the recently published "In The Beginning" book, which can also be utilized for Christian apologetic reasons.