Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Worlds in Derision

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1

    Worlds in Derision

    Your piece on Velikovsky failed to mention the current theory of the Moon's origin, that a planet-sized body hit the earth a glancing blow about 4 billion years ago, and the debris from this collision became the Moon (see "The Big Splat"). Of course, Velikovsky was wrong, but evidently there were numerous collisions in the early period of formation of the solar system. The collision theory is based on results from Apollo, as well as the fact that the Moon's average density is similar to that of the earth's crust, and much less than the average density of the earth (due to our iron core!).

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    2,790

    Re: Worlds in Derision

    Quote Originally Posted by OUGrad
    Your piece on Velikovsky failed to mention
    Indirectly, it does. Worlds in Derision is Chapter 18 in the BA's book, p.174, is about Velikovsky's theories, which theories seem to say that Venus collided with the earth in the last few thousand years. The book does talk about collisions many millions of years before, but obviously none of them, including the one you are referring to, have anything to do with Velikovsky's theory

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    11,227
    Yeah, the lunar formation theory doesn't have much to do with Velikovsky except tangentially (ha! a pun). A lot of V's current followers say that he is the one who kick-started modern catastrophic theories, but I doubt that's correct. His theories are so amazingly, astoundingly, grossly wrong that it's very unlikely that some scientist said, "Hey, maybe his ideas are amazingly, astoundingly, grossly wrong, but he may be on to something..." #-o

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    422
    You never know. Maybe someone was laughing themselves to self over a book of his theories and went "wait a second... that is amazingly, astoundingly, grossly wrong, but it gives me an idea....".

    Of course that doesn't change the fact that he is amazingly, astoundingly, grossly wrong. I just like saying that. Amazingly, astoundingly, grossly wrong! Amazingly, astoundingly, grossly wrong!

    Ok I'm done now.

  5. #5
    Guest
    Welcome to BA to another OU Grad...


    There is a difference between the current theory of the moon's formation, and Velikovski's ideas of Venus colliding round the Solar System, rather like a ball-bearing in a pinball game...


  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Boulder, Colorado
    Posts
    6,269
    yea, this chapter bothered me too. more about Carl Sagan than Velikovsky.

    Sagan was put down for poor or lacking arguments, but the points in this chapter didn't go much futher.



    I just realized that the Author has to hear critiques all day - especially since he created this place. #-o
    My travel blog Mostly about riding a motorcycle across the US and Europe. Also has cool things that happen in between.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    11,227
    Actually, ten pages in the chapter discuss V's claims, and three talk about how the scientific community dealt with him. Of those three, about one page is concerning Sagan's attack on V.

    I think that how the community dealt with V's antiscience garbage is very important, which is why I included it. I still stand by what I wrote in that chapter.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Boulder, Colorado
    Posts
    6,269
    Actually, I liked the part describing the community. I'm a little younger than most astronomers, 24, and I wasn't around to see these things happen. reading about them is the only way to know.


    I guess my complaint was that he, Sagan, wrote half a book on the subject and was put down, but there was nothing new that strenghtened the arguments against V.


    Overall I throughly enjoyed your book. 8)
    My travel blog Mostly about riding a motorcycle across the US and Europe. Also has cool things that happen in between.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    12

    Amateur Astronomer Here

    I have a physics degree but function as something other as do most people. How in the Worlds in Collision, did V get so much credibility that his puke had to be addressed by serious, busy scientists? Are we going to have to waste precious resources to debunk the golden shower hoard of pseudoscientists that populate Crank.net?

    Is our public education system really this bad?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    4,519

    Re: Amateur Astronomer Here

    Quote Originally Posted by Floyd_the_astronomer
    I have a physics degree but function as something other as do most people. How in the Worlds in Collision, did V get so much credibility that his puke had to be addressed by serious, busy scientists? Are we going to have to waste precious resources to debunk the golden shower hoard of pseudoscientists that populate Crank.net?

    Is our public education system really this bad?
    Yes ...

    Just Look at Kansas and Kentucky ...

    <Shudders>


Similar Threads

  1. # of worlds ?
    By CAPT CRUSTY in forum Space/Astronomy Questions and Answers
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 2007-Jul-20, 11:11 AM
  2. War O' The Worlds
    By peter eldergill in forum Small Media at Large
    Replies: 128
    Last Post: 2005-Aug-28, 11:14 PM
  3. War of the Worlds (Again)
    By Aubri in forum Small Media at Large
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 2005-Aug-24, 02:30 PM
  4. Worlds inside worlds
    By ChromeStar in forum Against the Mainstream
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 2004-Dec-27, 08:29 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •