Book Reviews

THE PSEUDOSCIENCE WARS I VELIKOVSKY AND THE BIRTH OF THE MODERN FRINGE

by Maurice A. Williams
01/20/19
Free to Share
Author requests article critique

  Message Writer
  Hire Writer

Tweet

The Pseudo-science Wars: Immanuel Velikovsky and the Birth of the Modern Fringe

Michael D. Gordin

© 2012

ISBN 13: 978-0-226-10172-9

The University of Chicago Press

291 pages, $17.50

I think everyone my age has heard of Immanuel Velikovsky, the man who rocked the scientific world with his claim that Venus was once a large comet that zoomed close enough to Earth that its gravitational attraction caused the events of the Exodus?  I was a young kid when I read his book: “Worlds in Collision” in 1951.  I was fresh out of high school and not very well grounded in science, but I knew the stories in the Bible.

His book intrigued me because it lent credence to the Bible whereas science at that time did not view the Bible as historical.  In high school I learned that the solar system is like a watch that once wound just goes on year after year in a steady and predictable fashion.  And there is no archeological evidence supporting the history of the Hebrew people recounted in the Bible.  I next read Velikovsky “Ages in Chaos;” eventually I read all of Velikovsky’s books.

I would up with a life-long interest in Velikovsky and science and history.  Today, I’m not an expert in any of these fields but I know a lot more than I knew when I was twenty-one.  Velikovsky, I think, was treated harshly by the scientific community, but I did not know many of the details.  Michael D. Gordin has provided a wealth of information about Immanuel Velikovsky and his impact the American culture and on the scientific community.  I’m glad I bought Gordin’s book, and I will treasure it for its frank and detailed biography of a man I admired all my life.

But in my old age, I can see some flaws in Gordin’s portrayal of Velikovsky and in what the scientific community did to Velikovsky.  Velikovsky was interested in history and wondered why biblical history was considered myths not supported by archaeological evidence.  He saw a possible solution to this when he read the papyrus of Ipawur.  He thought the papyrus of Ipawur was written by an Egyptian who witnessed the plagues of the Exodus.  That led him to believe that the Exodus can be placed in the time when Ipawur was alive, indicating that the Exodus had been placed in the wrong time period by scholars in 1940.

He figured that some events the Israelite people experienced during Old Testament times appear to be caused by extra-terrestrial influence of Mars and Venus travelling in erratic orbits close, which occasionally brought them to the earth.  From there, Velikovsky searched records of nearby neighbors to the Jews to see if they recorded activity of these planets in a similar fashion.  He found that the Romans and the Greeks reported battles on Earth involving Jupiter, Mars, and Venus viewing the same planets we see but interpreting what they saw as battles between gods with the same names as these planets.  He found other civilizations distant from the Middle East like China and Mexico that also saw similar events in the sky and reported the same erratic motion of these planets.

Velikovsky was a professional psychoanalyst and had treated many patients who suffered major problems from fear, so much so that they went into denial of the events.  He thought, perhaps, fear of what people saw in the past, caused them to cast those events as myths rather than actual cataclysms caused by errant planets.

In his third book, “Earth in Upheaval,” Velikovsky did not cite historical writings or positions of the planets: he instead reported on catastrophes that left their marks on the Earth, He felt these warranted a reconsideration of the theory of uniformitarianism which holds that the surface of the Earth changes very slowly over a matter of many millions of years.  He argued that the Earth at times suffered sudden catastrophes that left dead mammoths with food still in their stomachs; buried piles of broken bones and shattered trees; layers of sedimentary rock that are vertical mixed in with layers that are horizontal (some of them upside down) all of which can be found in many places on Earth.  We all know that collisions have occurred in the past: meteor crater in Flagstaff, Arizona; Popigai crater in Siberia; Chicxulub crater in Yucatàn peninsula plus all planets and moons without an atmosphere show multiple craters.

Velikovsky urged scientists to pay attention to the events he described and reconsider their understanding of celestial mechanics and historical timeline of history to base their theories more closely upon historical events.  His main point was that science should not ignore historical events that contradict the laws they have deduced.  His arguments were threefold (1) There were physical upheavals of a global character in historic times (2) These catastrophes were caused by extraterrestrial events and (3) There events can be identified.

Velikovsky tried to re-explain celestial mechanics to support what ancient observers saw the planets do.  From his speculation, he opined: (1) that the surface of Venus is much hotter than scientists presume – like 800 °F; the atmosphere of Venus contains hydrocarbons; that Jupiter emits radio noises; and that planets have electrical potential that can discharge if planets get too close to each other.  Surprisingly, these predictions turned out to be correct when the space age began.

When Velikovsky launched his first book, he was met with intense resistance from the scientific community.  I remember it.  Scientists forced Macmillan to quit publishing the book when it was already a best seller.  To save themselves from a boycott (many books used as text books were printed by Macmillan), Macmillan transferred publishing rights to Doubleday.  What the scientific community then tried to do was misconstrue Velikovsky’s arguments to make them appear to be pseudo-science.  Gordin wrote a whole chapter comparing Velikovsky to Trofim Denisovich Lysenko, a Russian botanist who championed a miscalculation of natural botanical laws that caused havoc in the Soviet Union, but Velikovsky had no part in the teaching of Lysenko.  I think it was unfair for the scientific community to push Velikovsky into similarity with a known pseudo-science only to more easily discredit Velikovsky.

Gordindescribed pretty much everything that happened in Velikovsky’s confrontation by scientists.  I notice then, and I see it in Gordin’s book, that the scientific community never took Velikovsky seriously when all he wanted was for them to re-evaluate their position on celestial mechanics and biblical history.  Instead, they focused only on Velikovsky’s attempt to redefine celestial mechanics.  They called it pseudo-science and ridiculed his attempts.  Velikovsky was not a trained astronomer: he was a self-taught amateur, but I think he did a marvelous job pointing out deficiencies in current celestial mechanics that do not explain what people all over the Earth had been seeing during recorded history.  I don’t think Velikovsky wanted to revise celestial mechanics himself;  he wanted the scientific community to pay attention to what ancient cultures actually observed and come up with a science that conforms itself to the historical record of what people have seen.  He did, however, formulate an overall hypothesis.

Besides opposing Velikovsky for his attempt to explain how celestial mechanics could better portray what ancient observers saw in the heavens, the scientific community dismissed Velikovsky’s historical record of observations by many cultures as myths and pseudoscience.  Cecilia Payne Gaposchkin wrote three critical reviews of Worlds in Collision.  In her third review, she said her problem was not with astronomy but with the historical sources Velikovsky cited.   She claimed that Velikovsky not only quoted historical sources, but he said what they meant.  Walter S. Adams of Caltech said he cannot help feeling that Velikovsky has overstated the value of his material (historical sources) as evidence. Primitive people in small countries, with little or no means of outside communication are, like children, prone to exaggeration.

The scientific community would not take Velikovsky seriously, even as Velikovsky quickly gathered a huge readership that thought he was right on track (myself included).  I think the problem was that Velikovsky was not an accredited physical scientist.  He was an amateur bursting into the domain of accredited scientists implying that the scientific community and historians were wrong in claiming that there is no confirmation for the Exodus or for Biblical history.  The accepted dates for Biblical history do not agree with accepted dates for Egyptian history or for the history of any neighboring country.  Velikovsky argued that secular history is out of sequence with Biblical history by 600 years.  Forty-seven years later, I read “Pharaohs and Kings” by David Rohl, a well-qualified Egyptologist, who also found discrepancies in agreement of the historical timelines for Egypt and Israel.  He showed evidence that the timelines were out of sync by 200 years.

Velikovsky’s critics argued that the Bible is based on myth.  But they went further; Gordin included a list of recognized pseudo-sciences held by many Americans.  He explained that anyone who believes in any of those pseudo-sciences is considered as belonging to the lunatic fringe.  One of the listed pseudo-sciences is creationism.  What! I happen to be convinced that God made a public revelation to mankind through Moses in which, among other things, he revealed that he did indeed create the world.  I didn’t come by this conviction by my own perception.  I think God’s revelation is true; that’s why I believe it.  This puts a whole different slant on my book review.

Gordin mentions Carl Sagan, America’s most popular astronomer.  I am familiar with Carl Sagan and his interaction with Velikovsky.  I read Sagan’s book “Cosmos” and I own the DVD collection of the same title.  In both the book and the DVD, Sagan professes his unbelief in God.  On The Internet he expresses it more clearly.  He is quoted on The Internet as saying:

"I would love to believe that when I die I will live again, that some thinking, feeling, remembering part of me will continue. But much as I want to believe that, and despite the ancient and worldwide cultural traditions that assert an afterlife, I know of nothing to suggest that it is more than wishful thinking. The world is so exquisite with so much love and moral depth, that there is no reason to deceive ourselves with pretty stories for which there's little good evidence. Far better it seems to me, in our vulnerability, is to look death in the eye and to be grateful every day for the brief but magnificent opportunity that life provides."

I don’t want to criticize Sagan for what he chooses to believe.  He is free to believe anything he wants.  But I think he is mistaken.  It seems counter intuitive to me to presume that God does not exist.  The world is too complex with too many organisms depending on a synergistic relationship between different species for me to presume that all this just happened with no God nor any intelligence behind it.  I think evolution can easily explain how God created the world, but I don’t see how it proves that God does not exist.  God not only created the physical universe, which does exhibit a progressive level of change through time, but God also created the physical laws that govern the universe.  These laws are unchanging and they apply throughout the universe.  If there were no creator and evolution holds sway over the entire universe: how is it that the laws governing the universe are fixed and stable throughout the universe and for all time?

Carl Sagan says in his book “Cosmos:” "The cosmos is all there is, all there ever was, and all there ever will be.” This is similar to the claims of Christianity:  "God is. He always was, and   always will be."  My acceptance of the revelation attributed to God through faith convinces me that this is absolutely true for God.  He is eternal.  He always existed and will exist forever.  But the cosmos Sagan is talking about is evolving.  It came into being about 13.8 billion years ago.  It is expanding and is headed for dissipation some billions of years in the future.  Even Sagan himself will dissipate into nothingness after he dies.

Sagan brought up his concept of The Encyclopedia Galactica.  He speculates to posit undiscovered alien civilizations throughout the universe, even though there are no credible facts to support his speculation.  He writes: "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” Yet he speculates that there must be hundreds of alien civilizations, even spending a whole chapter, and a whole episode in his DVD, cataloging the Encyclopedia Galactica, in which he presents a lot of detail on a catalog of all (possible) intergalactic civilizations, which he claims will be discovered through radio telescopes (even though we have not received a single message from them today twenty-three years after his death).

There is something very similar to the Encyclopedia Galactica in the Christian mentality, the presumption that every human demonstrates, in real time, the history of how he, during his earthly life, responded to God, and that history is remembered in the next life.  No human becomes extinct!  We all will exist forever, some in unimaginable joy in God's heavenly kingdom with others not so joyful realizing that their refusal to submit themselves entirely to God's holy will carries a heavy price.  God actually can be considered as the librarian of this Book of Life.

From my own perception, I think human are connected to two worlds: the physical world and the spiritual world.  We can easily examine the physical world, but we cannot examine the spiritual world.  Those who argue against the existence of the spiritual world cannot explain the enormous difference between human beings and anthropoid apes. No species of ape has ever developed language as humans have done.  No ape cooks its food or fashions clothes to be worn or shows any sign of believe in a supreme God.  But all races of humans do.  Some of the most massive constructions by human beings are places of worship, like Stonehenge, the Pantheon, and other ancient sites of worship.  I think it is obvious that all races of humans recognize a spiritual world no matter how primitive those races are.  This comes through their spiritual nature.

God is manifested in the spiritual world.  His revelation teaches that he created the entire physical and spiritual world and why he created everything and why there is so much grief and defiance against his will in the world.  A supremely gifted angel was granted free will just like we humans and all the other angels have, but that angel, Lucifer, chose not to obey.  Instead, he chose to take over the universe and all human beings for himself.  He rebelled and brought darkness into creation.  If one does not believe Genesis, one will never understand why God created the world as it is and what God expects from all of us.

I have believed the Christian message most of my life.  It’s not something that I think is true simply because I believe it. It’s quite the opposite.  First, I became convinced that the Christian Gospel is authentic: that’s why I believe it.  The only way we can approach God is to believe his revelation.  He started his revelation to Moses and had Moses record that early part of his revelation in the Torah, the first five books of the Hebrew Bible.  The Torah is the accepted as the beginning source of God’s revelation by three major religions in the world: Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

Incidentally, almost everything that we hold to be true is actually believed through faith in the accuracy of the person we hear it from.  Few of us have the training or the equipment to examine for ourselves what others tell us.  Are there billions of galaxies in the universe?  How would I confirm that?  I don’t have access to a powerful telescope, and I don’t understand celestial mechanics well enough to determine what other tell me is true science or pseudo-science.  I can either choose to believe what they tell me or refuse to believe.  It’s the same with almost everything I accept as true.  And some of the opinions I can confirm with my own eyes might not be as they look.  I can see the sun rise in the morning and set in the evening, but through faith in the testimony of scientists I have become convinced that it’s not the sun that moves; it’s the Earth that revolves.

Even though there is only one God, and one revelation, there are many different understanding of it.  This is a big problem, probably why scientists call creationism pseudo-science.  The world is full of conflict and contention, strife and fighting.  It comes from Lucifer’s darkness.  God’s revelations reveals why that is so.  Lucifer, whom God created to be the bright morning star to illumine the minds of lesser gifted angels and humans rebelled against God and decided to go his own way and take captive the whole human race to serve him instead of God.  His rebellion influencing human beings is what God’s revelation calls “darkness.”  I do believe this, and I recognize that many human beings, even those who consider themselves Christian, do not believe it as I do.  In trying to display their faith in God, they actually distort the faith, and justify others in their unbelief.  God created each one of us to serve him because he wants for each one of us to share in his happiness.  He put us into this mess on earth to combat the influence of Lucifer and make it possible for God’s will to be done on earth as it is done in heaven.  God wants all Christians to spread his revelation to others.  It seems impossible because of the incredible of darkness in the world, but bearing witness to his Gospel is what God wants.

Since the time of Velikovsky, scientists have begun to write about catastrophes: D. S. Allen, B. Sc., a science historian specializing in paleogeography, and J. D. Delair, an Oxford based geologist and Museum Curator of Geology at University of Southampton, England   wrote “Cataclysm” in 1997 describing Phaeton that broke off from the exploding super nova “Vela” and entered our solar system around 9500 B.C. and caused havoc in our solar system.  Once in the solar system, ancient observers called it Marduk.  Marduk pulled one of Neptune's satellites out of orbit to become the planet Pluto. It then pulled "Chiron" from Saturn, changing Chiron into an asteroid-sized smallest planet (first discovered in 1976). Then Marduk demolished an existing planet "Taimat," changing it into the modern-day asteroid belt between Jupiter and Mars. Taimat's moon "Kingu" was captured by Marduk. Marduk then approached the Earth, causing catastrophic disturbances. Those disturbances, plus Kingu's breaking apart and falling onto Earth caused the Deluge. Next Marduk flipped Venus over, causing its backwards rotation. Marduk then plunged into the sun.  The authors came to this realization by taking seriously the observations and myths of ancient observers just like Velikovsky did.

A recent book, “The Cycle of Cosmic Catastrophes,” by Richard Firestone, Ph.D. a nuclear physicist and member of the Isotopes Project at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory; Allen West, Ph.D. owner and CEO of a scientific consulting company; and Simon Warwick-Smith a geologist and head of Warwick Associates in Australia, was published in 2006.  Firestone argues that 41,000 years ago a distant star exploded into a super nova.  A shock wave of radiation reached the Earth and caused a mass extinction of most life exposed to the radiation.  A flux of microscopic particles accompanying the shock wave caused a second extinction.  A third wave, of larger particle-size debris arrived 16,000 years ago bringing a huge dust cloud hurtling in at 70,000 miles per hour followed by larger particles which erupted into huge fireballs when they struck the earth causing a huge blast of super-heated air traveling at more than 1000 miles per hour uprooting trees and ripping rocks from mountain sides.  The Carolina bays were formed by this bombardment.  Landslides and tsunamis were generated.  Huge tsunamis raced across the Atlantic Ocean, bounced off the coast of Europe and raced back toward the eastern shore of America.  Giant blooms of algae occurred, causing a deposit of black mud on rock sediments.  Some early humans witnessed these calamities.  Author quotes fifteen oral traditions from primitive tribes passed on to survivors, most of them describing floods and a great loss of people.  Some of them tell of God punishing humans for their wickedness.

It looks like Velikovsky’s influence is still operating in the American culture.  There is an immense number of Americans who are convinced that God did, indeed, create the universe.  If any of them are Christian, they all will feel bound by Christ’s command to let their lives bear witness to him and try to spread belief in his Gospel to the whole world.  So, even though the scientific establishment beat Velikovsky down so thoroughly that few persons under fifty years of age have even heard of him, and his name is no longer cited in serious books by accredited scientists, His memory is still encouraging Americans scientists to reconsider their conviction that creationism is pseudo-science.  I don’t think the scientific community will ever be rid of the influence of creationism, no matter how much they try to marginalize it.

Velikovsky believed that the creator selected the Israelite people to be his people from whom the creator will raise up a savior for all humans.  When Egypt placed this people under slavery, God had Moses warn the rulers of that nation to release God’s chosen people.  When they steadfastly refused, God punished Egypt and its rulers and their gods severely.  The selection of the Israelite people and their release from Egypt are cornerstones of God’s revelation of his plan to save the human race lost in bondage because of the rebellion by Lucifer.  This revelation is something I think every human being should accept as true.  I think God is serious about this, and I, for one, don’t want to spend the rest of my life ignoring it.

So, what is my opinion of Velikovsky?  I never met Velikovsky, but I watched some of his speeches on The Internet.  I think Velikovsky was gifted with extraordinary intelligence.  His books displayed his intelligence in understanding celestial mechanics, archaeology, history of the Middle East and Egypt, and migrations of Middle East people, plus his understating of worldwide cultures including Mayan and Chinese.  Even thought he was not trained in these disciplines (he was a psychoanalyst by training), he was a very convincing writer.  I enjoyed and learned a lot from reading his books.  He wanted the scientific community to reconsider their rejection of creationism as pseudo-science, but he failed.  I admired him all my life, and was saddened to see him silenced by the scientific community.