Worlds in Collision and The Velikovsky Heresies

Many years ago I picked up a couple of beat up copies of books by Immanuel Velikovsky at a used book store. I knew the name, but not much else. I figured maybe one day I would read them. Over the last year or so, I have become very interested in The Electric Universe theory and thunderbolts.info has become a favorite site of mine. They often mention Velikovsky, enough so that I finally sat down and read "Worlds in Collision". 

The main gist of Velikovsky's theory is that Venus started life as a comet, and within historical times. It was ejected from Jupiter around 1600 B.C. when a larger mass collided with the gas giant, and it had close encounters with both Earth and Mars before settling into it's current location. Velikovsky was a Russian born psychoanalyst, and a friend and contemporary of Einstein. When this book was published in 1950 it ignited a huge controversy. First of all, he was writing outside of his field. Second, he was contradicting accepted science at the time. Third, he was using ancient texts to support his theory, especially the Bible. None of this sat well with the scientific establishment of the time. It got worse, when various predictions he made, Venus would be hot, not cold as mainstream science believed, for example, turned out to be correct. In fact, the majority of what Velikovsky predicted seems to have been accurate. The attacks on him are astonishing, and have been covered in many other books. Carl Sagan made a special point of trying to take down Velikovsky, and many feel that he was successful. However a clear, unbiased look at what Sagan did, reveals that he actually failed to disprove Immanuel's theory, and that it was more of a hit job than anything else. Back to the book. It is a fascinating read. It was a best seller when it came out, and has held it's own for a long time after. It is well written, and detailed. And, yes, he does take passages from the bible to support his theory. However, he finds equating passages from other parts of the world to substantiate this. If one text says the sun stood still in the sky, he looks for, and finds, other texts from the same time period, from other parts of the world, that say the same thing. He shows that Venus is not mentioned by any cultures prior to a certain point, approximately 1600 B.C. He shows that it flew erratically around the heavens, and was a fearsome thing in the sky. He shows that it had a comet's tail, and was often referred to as comet's were. It is a stunning piece of work. I was pretty blown away when I got done. This book, however, was published in 1950. What I wanted to know was, has anything in our current understanding of science and history been found that soundly defeats Velikovsky's work? It seemed like a massive undertaking. Enter Laird Scranton...


Just about the time I was asking these questions, Laird Scranton published The Velikovsky Heresies, and hey, guess what, it is a book that answers that very question about how the theory has held up. From interviews I have heard with Laird, he went into this book with no bias one way or another. He did the research, took the main parts of Velikovsky's theory and searched to find out whether they stand or fall. For the most part, the theory has been more vindicated than debunked. Of course, when dealing with events of the distant past, it is hard to ever know for certain, but Laird, step by step, takes apart Velikovsky's theory and shows the current science that seems to support it (for example, we now know that Venus seems to still have the remnants of what seems to be a comet's tail!). It is a brilliant piece of work by it's own right, and my only complaint would be that I managed to read through it in about a day. There is a lot packed into the 130+ pages that make up this book, however. No theory is ever completely right, and of course that very much applies to Velikovsky, but Laird shows how much of the theory has held up over the 62 years since it was first published. It is impressive. You can easily read Laird's book without ever reading World's in Collision. I would, however, recommend reading both to get a more complete understanding of a theory that one day may completely change the way we look at our own solar system and planetary origins. 

2012

December 21, 2012 is the date the world ends. You have most likely heard this before. So says the Mayan calendar. So why should they know, and why should we care. Actually, there are hints of this date in various ancient cultures, but the Mayan calendar is special. It is more accurate than any other calendar, till very, VERY recently. As far as we can tell anyways. As we advance, we then notice that they were already there, we just aren't advanced enough to see it. So how did the Mayans get to that level? In all likelihood, they didn't. The Mayan's didn't really invent much. They never even invented the wheel. The calendar was passed down and kept, as were many other books and records which were destroyed by the Spanish. So...
Who gave the Mayans a calendar of such an advanced nature? Evidence, of which there is a good amount, suggests that it was a very advanced culture that existed on this planet before the end of the last so-called Ice Age. More on that in a moment. The one thing all ancient cultures share that was passed down to them is very advanced astronomical knowledge. The Zodiac and all long count calendars come from this culture, as well, seemingly as some architectural knowledge. Most ancient cultures seem to devolve, which is often overlooked. The best pyramids and such, were built first, then the art was lost. But that is not this point. Evidence of where the structures were built gives us more of a clue as well. Research has shown that most, if not all, major ancient structures, all over the world, point to, at very least, the last two positions of the north pole.

So does that mean the magnetic north pole? Yes, but there may be more to it. We know that they point to the old pole, and we know where that was because of the magnetism left in rock. This is accepted by current science. What is not accepted is a physical pole shift, yet evidence points to that, too. If you look at an accurate map of the last ice age, there are two interesting things... One, Siberia, which is now frozen, was ice free, and as a matter of fact, temperate, during the last ice age. The Mammoth’s that were found there led to the misconception that they were cold weather creatures, which they are not. Two, also ice free, was lesser Antarctica. Now, logically, how could that be? Two areas that are pretty frozen now, were ice-free during the ICE AGE? It does make sense, if you tip the globe so that the Hudson Valley Pole is the North Pole. Siberia moves south, and lesser Antarctica moves north. Ice builds up more on land than on water, hence the large Ice cap that covered North America and Europe back then. New geology has discovered that the ice caps, when they melted, melted internally first. They even have a name for the large lake that it formed. Then, one day, the whole glacier collapsed, and all that water came rushing out, causing not only worldwide flooding, but also earthquakes and volcanic activity as the huge weight of the ice suddenly dissipated. Again, that part is slowly becoming accepted science. But a pole shift is snubbed. Why? Well, when evidence was being discovered back in the late 1800's that suggested a worldwide flood, the last thing that the fledgling science wanted to do is announce that they found evidence of the biblical flood. That would give the bible thumpers the ability to say that the bible was now scientifically proven, so what do you need science for, it's all in the bible. So, using the evidence available, they came up with the ice age theory. It works to an extent, but it has many failings, and does not explain many things that a flood does. And this war between science and the bible continues to this day, as I am sure you have noticed. Sadly, science lends that same attitude to anything ancient. They reduce them to simple, stupid, superstitious beings. When new data reveals that they knew what they were talking about, that, and only that piece is accepted. Basically, it's a mess. And it's not likely to get any better any time soon.

So what does this have to do with 2012? Well, the calendar starts after the end of the last world, interestingly, just around the time the last Ice Age ended. Aka, the flood. The Hopi Indians, who also acknowledge the 2012 date, say that this world will end in Fire, just as the last ended in Water. The calendar, the alignment of buildings, these may be warnings to us, from 10,000 years ago. Perhaps from a culture who saw their end coming, but didn't know what to do about it. So, then, how would they know ours?

Well, the one thing I think we can assume that they had, was very advanced astronomical knowledge. So, using that, would there be something that could happen that such knowledge would be able to predict. Obviously, yes, but there are so many factors.

"In 2012 the plane of our Solar System will line up exactly with the plane of our Galaxy, the Milky Way. This cycle has taken 26,000 years to complete. Virgil Armstrong also says that two other galaxies will line up with ours at the same time. A cosmic event!"
From http://www.2012.com.au/unlimited.html

Ok, so what? Let's look at two other things. One, Fire. Over the last few years, when the Sun is supposed to have entered it's 'quiet' phase, it has actually been more active than ever. And now it is coming out of it's 'quiet' phase and we are seeing sunspots and solar flares bigger and more severe than anything we have seen before. Perhaps it's a coincidence. I do, however, believe that the peak of this cycle is around 2012.

The other odd thing. The entire solar system is getting brighter. This is a scientifically accepted piece of information that science cannot explain. I think it is not a stretch to connect this to the activity the sun is going through. We are also aware that lately there have been a bunch of gamma ray bursts coming from the center of the galaxy. Possibly nothing unusual, but maybe it is all connected. If the Sun blasts us with enough energy that it completely disrupts our magnetic field, it could cause a shift, like pushing to magnets against each other, the stronger wins. We also know that the magnetic north pole is moving, very quickly, towards Siberia. Again, science has no idea why or how, but at this juncture, I think it is worth a serious look to see if what is happening in our solar system and galaxy could be related to the 2012 date, since things seem to be increasing in that department as time moves on. And if it is related, and we know the ancients knew they astronomy if nothing else, could it cause a pole shift, and what would happen if it did. Since science buried any evidence that does not support the ice age theory, and ignores evidence of past pole shifts, we are not in a good position to know what would happen, nor how fast.

This is, of course, all speculation. I do think it is worth looking at, and keeping an eye open about, though. Too many things add up. Unfortunately, most of the time when 2012 is brought up nowadays, all you get is new age crap about new levels of consciousness being ushered in... And at that point, why not just call it The Rapture... Not that I don't have a spiritual bend, but it has a far more grounded notion of reality behind it. Just tossing out random happy nonsense about world peace happening suddenly, is not spiritual to me. It's escapism in a sense...
"...We will have gone beyond technology as we know it. We will have gone beyond time and money. We will have entered the fifth dimension after passing through the fourth dimension. Planet Earth and the Solar System will come into galactic synchronization with the rest of the Universe. Our DNA will be "upgraded" (or reprogrammed) from the centre of our galaxy."
Also quoted from http://www.2012.com.au/unlimited.html

That is the typical stuff that people spout on about when talking of 2012. The actual information that we have is very limited, and only through extrapolating what we do know can we see if any of it makes sense. Someone recently stated that the world will end at 11:11 on December 21st, 2012. And how did he deduce this? Well, he sees 11:11 everywhere, and he has been studying 2012. Oh, and it sounds nice. Very scientific stuff. Can't imagine why scientists don't take people like that seriously. Honestly, if he is seeing 11:11 everywhere, that probably has a personal meaning that he is overlooking, instead deciding that the universe must be telling him when the world will end... Ug.

Ok, so to sum up. When will the world end? Who knows, time is only an illusion anyways, it all happens at once, in every direction, but our consciousness and brains filter it and can only process so much at once. Hence, time flies when you are doing a lot, and drags when you are bored. Go figure. Anyway, the 2012 date, of any prophecy, may have science behind it. Ancient science that we don't understand yet. I doubt in that case, if the date itself is the point, as much as the time period. Things could happen tomorrow, or maybe we will get through all this without Florida moving to the equator... The one thing you can be sure of, if something does happen, we will not be ready for it. Our world will end. Is this what happened last time? Is that why they perished? Is that why we have so little of their world left? And what would remain in 10,000 years of us, if all this were to fall.......