I have read all his books and as a fairly smart guy, I can't refute them. I am a tech and Amateur Astronomer and I think the guy has some answers- he just took all the written historys from all the world and got the story right- none of his theories have been debunked- Sagen tried and failed. Anyone else believe?
2006-10-23 01:40:58 · 5 answers · asked by scootda2nd 2 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
I actually knew Velikovsky, in his later days. He was a very nice, smart, kindly man, and very religious. All of his theories were religiously motivated---like creationism, an attempt to bend scientific understanding to consistency with the Bible, which he took as the source of Truth. He was only trying to understand how the astronomical events in the Old Testament could be consistent with modern astronomy.
I'm afraid it's all nonsense. There was a chaotic period in the early Solar System, where planets did collide and zing around like pinballs, but all that ended at least 4.5 billion years ago, not in recent history. The inner Solar System has been stable for several billion years.
The idea that the rotation of the Earth could be stopped temporarily without, say, re-liquefying the entire surface, is particularly absurd.
2006-10-23 04:26:23 · answer #1 · answered by cosmo 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I haven't read Velikovsky, but I've read some about him. It is quite wrong to say that his theories have not been disproven. Isaac Asimov did that in an article titled "Worlds In Confusion". Velikovsky was an earlier Van Daniken-type writing nonsense that real scientists deplore.
2006-10-23 04:12:17 · answer #2 · answered by miyuki & kyojin 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
There are pros & cons in his work. I believe, in his times he had assumed fairly right things but some faultered seriously..
'The earth did not stop rotating 3,500 years ago.'
'Venus was formed much earlier than 3,500 years ago. Indeed, it is probably about a million times older than Dr Velikovsky suggests.'
'Venus was not formed from a comet emanating from Jupiter (or, for that matter, a comet emanating from anything else). '
2006-10-23 02:06:18 · answer #3 · answered by Jasee J 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Velikovsky's work has been demonstrated to be incorrect by scientific organizations and panels (such as AAAS (Amer. Assoc for the Advancement of Science)).
I believe the most accurate description of Velikovsky's work is that it is sophism.
2006-10-23 02:33:56 · answer #4 · answered by michaell 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Well, a quick google search gave me this site:
http://skepdic.com/velikov.html
Obviously the guy's a cook; Sagan was wrong about him. I remember reading about his debunking several times; no actual astronomer would take him seriously. He has no science to back up his asterations, and you need something to back up those ridiculous claims.
2006-10-23 01:51:56 · answer #5 · answered by eri 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋