• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Five hundred years error in ancient history chronology

humbleman

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2017
Messages
555
Location
Maryland
Basic Beliefs
Humanism
In the 1950's, Mr. Immanuel Velikovsky published his book Worlds in Collision, which became the NY best seller for years.

51KKQrmTbkL._SX359_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg


Also published other several books corroborating the first one.

Scientists and religious people rejected the book, which implied that the solar system order as we know it today, was in a recent past, a turbulent scenario of planets changing their courses and interacting.

Scientists felt affected because they were teaching that the solar system was formed and has been the same for millions of years. Scientists were so affected that they published their book called Scientists confront Velikovsky.

On the other hand, religious people also rejected the books of Mr. Velikovsky because he implied that the plagues of Egypt didn't happen because "miracles" but they were caused by the passing by of planet Venus close to earth.

Adding to the list of complainers, historians also gave their cry to heaven when Mr. Velikovsky discovered that there is an error in the world history chronology: 500 years error in the ancient history records.

Finally, after a continued war which lasted decades, after the death of MR. Velikovsky, many scientists stole his discoveries, publishing them taking the credit to themselves.

Only one became honest from the crappy rest men of science, the prestigious David M. Rohl.

Mr. Rohl published his book Pharaohs and Kings, a Biblical Quest, where he indeed expanded the discovery of Mr. Velikovsky and in a very detailed and ordered exposition, the 500 years error were recognized by him.

51YAPQ2PV7L._SX361_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

Of course, new generations ignore about this 500 years error because as well as scientists did a great job covering their mistakes insulting Mr. Velikovsky until they won people's credibility back, historians too have been in denial about this error.

The main problem for many was that the books of Velikovsky, if not 100% accurate in some aspects, and considering that he was not a religious person, when the error of the 500 years is fixed, the chronology of the cultures of the ancient world fit greatly with the chronological account given in the bible.

Mr. Kohl admitted it, because recognizing the error wasn't a religious issue but ordering the historical records the way they should be.
 
It's no surprise Velikovsky's claims met with resistance: they are pseudoscience.

David Rohl does indeed propose an alternate chronology for Ancient Egypt, but his proposed revisions only differ as much as 350 years from the mainstream timeline and Rohl's methods differ from those used by Velikovsky.
 
It's no surprise Velikovsky's claims met with resistance: they are pseudoscience.

David Rohl does indeed propose an alternate chronology for Ancient Egypt, but his proposed revisions only differ as much as 350 years from the mainstream timeline and Rohl's methods differ from those used by Velikovsky.

When you read the case of Homer, where the Greek language of the Iliad and Odyssey belongs to a 600 years different era, historians who went against Velikovsky "explained" that Homer told his stories orally. This oral version passed throughout generations until "someone" wrote them in a more modern Greek language.

Lets compare the next. A guy from England came to America in 1620 and told a story about wars, giants, gods, etc. to other people. His story passed orally throughout generations until one day a guy in 2017 writes it in modern English. Amazing! The stories are written with so many details like if the author -like a biblical god- is inspiring the modern writer. So, this is not a "legend" inherited by a group of people but a fictional story which was "memorized" by "someone(s)" until finally an unknown individual wrote it centuries later.

You must be joking, right?

Velikovsky just modified the existing 500 years chronological error and Homer wrote those stories with his own hands.

Between Velikovsky action and historians explanation, surely the version of historians is the one showing to be pseudoscience.
 
WThis oral version passed throughout generations until "someone" wrote them in a more modern Greek language.

Yep. We've also got English versions these days, and tranlsators such as Fagles have taken care to preserve the epithets and reiteration found in the Greek, where it's evident that the source material was partly improvised.

In the 21st century, we see this same technique used by freestyle rappers, who memorise stock phrases and rhymes, and prepare lyrics ahead of time, so that they don't need to manufacture every line from whole cloth.

If you ever decide to read the Homeric epics--or Shakespeare for that matter--I suggest you read it out loud to get a better appreciation of the writing.
 
Immanuel Velikovsky's Worlds in Collision? I suspected that something like that was what was behind some of what humbleman has posted elsewhere here. Posting that the ancients had seen some other planets get very close to our planet.

As Carl Sagan notes, where IV is right, he is not original, where he is original, he is not right, and there is much of his work that is neither right nor original. For instance, IV barely mentions such cosmic-catastrophe predecessors as William Whiston, Ignatius Donnelly, and Hanns Hoerbiger.
 
Immanuel Velikovsky's Worlds in Collision? I suspected that something like that was what was behind some of what humbleman has posted elsewhere here. Posting that the ancients had seen some other planets get very close to our planet.

As Carl Sagan notes, where IV is right, he is not original, where he is original, he is not right, and there is much of his work that is neither right nor original. For instance, IV barely mentions such cosmic-catastrophe predecessors as William Whiston, Ignatius Donnelly, and Hanns Hoerbiger.

Whatever.

Carl Sagan was just a showman, he never discovered anything. Why listening to a showman?

The discussion here is the 500 years chronology error in ancient history, and in this part Velikovsky was right, even David Rohl, whom at the beginning was against the Russian professor, Rohl ended admitting the error.
 
Oh, so you read the stuff he's parroting lpetrich? Is that where the "planets used to be bigger" stuff comes from? And did they mention any particular myths or fables that said so?

This is so brain dead I can't imagine anyone making it.

Just look at Io for god's sake and tell me that kind of massive tidal forces would have no consequences.

Speaking of which, if Jupiter were closer, why didn't the ancients mention its moons? Or the Red Spot? Or a much closer Saturn's rings?
 
Immanuel Velikovsky's Worlds in Collision? I suspected that something like that was what was behind some of what humbleman has posted elsewhere here. Posting that the ancients had seen some other planets get very close to our planet.

As Carl Sagan notes, where IV is right, he is not original, where he is original, he is not right, and there is much of his work that is neither right nor original. For instance, IV barely mentions such cosmic-catastrophe predecessors as William Whiston, Ignatius Donnelly, and Hanns Hoerbiger.

Whatever.

Carl Sagan was just a showman, he never discovered anything. Why listening to a showman?

The discussion here is the 500 years chronology error in ancient history, and in this part Velikovsky was right, even David Rohl, whom at the beginning was against the Russian professor, Rohl ended admitting the error.

Besides having a TV show, Carl Sagan earned a phd in astronomy from the University of Chicago. He later became a full professor at Cornell. Given that Sagan has the respect and admiration of his field, I'll give his opinion a lot of weight.

As for the missing 500 years, I prefer the explanation given by Mendacious, the astronomer from the Greek city of Boguseous. He discovered that a D and an L had been transposed on the calendar, leading people to believe it was 500 years in the future. Mendacious expected there to be more excitement, but as one Roman told him "I'll still be a slave tomorrow, right?"
 
Immanuel Velikovsky's Worlds in Collision? I suspected that something like that was what was behind some of what humbleman has posted elsewhere here. Posting that the ancients had seen some other planets get very close to our planet.

As Carl Sagan notes, where IV is right, he is not original, where he is original, he is not right, and there is much of his work that is neither right nor original. For instance, IV barely mentions such cosmic-catastrophe predecessors as William Whiston, Ignatius Donnelly, and Hanns Hoerbiger.

Whatever.

Carl Sagan was just a showman, he never discovered anything. Why listening to a showman?

The discussion here is the 500 years chronology error in ancient history, and in this part Velikovsky was right, even David Rohl, whom at the beginning was against the Russian professor, Rohl ended admitting the error.

Besides having a TV show, Carl Sagan earned a phd in astronomy from the University of Chicago. He later became a full professor at Cornell. Given that Sagan has the respect and admiration of his field, I'll give his opinion a lot of weight.
Yep! Not sure how the "discovered nuttin" is defined, but Sagan is certainly reasonably published, and certainly far more so than Velikovsky. A book being a best seller, isn't an argument for anything. See long Sagan academic publication listing:
https://academictree.org/physics/publications.php?pid=129031

As for the missing 500 years, I prefer the explanation given by Mendacious, the astronomer from the Greek city of Boguseous. He discovered that a D and an L had been transposed on the calendar, leading people to believe it was 500 years in the future. Mendacious expected there to be more excitement, but as one Roman told him "I'll still be a slave tomorrow, right?"
Besides the reality that the 500 year thingy is hardly agreed upon by historians/archaeologists to this day, and is still a minority position.

I luv the part about 'ignore the crazy parts of Velikovsky's book'...

Velikovsky kind of reminds me of Zecharia Sitchin's 'The 12th Planet', as I accidentally picked it up thinking it was a SciFi book. It turned into kind of a funny read...as fiction/pseudoscience. Or reminds me of why the study of ice cores is 'fake' cuz I found a creationist, facts be damned, explanation of why they are all wrong.
 
Carl Sagan was just a showman, he never discovered anything. Why listening to a showman?
That's lame. Carl Sagan was a professional astronomer, and he was in on the first few decades of the spacecraft exploration of the planets. In the late 1950's, radio astronomers discovered that Venus was brighter than expected in radio frequencies. When Carl Sagan found out about that, he worked out that the planet's surface could be made very hot by a greenhouse effect. That great heat was confirmed by spacecraft visits over the next few decades. In 1967, Russian spacecraft Venera 4 attempted to land on the planet's surface, reporting back a temperature of 262 C in its last radio transmission. A day later, American spacecraft Mariner 5 flew by the planet, with its radio transmissions going through the planet's atmosphere. The Mariner 5 team inferred that Venus's surface had a temperature of 490 C. So the Russian spacecraft had conked out on its way down. Some later Russian ones survived and sent back pictures of the planet's surface, reporting back some 450 C. So Carl Sagan was successful there, though he once had an amusing exchange with a Russian colleague on the fate of Venera 4.

humbleman said:
The discussion here is the 500 years chronology error in ancient history, and in this part Velikovsky was right, even David Rohl, whom at the beginning was against the Russian professor, Rohl ended admitting the error.
Mainstream chronology is well-supported by C-14 chronology, and that is, in turn, well-supported by tree-ring chronology.
 
Oh, so you read the stuff he's parroting lpetrich? Is that where the "planets used to be bigger" stuff comes from? And did they mention any particular myths or fables that said so?

This is so brain dead I can't imagine anyone making it.

Just look at Io for god's sake and tell me that kind of massive tidal forces would have no consequences.

Speaking of which, if Jupiter were closer, why didn't the ancients mention its moons? Or the Red Spot? Or a much closer Saturn's rings?

It depends of how much closer.

The satellites of Mars were mentioned since ancient times. Jonathan Swift in Gulliver's Travels mentioned the moons of Mars, even the orbits in hours. Logically the moons of Mars have changed the length of their orbits, same as the moon is going away from earth as it was found recently. It doesn't have to be "proportionally" the differences of orbits of the moon of both planets, but surely they never stay the same for millenniums and less for millions of years.

Besides, no one knows when those planets acquired their moons, so you can't make any discussion about it.

Facts talk in science when you want to argue someone's thoughts. As long as writings show witness, and you only have "computer simulations", witness rule because they lived in those times while you just invent your theory in what you see today.
 
Immanuel Velikovsky's Worlds in Collision? I suspected that something like that was what was behind some of what humbleman has posted elsewhere here. Posting that the ancients had seen some other planets get very close to our planet.

As Carl Sagan notes, where IV is right, he is not original, where he is original, he is not right, and there is much of his work that is neither right nor original. For instance, IV barely mentions such cosmic-catastrophe predecessors as William Whiston, Ignatius Donnelly, and Hanns Hoerbiger.

Whatever.

Carl Sagan was just a showman, he never discovered anything. Why listening to a showman?

The discussion here is the 500 years chronology error in ancient history, and in this part Velikovsky was right, even David Rohl, whom at the beginning was against the Russian professor, Rohl ended admitting the error.

Besides having a TV show, Carl Sagan earned a phd in astronomy from the University of Chicago. He later became a full professor at Cornell. Given that Sagan has the respect and admiration of his field, I'll give his opinion a lot of weight.

As for the missing 500 years, I prefer the explanation given by Mendacious, the astronomer from the Greek city of Boguseous. He discovered that a D and an L had been transposed on the calendar, leading people to believe it was 500 years in the future. Mendacious expected there to be more excitement, but as one Roman told him "I'll still be a slave tomorrow, right?"

He was like poor Albert, dudes without real diplomas, one earned a "honor diploma" and the another was given one to make him more credible.

You were convinced by his charisma. After he criticized Velikovsky because his book -without caricatures- Worlds in Collision, Sagan wrote his Cosmos full of caricatures and drawings of "ancient legends".

The poor loony was interested in UFO's like crazy.

And the common burglars: Velikovsky wrote as his conclusion that planet Venus was hot because was a new planet. This is 1950's.

What Carl Sagan did? Stealing Velikovsky's assertion and making his own the statement that Venus was hot.

And Sagan is not the only one who was stealing from Velikovsky, ha... you have no idea. I saw a video of an idiot, a so called scientists, who filmed himself going to an ancient temple and assure that the temple was built with meteorites. This film made 15 years after Velikovsky died. And Velikovsky was the first to assert that ancient temples were built with meteorites.

Many of the thongs you read today from scientists are stolen ideas which Velikovsky wrote in his books.

So, you must respect what Velikovsky wrote, because from Velikovsky Carl Sagan learned a lot.

While all the books of Velikovsky have names and content based in studies and evidence by lots, the books of Sagan have names like "The Dragons of Eden" ha ha ha ha... "The Cosmic Connection: an Extraterrestrial Perspective" ha ha ha ha... and this book is not a non-fiction... ha ha ha ha...

Sagan was desperate to sell books like Velikovsky.

And about the 500 years chronological error in ancient history, no, you don't have to worry about it, you still are your age and no five hundred years additional... ha ha ha ha....
 
Carl Sagan was just a showman, he never discovered anything. Why listening to a showman?
That's lame. Carl Sagan was a professional astronomer, and he was in on the first few decades of the spacecraft exploration of the planets. In the late 1950's, radio astronomers discovered that Venus was brighter than expected in radio frequencies. When Carl Sagan found out about that, he worked out that the planet's surface could be made very hot by a greenhouse effect. That great heat was confirmed by spacecraft visits over the next few decades. In 1967, Russian spacecraft Venera 4 attempted to land on the planet's surface, reporting back a temperature of 262 C in its last radio transmission. A day later, American spacecraft Mariner 5 flew by the planet, with its radio transmissions going through the planet's atmosphere. The Mariner 5 team inferred that Venus's surface had a temperature of 490 C. So the Russian spacecraft had conked out on its way down. Some later Russian ones survived and sent back pictures of the planet's surface, reporting back some 450 C. So Carl Sagan was successful there, though he once had an amusing exchange with a Russian colleague on the fate of Venera 4.

humbleman said:
The discussion here is the 500 years chronology error in ancient history, and in this part Velikovsky was right, even David Rohl, whom at the beginning was against the Russian professor, Rohl ended admitting the error.
Mainstream chronology is well-supported by C-14 chronology, and that is, in turn, well-supported by tree-ring chronology.

Professional astronomer, eh? sure... professional astronomer.

Besides of stealing the credit to Velikovsky who said that Venus was a hot planet because was a new planet, which might be that Venus appeared as a giant comet to the people in the past, some cultures mention Venus as having a tail, this dude Sagan was not very good as an astronomer.

Look, a young amateur astronomer was watching planet Venus for a long time, and he told the rest that he noticed that the clouds of Venus in a period of four days travel at a different rate compared to the slow rotation of the planet.

Carl Sagan barked at the moon: "... the four-day rotation is theoretically impossible, and shows how foolish the work of the inexperienced amateur can be."

Too bad.

Spacecrafts sent to Venus confirmed the discovery of Charles Boyer.

For this reason I'm telling you, Carl Sagan was nothing but a showman, not a real astronomer and less a scientists.

He never discovered anything important but his UFO's for loonies, who loved him because his extraterrestrials affairs.

At least Velikovsky centered his writing in cosmic encounters in past events, which when considered their intervention changed the history of the world.
 
After he criticized Velikovsky because his book -without caricatures- Worlds in Collision, Sagan wrote his Cosmos full of caricatures and drawings of "ancient legends".
Like what?
The poor loony was interested in UFO's like crazy.
What do you mean?
And the common burglars: Velikovsky wrote as his conclusion that planet Venus was hot because was a new planet. This is 1950's.
Ejected from Jupiter. Which is total bullshit. What is the mechanism for that ejection? Why does Venus have a composition very different from Jupiter's composition? How did Venus survive the alleged ejection?

Milankovitch cycles are consistent with Venus having been in its present orbit well into the Proterozoic.

What Carl Sagan did? Stealing Velikovsky's assertion and making his own the statement that Venus was hot.
He didn't. He worked from radio astronomers' observations.

And Sagan is not the only one who was stealing from Velikovsky, ha... you have no idea. I saw a video of an idiot, a so called scientists, who filmed himself going to an ancient temple and assure that the temple was built with meteorites. This film made 15 years after Velikovsky died. And Velikovsky was the first to assert that ancient temples were built with meteorites.
I searched books.google.com and I found references to meteorites in temples older than WoC. humbleman, you really need to improve your research skills.

Many of the thongs you read today from scientists are stolen ideas which Velikovsky wrote in his books.
Like what?
 
humbleman said:
It depends of how much closer.
You tell me! Please!

The idea that Mars had sons was mentioned from ancient times. At no point did anyone see any satellites of Mars. Swift was making an educated guess based on the facts observed in his times: One, Earth and Jupiter had moons, so it was likely that Mars did too (the theory that the further out you get in the solar system, the more moons you have. Not exactly true, but reasonable to guess according to the available evidence) Also since no one had seen the moons, they must be small and close to Mars. His educated guess turned out to be correct. Plenty of other people made guesses, some educated and some not, that turned out not to be correct. Edgar Rice Burroughs, for example.

When discovered, the moons were named after the sons of Mars. I have no idea what afflicts you to think that because Mars' moons are named Phobos and Deimos, that the mention of these characters in old myths confirms that they knew about the moons.
 
It was more likely from a numerical progression: Mercury and Venus have no moons, the Earth has one moon, Jupiter has four moons (those known back then), and therefore, Mars must have two moons.

Jonathan Swift, Gulliver's Travels (1726):
Orbit radius: 3, 5 Mars diameters
Orbit period: 10, 21.5 hours

Actual:
Orbit radius: 1.4, 3.5 Mars diameters
Orbit period: 7.66, 30.35 hours

Interrelationships of period, radius, mass, and density:

\( \omega = \frac{2\pi}{T} = \sqrt{ \frac{GM}{R^3} } = \sqrt{ \frac{4\pi}{3} G\rho } \)

I calculated Mars's average density from both Jonathan Swift's numbers and the actual numbers.
JS: 23.6 g/cm^3
Actual: 4.1 g/cm^3

So while Jonathan Swift got Kepler's third law right, he also got an absurdly high value for Mars's average density.
 
Like what?

Like what you said?

Lol.

Before every chapter, he decorate the beginnings with words from ancient legends and books which surely have no acceptance by orthodox science, but Sagan wants to sell books like Velikovsky. Carls Sagan used the same source used by Velikovsky to "attract readers" right at the beginning of his first chapter.

The first men to be created and formed were called the Sorcerer of Fatal Laughter,
the Sorcerer of Night, Unkempt, and the Black Sorcerer . . . They were endowed
with intelligence, they succeeded in knowing all that there is in the world. When
they looked, instantly they saw all that is around them, and they contemplated in
turn the arc of heaven and the round face of the earth . . . [Then the Creator said]:
‘They know all . . . what shall we do with them now? Let their sight reach only to
that which is near; let them see only a little of the face of the earth! . . . Are they not
by nature simple creatures of our making? Must they also be gods?’
- The Popol Vuh of the Quiché Maya

Have you comprehended the expanse of the earth? Where is the way to the dwelling
of light, And where is the place of darkness . . . ?
- The Book of Job




Funny thing is finding his craziness in his writings, just from one chapter to another. In one chapter he says Newton was influenced by mysticism which was common in his days

Like Kepler, he was not immune to the superstitions of his day and had many encounters with mysticism. Indeed, much of Newton’s intellectual development can be attributed to this tension between rationalism and mysticism. At the Stourbridge Fair in 1663, at age twenty, he purchased a book on astrology, ‘out of a curiosity to see what there was in it.’ He read it until he came to an illustration which he could not understand, because he was ignorant of trigonometry. So he purchased a book on trigonometry but soon found himself unable to follow the geometrical arguments. So he found a copy of Euclid’s Elements of Geometry, and began to read. Two years later he invented the differential calculus.... ....Newton discovered the law of inertia, the tendency of a moving object to continue moving in a straight line unless something influences it and moves it out of its path. The Moon, it seemed to Newton, would fly off in a straight line, tangential to its orbit, unless there were some other force constantly diverting the path into a near circle, pulling it in the direction of the Earth. This force Newton called gravity, and believed that it acted at a distance. There is nothing physically connecting the Earth and the Moon. And yet the Earth is constantly pulling the Moon toward us. Using Kepler’s third law, Newton mathematically deduced the nature of the gravitational force.* He showed that the same force that pulls an apple down to Earth keeps the Moon in its orbit and accounts for the revolutions of the then recently discovered moons of Jupiter in their orbits about that distant planet....

So, "ignorant Newton" invented differential calculus.

I still wonder, what the hell Sagan discovered?

Lets see now how Sagan is slave of modern mysticism in the chapter following his criticism against Newton. The famous case of the Siberia explosion.

In the early morning hours of June 30, 1908, in Central Siberia, a giant fireball was seen moving rapidly across the sky. Where it touched the horizon, an enormous explosion took place. It leveled some 2,000 square kilometers of forest and burned thousands of trees in a flash fire near the impact site. It produced an atmospheric shock wave that twice circled the Earth. For two days afterwards, there was so much fine dust in the atmosphere that one could read a newspaper at night by scattered light in the streets of London, 10,000 kilometers away. The government of Russia under the Czars could not be bothered to investigate so trivial an event, which, after all, had occurred far away, among the backward Tungus people of Siberia. It was ten years after the Revolution before an expedition arrived to examine the ground and interview the witnesses. These are some of the accounts they brought back:

Early in the morning when everyone was asleep in the tent, it was blown up into the
air, together with the occupants. When they fell back to Earth, the whole family
suffered slight bruises, but Akulina and Ivan actually lost consciousness. When they
regained consciousness they heard a great deal of noise and saw the forest blazing
round them and much of it devastated.
I was sitting in the porch of the house at the trading station of Vanovara at breakfast
time and looking towards the north. I had just raised my axe to hoop a cask, when
suddenly . . . the sky was split in two, and high above the forest the whole northern
part of the sky appeared to be covered with fire. At that moment I felt a great heat as
if my shirt had caught fire . . . I wanted to pull off my shirt and throw it away, but at
that moment there was a bang in the sky, and a mighty crash was heard. I was
thrown on the ground about three sajenes away from the porch and for a moment I
lost consciousness. My wife ran out and carried me into the hut. The crash was
followed by a noise like stones falling from the sky, or guns firing. The Earth
trembled, and when I lay on the ground I covered my head because I was afraid that
stones might hit it. At that moment when the sky opened, a hot wind, as from a
cannon, blew past the huts from the north. It left its mark on the ground . . .
When I sat down to have my breakfast beside my plough, I heard sudden bangs, as
if from gun-fire. My horse fell to its knees. From the north side above the forest a
flame shot up . . . Then I saw that the fir forest had been bent over by the wind and I
thought of a hurricane. I seized hold of my plough with both hands, so that it would
not be carried away. The wind was so strong that it carried off some of the soil from
the surface of the ground, and then the hurricane drove a wall of water up the
Angara. I saw it all quite clearly, because my land was on a hillside.
The roar frightened the horses to such an extent that some galloped off in panic,
dragging the ploughs in different directions, and others collapsed.....
I was in the fields . . . and had only just got one horse harnessed to the harrow and
begun to attach another when suddenly I heard what sounded like a single loud shot
to the right. I immediately turned round and saw an elongated flaming object flying
through the sky. The front part was much broader than the tail end and its color was
like fire in the day-time. It was many times bigger than the sun but much dimmer,
so that it was possible to look at it with the naked eye. Behind the flames trailed
what looked like dust. It was wreathed in little puffs, and blue streamers were left
behind from the flames . . . As soon as the flame had disappeared, bangs louder than
shots from a gun were heard, the ground could be felt to tremble, and the window
panes in the cabin were shattered.
I was washing wool on the bank of the River Kan. Suddenly a noise like the
fluttering of the wings of a frightened bird was heard . . . and a kind of swell came
up the river. After this came a single sharp bang so loud that one of the workmen
fell into the water.

Look at the most stupid conclusions made by scientists, including, of course, the modern mysticism over Sagan's mind.

This remarkable occurrence is called the Tunguska Event. Some scientists have suggested that it was caused by a piece of hurtling antimatter, annihilated on contact with the ordinary matter of the Earth, disappearing in a flash of gamma rays.

"antimatter" Ha ha ha ha

But the absence of radioactivity at the impact site gives no support to this explanation. Others postulate that a mini black hole passed through the Earth in Siberia and out the other side.

"Mini black holes"... ha ha ha ha...

But the records of atmospheric shock waves show no hint of an object booming out of the North Atlantic later that day. Perhaps it was a spaceship of some unimaginably advanced extraterrestrial civilization in desperate mechanical trouble, crashing in a remote region of an obscure planet.

"a spaceship of some unimaginably advanced extraterrestrial civilization "... ha ha ha ha....

This guy is showing that the scientific community was a circus with a bunch of clowns.

He concluded

There seems to be only one explanation consistent with all the facts: In 1908 a piece of comet hit the Earth.

Here, with Carl Sagan, you have another supporter of Velikovsky.
And what about Kepler, from whom you base your version of plates orbiting the same or millions and millions of years?

You are going to be disappointed. Pythagoras was the first claiming that planets orbiting around the Sun make melodies. He argued that because we are born with that "sound since conception" we don't hear those melodies. (We don't have a single word written by Pythagoras, but his teachings were given by his followers, who were attacked by Plato and others.

Well, Kepler was a follower of astrology. He believed as well in the influence of other planets and stars on earth.

Within the ‘symphony of voices,’ Kepler believed that the speed of each planet corresponds to certain notes in the Latinate musical scale popular in his day - do, re, mi, fa, sol, la, ti, do. He claimed that in the harmony of the spheres, the tones of Earth are fa and mi, that the Earth is forever humming fa and mi, and that they stand in a straightforward way for the Latin word for famine. He argued, not unsuccessfully, that the Earth was best described by that single doleful word....

Sagan attempts to comment about ancient chronology.

The major intellectual pursuit of his last years was a concordance and calibration of the chronologies of ancient civilizations, very much in the tradition of the ancient historians Manetho, Strabo and Eratosthenes. In his last, posthumous work, ‘The Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms Amended,’ we find repeated astronomical calibrations of historical events; an architectural reconstruction of the Temple of Solomon; a provocative claim that all the Northern Hemisphere constellations are named after the personages, artifacts and events in the Greek story of Jason and the Argonauts, and the consistent assumption that the gods of all civilizations, with the single exception of Newton’s own, were merely ancient kings and heroes deified by later generations.

Of course, orthodox historians refused to accept they are wrong. Slowly but surely, without you noticing, the chronologies will change. This is like the stupid idea that a shrinking collapsed star will become black and will attract with its strong density everything around including space. Today, no more black but shinning bodies called "black holes", imaginary bodies which in the 60s were called "white holes".

The whole world has been invaded by a bunch of lunatics who manipulate information to keep their pride alive, because losers is what they are.

The book Cosmos is full of pictures, the greater percent of mystic origin, a few with scientific background.

Sagan just collected information from other existing sources and resume them in a book. He didn't discover anything, he was just a showman.
 
And the common burglars: Velikovsky wrote as his conclusion that planet Venus was hot because was a new planet. This is 1950's.

Ejected from Jupiter. Which is total bullshit. What is the mechanism for that ejection? Why does Venus have a composition very different from Jupiter's composition? How did Venus survive the alleged ejection?

The bible describes a dark cloud lasting 40 years due to the passing by of a huge body (planet) near our earth.

Check the dark cloud in Jupiter. It appears the collision of this same body (planet) with Jupiter caused it. The impact should be that hard, that it created that dark cloud "that today is found is dissolving itself"n (like the dark cloud of the biblical narration) and it is estimate that future generations won't see the famous dark cloud in Jupiter.

Ancients thought that the planet was born from Jupiter, what is appears to happen is that this planet also passed by close to Jupiter as it did with earth.

Milankovitch cycles are consistent with Venus having been in its present orbit well into the Proterozoic.

It happens that such Proterozoic era never was millions of years ago but recently some thousands years ago.

What Carl Sagan did? Stealing Velikovsky's assertion and making his own the statement that Venus was hot.

He didn't. He worked from radio astronomers' observations.

Velikovsky's writings explain why Venus is hot. Sagan claims that no water is detected in Venus, however Velikovsky is vindicated when "snow" is part of the upper atmosphere of Venus.

And Sagan is not the only one who was stealing from Velikovsky, ha... you have no idea. I saw a video of an idiot, a so called scientists, who filmed himself going to an ancient temple and assure that the temple was built with meteorites. This film made 15 years after Velikovsky died. And Velikovsky was the first to assert that ancient temples were built with meteorites.
I searched books.google.com and I found references to meteorites in temples older than WoC. humbleman, you really need to improve your research skills.

Wow, this is a miracle that you have not invaded your message with hundreds of links supporting your statement.
 
That quote from the Popul Vuh is made up. They didn't have a single creator god. They had several gods, who made several blunders before managing to create humankind. I've read the Popul Vuh.

Of course, you never actually bothered to check his primary sources, right? You fell for the old trick of attributing a made up quote from an obscure source, and then juxtaposing it with a correct quote from a more well known source, so that the reader assumes the one is as accurate as the other.
 
Back
Top Bottom