ted@imsvax.UUCP (Ted Holden) (07/10/85)
In "Worlds in Collision", Immanuel Velikovsky gave
the world the key to the language which the ancients
used to describe THEIR world. The proofs of the general
thesis of the book rely heavily upon a radical
re-interpretation of a great deal of the literature
which we call mythology. Modern science has not yet
accepted this thesis because it doesn't yet accept the
validity of these basic lines of argument.
Establishment scientists are just now beginning to
recognize the inevitability of dealing with
catastrophism (the new theories about iridium and
dinosaurs), assuming they can be put a comfortable
distance in time from us, the usual billions of years.
They remain oblivious to the fact that admitting to one
global catastrophe ruins all of the assumptions used by
any of their systems for dating ANYTHING prior to that
castrophe. Velikovsky's date for the most recent such
castrophe was about 700 B.C. Establishment science
isn't comfortable with that yet; the validity of the
theory is relatively unimportant to them.
Castrophists have simply gone their own way since,
believing it best to let the world catch up when it
wants to. Velikovsky's long promised "Worlds in
Collision, Chapter II", dealing with the nature of the
world prior to the flood, was essentially published in
1981 in the form of "The Saturn Myth" by David Talbott,
available from DoubleDay. Articles on the same and
similar topics appear regularly in the Kronos Journal,
subscriptions ($15/year) from:
Kronos
P.O. Box 343
Wynnewood, PA 19096
The ancients believed that Jupiter and Saturn had
been live stars within the memory of man. Greeks and
Romans described the planetary systems of Jupiter and
Saturn as the dual systems of dieties, Olympian gods
under Zeus (Jupiter), and Titans under Kronos (Saturn).
Egyptians described the same thing as a "double Ennead",
the systems of Set and Horus. They believed there had
been an ORBITING mantel of water, not clouds, high over
the world; that one hadn't needed be but so much of a
prophet to know it was going to fall some day. They
described the sky as the primeval watery abyss. The
first paragraph of Genesis refers to the sky as a
firmamemt built to seperate the waters above from the
waters below. The great hymns to Osiris in the Egyptian
Book of the Dead refer to Osiris as having fashioned man
and the primeval watery abyss of the sky. Nearly
identical language concerning the sky can be found in
Snorri Sturleson's Prose Edda, not because of any early
contacts between Skandanavia and Egypt, but because
these people obviously saw the same sky. These stories
are fragments of racial memory, bits and pieces of a
picture which can be put together with just a little bit
of effort.
Prior to the flood, we were a planet of Saturns.
The North pole faced Saturn directly, and we hung
perilously close to the small star. The gravitational
interaction between the star and planet was intense;
particals and debris were trapped in between permanently
and picked up the glow of the star, resembling a great
mountain rising straight from the North Pole to the
star, the myth of the god on the mountain, Zeus on
Olympus, Jahveh on Zion etc. Creatures living in the
gravitational tug of war which existed then got big, 200
pound birds which couldn't fly today, Brontosaurs and
Ultrasaurs which couldn't even walk today, even in water
since their feet, having no adaptation for water, would
sink hopelessly into the mud on river bottoms.
Why couldn't a 200 lb. bird fly? When animals get
bigger, their weight goes up in proportion to volumn, a
cubed figure. Strength only goes up in proportion to
cross sections of bones and muscles, a squared figure;
that is why you never see 200 lb. gymnists even though
you do see splendid athletes over 200 lbs, they simply
don't have the power-to-weight ratio. Every other
measure of the bodies efficiency goes up in proportion
to other squared figures: your ability to breathe goes
up in proportion to surface area of lungs, to cool
yourself in proportion to total body surface area, and,
of course, surface area of wings is vital to birds. The
largest birds which fly in OUR world hang in around 12
to 25 pounds and all have major difficulties with
takeoffs and landings, the worst case being albatrosses
which sailors call goonie-birds for that reason.
The heiroglyphs for Ra, Atum, Osiris etc., names at
various time periods for the elder god of Egypt, are
basically just pictures of a star inside a ring,
pictures of Saturn. Usually the ringed star sits on
either a pyramid shaped mound or, as in the case of the
loop at the top of the ankh symbol, atop the Egyptian
symbol for a pillar or structural support. In
E. A. Wallis Budge's The Book of the Dead (1895), Dover
paperback version available cheaply, several different
versions of these pictures can be seen. One symbol is
nearly exactly what I have described, a dot inside a
circle supported by three lightning forks in the form of
a triangle which appears in any word meaning "to
brighten" or "illuminate". The glyph for Ra takes the
form of a humanized god sitting on his haunches and
either a dot inside a circle or a hoop snake with a dot
inside the coil. The word Khut (mound of glory) is a
circle atop a mound. A five point star inside a circle
appears on page 10, the word tuat. Often these pictures
take the form of a star inside a half-circle or
crescent, all atop a pyramid, indicating that Saturn's
ring showed phases, since the crescent is variously to
one or the other side, or above or below the star. The
term "paut neteru" (substance of the gods) recurs in the
book; it is pictured as a ring with one side widened,
the other side narrowed to a point. The Moslem symbol
of a star inside a crescent is basically this picture,
not a picture of the sun inside a crescent moon (which
no one has ever seen).
King's crowns and the idea of angels having halos
are racial memories of the god inside the ring.
Likewise, the notion of the old man living at the North
Pole who brings gifts for children.
Hesiod, in "Works and Days" and Ovid, in "The
Metamorphoses" use identical language in describing a
"Golden Age of Man" when Kronos (Saturn) was king of
heaven (the sun). The ancient world was of one mind in
believing that age to have been a far better one than
theirs. However, that age came crashing down with a
stellar blowout INSIDE our solar system followed, seven
days later, by the Noachian deluge. Twice in Genesis in
the story of Noah (Genesis 7:4 and 7:10) the seven days
prior to the flood are mentioned. The only other
reference to these days in the old testament occurs in
Isiah 30:26 "Moreover the light of the moon shall be as
the light of the sun, and the light of the sun shall be
sevenfold, as the light of the seven days..." This was
the basis of all of the ancient seven day light festiv-
als, Hanukah, the Roman Saturnalia etc.
The solar system was a long time settling into its
present state after the flood. Part of the story of
these times is told in Velikovsky's major book, "Worlds
in Collision" which is worth reading. Saturn was still
visible for a long time afterwards and was worshipped as
Osiris, god of the dead, by the Egyptians, the
prototypical ressurection story. Lest anyone have any
doubts that these Egyptians saw a different sky than
ours, the following are direct quotes from the various
hymns to Osiris in the Dover paperback version of
Budge's "Egyptian Book of the Dead":
page 250 "..thou risest, coming forth from the god Nu.
Thou hast come with thy splendors and thou
hast made heaven and earth bright with thy
rays of PURE EMERALD LIGHT"
page 251 "...thou dost arise in the horizen of heaven
and shed upon the world beams of emerald
light;..."
page 254 "..Through thee the world waxeth green before
the might of Neb-er tcher.... Thy body is of
gold, thy head of azure, and emerald light
encircleth thee.."
The pictures of Osiris in human form on the pyramid
walls were, of course, green.ethan@utastro.UUCP (Ethan Vishniac) (07/10/85)
[]
I'm reminded of a conversation a friend of mine had in the mid 1960s.
He was talking to a specialist in ancient near eastern history who
remarked that Velikovsky's grasp of mythology and ancient history was
pathetic, but his knowledge of science was impressive. Oddly enough,
my friend (an astronomer) had the opposite opinion.
--
"Don't argue with a fool. Ethan Vishniac
Borrow his money." {charm,ut-sally,ut-ngp,noao}!utastro!ethan
Department of Astronomy
University of Texasgjphw@iham1.UUCP (wyant) (07/23/85)
This is just a short note cautioning people concerning the celestial
dynamics of Velikovsky's "Worlds in Collision". It is the failure of
"Worlds" to obey basic Newtonian physics that gathers the well deserved
criticism.
As I understand, I. Velikovsky was essentially a Talmudic scholar
that sought to establish a different chronology for the first few books
of the Bible. He tried to show that the Pentateuch was much older than
what was accepted by most scholars and that the persons mentioned in
the books corresponded to much older personalities of ancient Egypt and
what is now the middle East. During his studies, Velikovsky came upon
similar references in several sources to a grand catastrophe that had
a profound influence all over the Earth. These sources all referred to
this catastrophe as coming from the sky. The time was approximately
1500 BC.
Sometime between 1200 BC and 1800 BC (1500 BC is as good as any), an
island (Santorini?) in the Mediterranean became a major volcano. The
location and timing are appropriate for this to have been the basis of
the Atlantis legends (if the original distances and times are divided by 10),
and the cause of some of the Plagues of Egypt brought by Moses if Velikovsky's
new chronology is accepted. Unfortunately, Velikovsky chose not to rest
on his laurels but gathered some followers and pursued the "Worlds" hypothesis.
The major problem with Velikovsky's proposal in "Worlds" is that the
motions of the planetary bodies fail to conserve momentum. He presents
some planets moving from their orbits by objects that leave no other traces,
and the planets assuming new orbits without any mechanism to absorb the
excess momentum above what would be required for the new orbit. Some of
the predictions for the conditions on some planets are close to what are
observed and others are in conflict. These comparisons are made after
probes have passed near these planets and returned their pictures and
measurements.
Velikovsky may have an interesting rendition of classical mythologies
but his celestial mechanics and planetary astronomy are bad. The "Worlds"
hypothesis is incomplete at best and incorrect at worst. However, I wonder
what Velikovsky has to do with the issue of the origins of life on Earth
and the validity of creationism as a science.
Patrick Wyant
AT&T Bell Laboratories (Naperville, IL)
*!iham1!gjphwmcewan@uiucdcs.Uiuc.ARPA (07/25/85)
An excellent article. It was the best laugh I've had all day. However, I
think future submissions should go to net.jokes.
Scott McEwan
{ihnp4,pur-ee}!uiucdcs!mcewan
"They're clumsy. They're out of shape. They're dead."