Velikovsky Immanuel

Da Ufopedia.

(Differenze fra le revisioni)
(→Revised chronology)
 
Riga 70: Riga 70:
==Revised chronology==
==Revised chronology==
-
{{Main|Ages in Chaos}}
 
Velikovsky argued that the conventional chronology of the Near East and classical world, based upon Egyptian [[Sothic dating]] and the king lists of [[Manetho]], was wholly flawed. This was the reason for the apparent absence of correlation between the Biblical record and those of neighbouring cultures, and also the cause of the enigmatic "[[Greek Dark Ages|Dark Ages]]" in [[Greece]] and elsewhere. Velikovsky shifted several chronologies and dynasties from the Egyptian Old Kingdom to Ptolemaic times by centuries (a scheme he called the ''Revised Chronology''), placing [[The Exodus]] contemporary with the fall of the [[Middle Kingdom of Egypt]]. He proposed numerous other synchronisms stretching up to the time of [[Alexander the Great]]. He argued that these eliminate phantom "Dark Ages", and vindicate the [[Bible|biblical]] accounts of history and those recorded by [[Herodotus]].
Velikovsky argued that the conventional chronology of the Near East and classical world, based upon Egyptian [[Sothic dating]] and the king lists of [[Manetho]], was wholly flawed. This was the reason for the apparent absence of correlation between the Biblical record and those of neighbouring cultures, and also the cause of the enigmatic "[[Greek Dark Ages|Dark Ages]]" in [[Greece]] and elsewhere. Velikovsky shifted several chronologies and dynasties from the Egyptian Old Kingdom to Ptolemaic times by centuries (a scheme he called the ''Revised Chronology''), placing [[The Exodus]] contemporary with the fall of the [[Middle Kingdom of Egypt]]. He proposed numerous other synchronisms stretching up to the time of [[Alexander the Great]]. He argued that these eliminate phantom "Dark Ages", and vindicate the [[Bible|biblical]] accounts of history and those recorded by [[Herodotus]].

Versione attuale delle 13:32, 11 lug 2011

iconInfo.png Questa voce ha bisogno di essere tradotta.
Immanuel Velikovsky at the 1974 American Association for the Advancement of Science Conference in San Francisco

Immanuel Velikovsky (Иммануил Великовский) (Vitebsk, 10 June 1895 (NS) – 17 November 1979) was a Russian-born American independent scholar, best known as the author of a number of controversial books reinterpreting the events of ancient history, in particular the US bestseller Worlds in Collision, published in 1950.[1] Earlier, he played a role in the founding of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in Israel, and was a respected psychiatrist and psychoanalyst.

His books use comparative mythology and ancient literary sources (including the Bible) to argue that Earth has suffered catastrophic close-contacts with other planets (principally Venus and Mars) in ancient times. In positioning Velikovsky among catastrophists including Hans Bellamy, Ignatius Donnelly, and Johann Gottlieb Radlof[2], the British astronomers Victor Clube and Bill Napier noted ". . . Velikovsky is not so much the first of the new catastrophists . . . ; he is the last in a line of traditional catastrophists going back to mediaeval times and probably earlier."[2] Velikovsky argued that electromagnetic effects play an important role in celestial mechanics. He also proposed a revised chronology for ancient Egypt, Greece, Israel and other cultures of the ancient Near East. The revised chronology aimed at explaining the so-called "dark age" of the eastern Mediterranean (ca. 1100 – 750 BCE) and reconciling biblical history with mainstream archeology and Egyptian chronology.

In general, Velikovsky's theories have been vigorously rejected or ignored by the academic community.[3] Nonetheless, his books often sold well and gained an enthusiastic support in lay circles, often fuelled by claims of unfair treatment for Velikovsky by orthodox academia.[4][5][6][7] The controversy surrounding his work and its reception is often referred to as "the Velikovsky affair".[8][9][10]

Indice

Velikovsky's life[11]

Childhood and education

Immanuel Velikovsky was born in 1895 to a prosperous Jewish family, in Vitebsk, Russia (now in Belarus). The son of Shimon (Simon Yehiel) Velikovsky (1859 – 1937) and Beila Grodensky, he learned several languages as a child, was sent away to study at the Medvednikov Gymnasium in Moscow, where he performed well in Russian and mathematics. He graduated with a gold medal in 1913. Velikovsky then traveled in Europe and visited Palestine before briefly studying medicine at Montpellier in France and taking premedical courses at the University of Edinburgh. He returned to Russia before the outbreak of World War I, enrolled in the University of Moscow, and received a medical degree in 1921.

Hebrew University of Jerusalem

Upon taking his medical degree, Velikovsky left Russia for Berlin. There, with the financial support of his father, Velikovsky edited and published a pair of volumes of scientific papers, translated into Hebrew, titled Scripta Universitatis Atque Bibliothecae Hierosolymitanarum ("Writings of the Jerusalem University & Library"). He enlisted Albert Einstein to prepare the volume dealing with mathematics and physics. Once completed, this project was a cornerstone in the formation of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem; the fledgling university was able to donate copies of the Scripta to the libraries of other academic institutions, who would then send complimentary copies of their own publications, thus helping the Hebrew University to stock its library.

In 1923, Velikovsky married Elisheva Kramer, a young violinist.

Velikovsky's career as a psychiatrist

From 1924 to 1939 Velikovsky lived in what was then the British Mandate of Palestine, practicing medicine (both general practice and psychiatry), and also psychoanalysis (he had studied under Sigmund Freud's pupil, Wilhelm Stekel in Vienna). During this time he had a dozen or so papers published in medical and psychoanalytic journals, including, in 1930, the first paper to suggest epilepsy is characterized by abnormal encephalograms,[12] now part of the routine diagnostic procedure, and papers in Freud's Imago, including a precocious analysis of Freud's own dreams.[13]

Emigration to the USA and a career as an author

In 1939, with the prospect of war looming, Velikovsky travelled with his family to New York, intending to spend a sabbatical year researching for his book Oedipus and Akhnaton (which, inspired by Freud's Moses and Monotheism, explored the possibility that Pharaoh Akhenaton was the legendary Oedipus). Freud had argued that Akhenaton, the supposedly monotheistic Egyptian pharaoh, was the source of the religious principles that Moses taught to the people of Israel in the desert. Freud's claim (and that of others before him) was based in part on the resemblance of Psalm 104 in the Bible to an Egyptian hymn discovered on the wall of the Tomb of Akhenaton's general, Ai, in Akhenaton's city of Akhetaten. To disprove Freud's claim as well as to prove the Exodus as such, Velikovsky sought evidence for the Exodus in Egyptian documents. One such document was the Ipuwer Papyrus, which he considered reported events similar to several of the Biblical plagues. Since conventional Egyptology dated the Ipuwer Papyrus much earlier than either the Biblical date for the Exodus (ca. 1500—1450 BCE) or the Exodus date accepted by many of those who accepted the conventional chronology of Egypt (ca. 1250 BCE) Velikovsky had to revise or correct the conventional chronology.

Within weeks of his arrival in the United States, World War II began. Soon launching on a tangent from his original book project, Velikovsky began to develop the radical catastrophist cosmology and revised chronology theories for which he would become notorious (see below). For the remainder of the Second World War, now as a permanent resident of New York City, he continued to research and write about his ideas, searching for a means to disseminate them to academia and the public. He privately published two small Scripta Academica pamphlets summarising his theories in 1945 (Theses for the Reconstruction of Ancient History and Cosmos Without Gravitation). His mailing a copy of the latter to astronomer Harlow Shapley in 1947 was to have particular repercussions.

In 1950, after eight publishing houses rejected the Worlds in Collision manuscript,[14] it was finally published by Macmillan, who had a large presence in the academic textbook market. Even before its appearance, the book was enveloped by furious controversy, when Harper's Magazine published a highly positive feature on it, as did Reader's Digest, with what would today be called a creationist slant. This came to the attention of Shapley, who opposed the publication of the work, having been made familiar with Velikovsky's claims through the pamphlet Velikovsky had given him, Cosmos Without Gravitation. Shapley threatened to organize a textbook boycott of Macmillan for its publication of Worlds in Collision, and within two months the book was transferred to Doubleday. It was by then a best seller in the United States. In 1952, Doubleday published the first installment in Velikovsky's revised chronology, Ages in Chaos, followed by the Earth in Upheaval (a geological volume) in 1955. In November 1952, Velikovsky moved from Manhattan to Princeton, New Jersey.

For most of the 1950s and early 1960s, Velikovsky was persona non grata on college and university campuses. After this, he began to receive more requests to speak. He lectured, frequently to record crowds, at universities across North America. In 1972, Velikovsky's public profile was raised still higher when the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation aired a one-hour television special featuring Velikovsky and his work, and this was followed by a thirty-minute documentary by the BBC in 1973.

The remainder of the 1970s saw Velikovsky devoting a great deal of his time and energy to rebutting his critics in academia, and continuing to tour North America and also Europe, delivering lectures on his ideas. By now an elderly man, Velikovsky suffered from diabetes and intermittent depression, which according to his daughter may have been exacerbated by the academic establishment's continuing rejection of his work,[15][16] and many wondered if the remaining promised volumes of his work (including a prequel to Worlds in Collision and the projected sequels to Ages in Chaos) would ever see publication.

The last two years of his life finally saw publication of two more volumes of the Ages in Chaos series: Peoples of the Sea (1977) and Rameses II and his Time (1978). Velikovsky died, tended by his wife, at his Princeton home on November 17, 1979.

Posthumous administration of Velikovsky's literary estate

Legal wranglings appear to have dogged the release of remaining unpublished work. Velikovsky had appointed Professor Lynn E. Rose as his literary executor, with plans to issue several more volumes. However, his family managed to retain control of his literary estate. Under the supervision of Velikovsky's wife, two posthumous books appeared: the psychoanalytic work Mankind in Amnesia (1982) and also Stargazers and Gravediggers (1983), which chronicled the hostility of academia to Velikovsky's work up to 1955.

For many years Velikovsky's estate was controlled by his two daughters, Shulamit Velikovsky Kogan (b. 1925), and Ruth Ruhama Velikovsky Sharon (b. 1926),[17] who generally resisted the publication of any further material. (Exceptions include the biography ABA — the Glory and the Torment: The Life of Dr. Immanuel Velikovsky, issued in 1995 and greeted with rather dubious reviews;[18][19][20] and a Hebrew translation of another Ages in Chaos volume, The Dark Age of Greece, that was published in Israel.) A volume of Velikovsky's discussions and correspondence with Albert Einstein appeared in Hebrew in Israel, translated and edited by his daughter Shulamit Velikovsky Kogan. In the late 1990s, a large portion of Velikovsky's unpublished book manuscripts, essays and correspondence became available at the Velikovsky Archive website. In 2005, Velikovsky's daughter Ruth Sharon presented his entire archive to Princeton University Library.

Velikovsky's ideas

Notwithstanding Velikovsky's dozen or so publications in medical and psychoanalytic journals in the 1920s and 1930s,[21] the work for which he became well known was developed by him during the early 1940s, whilst living in New York. He summarised his core ideas in an affidavit in November 1942,[22] and in two privately published Scripta Academica pamphlets entitled Theses for the Reconstruction of Ancient History (1945) and Cosmos without Gravitation (1946).[23]

Rather than have his ideas dismissed wholesale because of potential flaws in any one area, Velikovsky then chose to publish them as a series of book volumes, aimed at a lay audience, dealing separately with his proposals on ancient history, and with areas more relevant to the physical sciences. Velikovsky was a passionate Zionist,[24][25] and this did steer the focus of his work, although its scope was considerably more far-reaching than this. The entire body of work could be said to stem from an attempt to solve the following problem: that to Velikovsky there appeared to be insufficient correlation in the written or archeological records between Biblical history and what was known of the history of the area, particularly Egypt.[26]

Velikovsky searched for common mention of events within literary records, and in the Ipuwer papyrus he believed he had found a contemporary Egyptian account of the Israelite Exodus. Moreover, he interpreted both accounts as descriptions of a great natural catastrophe. Velikovsky attempted to investigate the physical cause of the Exodus event, and extrapolated backwards and forwards in history from this point, cross-comparing written and mythical records from cultures on every inhabited continent, using them to attempt synchronisms of the historical records, yielding what he believed to be further periodic natural catastrophes which can be global in scale.

He arrived at a body of radical inter-disciplinary ideas, which might be summarized as:

Some of Velikovsky's specific postulated catastrophes included:

As noted above, Velikovsky had conceived the broad sweep of this material by the early 1940s. However, within his lifetime, whilst he continued to research, expand and lecture upon the details of his ideas, he released only selected portions of his work to the public in book form:

Velikovsky's ideas on his earlier Saturn/Mercury/Jupiter events were never published, and the available archived manuscripts are much less developed.

Of all the strands of his work, Velikovsky published least on his ideas regarding the role of electromagnetism in astronomy. Although he appears to have retreated from the propositions in his 1946 monograph Cosmos without Gravitation, no such retreat is apparent in Stargazers and Gravediggers.[27] Cosmos without Gravitation, which Velikovsky placed in university libraries and sent to scientists, is a probable catalyst for the aggressively antipathetic reaction of astronomers and physicists from its first presentation.[28] However, other Velikovskian enthusiasts such as Ralph Juergens (dec.), Earl Milton (dec.), Wal Thornhill, and Donald E. Scott have embraced and developed these themes to propose a scenario where stars are powered not by internal nuclear fusion, but by galactic-scale electrical discharge currents. Such ideas do not find support in the conventional literature.[29][30][31]

Revised chronology

Velikovsky argued that the conventional chronology of the Near East and classical world, based upon Egyptian Sothic dating and the king lists of Manetho, was wholly flawed. This was the reason for the apparent absence of correlation between the Biblical record and those of neighbouring cultures, and also the cause of the enigmatic "Dark Ages" in Greece and elsewhere. Velikovsky shifted several chronologies and dynasties from the Egyptian Old Kingdom to Ptolemaic times by centuries (a scheme he called the Revised Chronology), placing The Exodus contemporary with the fall of the Middle Kingdom of Egypt. He proposed numerous other synchronisms stretching up to the time of Alexander the Great. He argued that these eliminate phantom "Dark Ages", and vindicate the biblical accounts of history and those recorded by Herodotus.

These ideas were first put forward in Ages in Chaos, and his later published works Oedipus and Akhnaton, Peoples of the Sea and Rameses II and His Time, and two further works which were unpublished at the time of his death but which are now available online at the Velikovsky Archive: The Assyrian Conquest and The Dark Ages of Greece.

These ideas have been rejected by mainstream historians, and eventually even some of his followers.

Reception

Velikovskyism

C. Leroy Ellenberger with Immanuel Velikovsky at Seaside Heights, New Jersey, in 1978.

Velikovsky inspired numerous followers during the 1960s and 1970s. Alfred de Grazia dedicated a 1963 issue of his journal, American Behavioral Scientist to Velikovsky, published in an expanded version as a book, The Velikovsky Affair, in 1966. The Skeptical Inquirer in a review of a later book by de Grazia, Cosmic Heretics (1984), suggests that de Grazia's efforts may be responsible for Velikovsky's continuing notability during the 1970s.[32]

The Society for Interdisciplinary Studies (SIS) was "formed in 1974 in response to the growing interest in the works of modern catastrophists, notably the highly controversial Dr Immanuel Velikovsky". The Institute for the Study of Interdisciplinary Sciences (ISIS) is a 1985 spin off the SIS, founded under the directorship of David Rohl, who had come to reject Velikovsky's Revised Chronology in favour of his own "New Chronology".

Kronos: A Journal of Interdisciplinary Synthesis was founded in 1975 explicitly "to deal with Velikovsky's work". Ten issues of Pensée: Immanuel Velikovsky Reconsidered appeared in 1972 to 1975. The controversy surrounding Velikovsky peaked in the mid 1970s and public interest declined in the 1980s, and by 1984, erstwhile Velikovskyist C. Leroy Ellenberger had become a vocal critic of Velikovskian catastrophism. Some Velikovskyist publications and authors such as David Talbott remain active into the 2000s.

Criticism

Velikovsky's ideas have been almost entirely rejected by mainstream academia (often vociferously so) and his work is generally regarded as erroneous in all its detailed conclusions. Moreover, scholars view his unorthodox methodology (for example, using comparative mythology to derive scenarios in celestial mechanics) as an unacceptable way to arrive at conclusions. Stephen Jay Gould[33] offers a synopsis of the mainstream response to Velikovsky, writing, "Velikovsky is neither crank nor charlatan — although to state my opinion and to quote one of my colleagues, he is at least gloriously wrong ... Velikovsky would rebuild the science of celestial mechanics to save the literal accuracy of ancient legends."

Velikovsky's bestselling and consequently most-criticized book is Worlds in Collision. Astronomer Harlow Shapley, along with others such as Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin, were highly critical of Macmillan's decision to publish the work. The fundamental criticism against this book from the astronomy community was that its celestial mechanics were physically impossible, requiring planetary orbits which do not conform with the laws of conservation of energy and conservation of angular momentum.

Velikovsky relates in his book Stargazers & Gravediggers how he tried to protect himself from criticism of his celestial mechanics by removing the original Appendix on the subject from Worlds in Collision, hoping that the merit of his ideas would be evaluated on the basis of his comparative mythology and use of literary sources alone. However, this strategy did not protect him: the appendix was an expanded version of the Cosmos Without Gravitation monograph, which he had already distributed to Shapley and others in the late 1940s—and they had regarded the physics within it as absurd.

By 1974, the controversy surrounding Velikovsky's work had permeated US society to the point where the American Association for the Advancement of Science felt obliged to address the situation, as they had previously done in relation to UFOs, and devoted a scientific session to Velikovsky, featuring (among others) Velikovsky himself and Professor Carl Sagan. Sagan gave a critique of Velikovsky's ideas (the book version of Sagan's critique is much longer than that presented in the talk; see below). His criticisms are available in Scientists Confront Velikovsky[34] and as a corrected and revised version in the book Broca's Brain: Reflections on the Romance of Science.[35] Sagan's arguments were aimed at a popular audience and he did not bother to remain to debate Velikovsky in person, facts that were used by Velikovsky's followers to attempt to discredit his analysis.[36] Sagan rebutted these charges, and further attacked Velikovsky's ideas in his PBS television series Cosmos, though not without reprimanding scientists who attempted to suppress Velikovsky's ideas.

It was not until the 1980s that a very detailed critique of Worlds in Collision was made in terms of its use of mythical and literary sources, when Bob Forrest published a highly critical examination of them (see below). Earlier in 1974, James Fitton published a brief critique of Velikovsky's interpretation of myth that was ignored by Velikovsky and his defenders whose indictment began: "In at least three important ways Velikovsky's use of mythology is unsound. The first of these is his proclivity to treat all myths as having independent value; the second is the tendency to treat only such material as is consistent with his thesis; and the third is his very unsystematic method."[37] A short analysis of the position of arguments in the late 20th century is given by Dr Velikovsky's ex-associate, and Kronos editor, C. Leroy Ellenberger, in his A Lesson from Velikovsky.

More recently, the absence of supporting material in ice-core studies (such as the Greenland Dye-3 and Vostok cores) have removed any basis for the proposition of a global catastrophe of the proposed dimension within the later Holocene period.

"The Velikovsky Affair"

Such was the hostility directed against Velikovsky from some quarters (particularly the original campaign led by Harlow Shapley), that some commentators have made an analysis of the conflict itself. The most prominent of these was a study by American Behavioral Scientist magazine, eventually published in book form as The Velikovsky Affair.[38] This framed the discussion in terms of how academic disciplines reacted to ideas from workers from outside their field, claiming that there was an academic aversion to permitting people to cross inter-disciplinary boundaries. More recently, James Gilbert, professor of history at University of Maryland, challenged this traditional version with a more nuanced account which focused on the intellectual rivalry between Velikovsky's ally Horace Kallen and Harlow Shapley.[39] Earlier, Henry Bauer challenged the traditional view that the Velikovsky Affair illustrated the resistance of scientists to new ideas by pointing out "the nature and validity of Velikovsky's claims must be considered before one decides that the Affair can illuminate the reception of new ideas in science ..."[40]

The scientific press generally denied Velikovsky a forum to rebut his critics. Velikovsky claimed that this made him a "suppressed genius", and he likened himself to Giordano Bruno, who was burnt at the stake.[41][42][43]

The storm of controversy created by Velikovsky's publications may have helped revive the catastrophist movement in the second half of the 20th century; however it is also held by some working in the field that progress has actually been retarded by the negative aspects of the so-called Velikovsky Affair.[44][45]

Books by Velikovsky

Published by The Macmillan Company:

Published by Doubleday:

Published by William Morrow:

Notes

  1. ↑ Princeton University press release, July 29, 2005 (quoted on website of Dr. Ruth Velikovsky Sharon)
  2. ↑ Clube, S. V. M. and Bill Napier 1984. Velikovskians In Collision. Quadrant (Sydney). Jan.-Feb., pp. 33-34; reprinted in Kronos vol. IX, no. 3, 1984. pp. 44-49.
  3. ↑ Trevor Palmer, Perilous Planet Earth: Catastrophes and Catastrophism through the Ages, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 0521819288. pp.116-119.
  4. ↑ Morrison, David (2001). Velikovsky at Fifty: Cultures in Collision on the Fringes of Science. Skeptic, 9 (1), 62-76; reprinted in Shermer, Michael (editor) (2002). The Skeptic Encyclopedia of Pseudoscience, Santa Barbara, Calif. ISBN 1576076539. 473-488.
  5. ↑ Cohen, Daniel (1967). Myths of the Space Age, Dodd Mead. LCCN 67-25108. Chap. VIII, Immanuel Velikovsky — the Man Who Challenged the World, pp. 172-94.
  6. ↑ Gordon, Theodore J. (1966). Ideas in Conflict, St. Martin's Press. LCCN 66-23261. Chap. 2, The Miracles of Exodus, pp. 18-48.
  7. ↑ Fair, Charles (1974). The New Nonsense: The End of the Rational Consensus, Simon and Schuster. ISBN 0671218220. Chap. viii, Speaking of Flying Objects ... , pp. 139-86.
  8. ↑ Bauer, Henry H. (1992). The Velikovsky Affair Aeon, 2 (6), 75-84. <http://www.henryhbauer.homestead.com/Aeon1992.pdf> This article, a comprehensive overview, originally appeared in Dec. 1988 La Recherche, pp. 1448-55.
  9. ↑ Bauer, Henry H. (1996). VELIKOVSKY, IMMANUEL, in Gordon Stein (editor), The Encyclopedia of the Paranormal. Prometheus Books. ISBN 1-57392-021-5. pp. 781-788.
  10. ↑ Grove, J.W. (1989). In Defence of Science: Science, technology, and politics in modern society, University of Toronto Press. ISBN 0-8020-2634-6. Chap. 5, Pseudo-science, pp. 120-50; adapted from Grove, J.W. (1985). Rationality at Risk: Science against Pseudoscience. Minerva, 23 (2), 216-40.
  11. ↑ Velikovsky, I. Days and Years http://www.varchive.org/dy/biocont.htm
  12. ↑ Velikovsky, I. "Über die Energetik der Psyche und die physikalische Existenz der Gedankenwelt", Zeitschrift für die gesamte Neurologie und Psychiatrie, Vol. CXXXIII (Jan. 14, 1931) http://www.varchive.org/tpp/energetik.htm
  13. ↑ Velikovsky, I. "The Dreams Freud Dreamed" Psychoanalytic Review Vol. 28 pp. 487–511 (October, 1941) http://www.varchive.org/tpp/dreams.htm
  14. ↑ Velikovsky, Immanuel (1983). Stargazers and Gravediggers, William Morrow & Co. ISBN 0-688-01545-X. p. 63.
  15. ↑ Sharon, Ruth Velikovsky: "Aba: The Glory and the Torment. The Life of Dr. Immanuel Velikovsky" McGraw Hill, 1995
  16. ↑ Sharon, Ruth Velikovsky, "Immanuel Velikovsky – The Truth Behind the Torment" Xlibris, 2003
  17. ↑ Duane Vorhees, "The Early Years: Part Two", Aeon III:1 (Nov 1992). See also the Web site of Ruth Velikovsky Sharon
  18. ↑ Vorhees, Duane (1996). Aeon, 4 (2), 107-11.
  19. ↑ Ellenberger, Leroy (1996). Journal of Scientific Exploration, 10 (4), 561-9.<http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/cle/cle-jose.txt>
  20. ↑ Moore, Brian (1997). Chronology & Catastrophism Review 1997 (2), 51.
  21. ↑ See http://www.varchive.org/tpp/index.htm for a list
  22. ↑ Velikovsky, Immanuel (1942). Affidavit, November 23. <http://www.varchive.org/ce/affidavit.htm
  23. ↑ Collected at http://www.varchive.org/ce/index.htm
  24. ↑ Velikovsky penned a weekly political column under the moniker "Observer" in the New York Post November 25, 1947– June 23, 1949 http://www.varchive.org/obs/index.htm
  25. ↑ Sieff, M "Velikovsky and his Heroes" Society for Interdisciplinary Studies Review Vol. V, issue 4 (1984)
  26. ↑ Vorhees, Duane. (1990). The "Jewish Science" of Immanuel Velikovsky: Culture and Biography as Ideational Determinants. Dissertation, Bowling Green State University.
  27. ↑ Velikovsky, Immanuel 1983. Stargazers and Gravediggers. William Morrow and Co. ISBN 0-688-01545-X. Footnote, p. 165, indicates no retreat and states "Gravitation is an electromagetic phenomenon."
  28. ↑ Bauer, Henry H. 1984. Beyond Velikovsky: The History of a Public Controversy. University of Illinois Press. ISBN 0-252-01104-X. p. 233.
  29. ↑ Ellenberger, C. Leroy 1985. sec. "Electric Stars" in "Still Facing Many Problems (Part II)", Kronos X (3), pp. 15-23.
  30. ↑ Thompson, Tim 2001. "On the 'Electric Sun' Hypothesis". Thompson is a physicist retired from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory.
  31. ↑ Bridgman, W. T. 2008. "The Electric Sky, Short-Circuited". Bridgman is an astrophysicist at NASA-Goddard Spaceflight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland.
  32. ↑ Template:Cite journal
  33. ↑ Stephen Jay Gould|Velikovsky in Collision
  34. ↑ Sagan, Carl (1977). An Analysis of Worlds in Collision, in Goldsmith, Donald (editor) (1977). Scientists Confront Velikovsky. Cornell University Press. ISBN 0-8014-0961-6. pp. 41-104.
  35. ↑ Here is an example of the re-working of the text between 1977 and 1979: "My own position is that even if twenty percent of the legendary concordances which Velikovsky produces are real, there is something important to be explained. . . . Likewise, we should not be surprised if a few elements of a few legends are coincidentally identical. But I do not believe that all of the concordances which Velikovsky produces can be explained away in this manner" (1977, pp. 48-50), compared with "My own position is that if even 20 percent of the legendary concordances that Velikovsky produces are real, there is something important to be explained. . . . Likewise, we should not be surprised if a few elements of a few legends are coincidentally identical. But I believe that all of the concordances Velikovsky produces can be explained away in this manner" (1979, pp. 86-88).
  36. ↑ Ginenthal, Charles (1995). Carl Sagan & Immanuel Velikovsky. New Falcon Publications, Tempe Arizona
  37. ↑ Fitton, James (1974). Velikovsky Mythistoricus. Chiron, I (1&2), 29-36; excerpts at [1].
  38. ↑ This "study" is hardly an objective examination of the issues because all three authors were supporters of Velikovsky and the description of the controversy over the publication of 'Worlds in Collision' is based entirely on Velikovsky's manuscript for Stargazers and Gravediggers (1983), as DeGrazia confirmed for Ellenberger in May 1983.
  39. ↑ Gilbert, James (1997). Redeeming Culture: American Religion in an Age of Science, University of Chicago Press. ISBN 0-226-29320-3. Chap. 8, Two Men of Science, pp. 170-97.
  40. ↑ Bauer, Henry (1984). Velikovsky and Social Studies of Science. 4S Review 2 (4), 2-8. <http://www.jstor.org/view/07380526/ap020008/02a00010/0>.
  41. ↑ Velikovsky, I. The Acceptance of Correct Ideas in Science http://www.varchive.org/ce/accept.htm
  42. ↑ Velikovsky, I My Challenge to Conventional Views in Science, presented at the AAAS 1974 conference http://www.varchive.org/lec/aaas/challenge.htm
  43. ↑ Velikovsky, I Claude Schaefferhttp://www.varchive.org/cor/schaeffer/schaef.htm
  44. ↑ Steel, Duncan (1995). Rogue Asteroids and Doomsday Comets, John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 0471308242. p. 155.
  45. ↑ Morrison, David (2001). Velikovsky at Fifty: Cultures in Collision on the Fringes of Science. Skeptic, 9 (1), 62-76; reprinted in Shermer, Michael (editor) (2002). The Skeptic Encyclopedia of Pseudoscience, Santa Barbara, Calif. ISBN 1576076539. 473-488. Morrison quotes several scientists who embrace the latter view, including Walter Alvarez, David Raup, Richard Muller, Jay Melosh, Peter Ward, and Don Yeomans. This survey confirms the hunch expressed by Morrison and Clark R. Chapman in Chap. 13 "Catastrophism Gone Wild: The Case of Immanuel Velikovsky" in Cosmic Catastrophes (1989), pp. 183-96.

References

External links

Velikovsky works available online

Sites about Velikovsky

Organizations sympathetic to Velikovsky's work

Critiques of Velikovsky

Estratto da "http://ufopedia.it/Velikovsky_Immanuel.html"
Strumenti personali
Namespace
Varianti
Azioni
Menu principale
Strumenti