Velikovsky nut butter (Introduction)

by dhw, Friday, October 26, 2012, 17:50 (4388 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: A new book has put a nut to rest. "The Pseudo-science Wars" by Michael D. Gordon does just that. Goodbye Velikovsky. What weird ideas he had, and folks swallowed them whole.-http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444709004577651741918258080.html?KEYWORDS...-dhw: He was a champion of catastrophism (anticipating punctuated equilibrium) at a time (the 1950s) when uniformitarianism was the order of the day, and whatever may have been his shortcomings, his interdisciplinary approach was not only a prodigious undertaking in itself, but has also initiated lines of inquiry that are a very long way from being exhausted. -DAVID: His theory about Venus is obviously wacky. We know of asteroid-dinosaur death and that the Earth is threatened by near-Earth asteroids. This is solid science.
But the fact that we are discussing these possible catastrophes does not validate Velikovsky and the weird theories the book refutes.-Not having read the book, I don't know which other theories it refutes. Does it, for instance, provide evidence to confirm the conventional chronology of the ancient world, which he challenged? I don't feel qualified to defend or attack the vast range of ideas Velikovsky covered, and no doubt some of them were "wacky", but as for the fact that we are discussing catastrophes, it certainly does validate some of his theories, as is clear from the quote you omitted:
 
"Another book by Velikovsky, Earth in Upheaval, gave an even more convincing case for worldwide Catastrophism. While the earlier book [Worlds in Collision] included extensive documentation from literature and folklore showing that every civilization had witnessed cosmic disturbances, this book contained a massive amount of geological and paleontological evidence showing that catastrophes were the primary mechanism for fossil deposition and formation. It also gave evidence that conflicted with Darwinism. 
At first the scientific community was solidly opposed to Velikovsky, and it gave him very shoddy treatment, calling him a heretic. But after over 50 of his predictions were shown to be correct through space program research, some scientists began to reconsider his ideas."-Here are two weird theories for you to consider:
1) The astonishingly complex mechanisms that govern life and evolution assembled themselves by sheer accident.
2) Human intelligence is so complex that it could only have been designed. So it must have been designed by an even greater intelligence that didn't need to be designed.
Any weirder than the theory that the Earth has been subjected to catastrophic collisions and near collisions? Ah well, perhaps I'm too tolerant. I love all these nuts, and I really don't want to wave goodbye to any of them.