Velikovsky continues to rattle them

There’s a bit of heat under the collars and dissent among the various creation sects at Anthony Watts’ comment section on the post about Mannhandling.

Creation sects? Well there’s the short chronology group who believe it happened 6000 years ago. Then there’s the long chronology group who believe it happened 13.8 billion years ago and as astrophysicist Hilton Ratcliffe told me a day or so ago, about 10^-50 second after the BB.

Velikovsky’s crime or sin was to wonder if there was another force operating in the cosmos in addition to gravity. It’s now studied under the discipline of The Physics of The Plasma Universe etc. Velikovsky was right and his critics not.

However all scientific theories are intrinsically false, so it is no surprise that Velikovsky’s theories considered during the 1940’s have since been updated with new data and many of his interpretations were subsequently shown to be wrong.

And creation? Never happened – some of us have concluded the universe has always existed, is static, is neither expanding or contracting, and justĀ is.

But if your culture is dominated by religious belief, then be sure to understand that so too will be your cosmology and science; it has to be. So what is touted as science in our culture isn’t really, it’s just religion cloaked in scientific language.

And remember in science there are no absolutes, but there are in religion, gravity being the core axiom along with the Big Bang.

Update: When critics use ad hominems to disparage a target, such as labelling Velikovsky a crank, etc, or insisting that he is questioning the law of gravitation, which is forbidden, then that’s the reaction of people whose beliefs have been profaned; science is thus absent.

About Louis Hissink

Retired diamond exploration geologist. Trained by Western Mining Corporation and polished by De Beers. Chief Editor, New Concepts of Geoplasma Tectonics Journal. When the facts change, I change my mind: What do you do? (attrib. J.M. Keynes)
This entry was posted in Catastrophism, Electric Universe, plasma universe, Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Velikovsky continues to rattle them

  1. PeterMG says:

    Back in 2010 just after Climategate I wrote on several blogs that the sceptical climate blog community had a big decision to make. Either they stuck with what they had done well, debunk current climate science or if they whished to continue the fight against AGW they needed to go political, as it was obvious that AGW and it associated offspring were entirely political in nature. WUWT went a third way and has tried to embrace a wider scientific audience.

    It was around this time I stopped reading WUWT. Anthony Watts did a great job with the surface stations project. Great investigation, science and engineering. But when it came to having an open mind to discuss boarder scientific subjects he is very much in behind the establishment. He has used his success not to further the cause AGW Scepticism, but to further his own career, (no harm in that) but in doing so to my mind is being used by the established science mob to defuse sceptical science. Watts on the back of his success and awards has stepped into his area of incompetence.

    After 25 years of trying to demonstrate exactly how a so called “greenhouse gas” works, and still failing to do so you would think you would be able to discus this on WUWT, but Watts stops it and just states that greenhouse theory is established science and he only differs from the likes of M Mann in that they disagree over such obscure notions as “climate sensitivity” and the amount of direct influence CO2 has on temperature.

    It is entirely in keeping that should anyone mention Velikovsky that Watts and his bunch of self important pals should dismiss him as a crank. In fact it seems that Watts himself was oblivious to Velikovsky, not a crime or failing of itself, but Watts has been prepared to dismiss Velikovsky out of hand as a crank, without doing any background reading or investigation for himself, which is entirely typical of the man. WUWT will bumble along well past the time when almost everyone has lost interest in climate science, and no one is likely to further the cause of science referring to a blog that dismisses out of hand any decent with established science.


    • Yes, when dealing Watts and his circle were are still dealing with religious minds, people that think with a few entrenched ideas. They cannot consider the possiblity Venus was a recently formed planet because it completely contradicts the standard model and hence their reactions are simple cases of cognitive dissonance.

      I keep forgetting we live in the Judean-Christian world and its mores, and that the followers of these Abrahamic religions out number us. Western peoples have been educated to think in particular ways, the political Left not even being guilty of that, thinking coherently that is, so it’s no wonder mentioning Velikovsky and kindred topics causes intemperate reactions.

      Many climate sceptics, and I suppose socientists, follow the Roman faith, and their thinking habits are not going to change because it’s just too psychologically unsettling for them. Critics of the Big Bang and the standard model are not simply questioning the science, but also the associated core cultural belief system that science is built on.

      I met Anthony Watts some years back in Australia, (dinner party with other sceptics in Perth) and your assessment is on the mark. The problem is that while we might ignore the religious aspects of science, they can’t and won’t because while demonstrating that CO2 isn’t a GHG, we have not offered an alternative theory, both for the CO2 issue as well as the more basic alternative for the standard cosmological model and its gravitational axiom.

      The last person who questioned the ruling establishment ended up somewhat poorly. iIt’s what Jiddu Krishnamurti pointed out – questioning the very basis of thinking itself that has to be done, because religion and science are both the results of human thought.


  2. wyoskeptic says:

    I am coming more and more to believe that most people are afflicted with Memeplexes. CAGW, Liberal Socialism, and all the rest right now that graces the news. I am not sure how much of meme theory I really buy into, but as a functional description of how most adherents to the belief behave and what they do to protect that belief, it sure seems to fit. But mostly, it seems to explain how far off from Reality most people are.

    Then when you go look at established scientific theories, they suffer from the same symptoms. Once the memeplex is established, the defenders all react with the fervency of a religious disciple defending their beliefs to anything which seems to challenge the theory.

    To me, science is the pursuit of Reality. Or, if you will, the pursuit of the description of Reality. If you fail to demonstrate the connection of any theory with Reality, it fails. If something can be shown to have a more firm connection to Reality, it should be considered, whether it matches current theories or not. Reality is what Reality does. It cares not for what anyone screams or proclaims, or insists. Reality is gonna do (or has done) what Reality is gonna do (or has done.)


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s