Eyewitness accounts are notoriously unreliable, as we know from court testimony.
What then are we to make of eye witness accounts of Lilith?
You can make of them whatever the hell you wish.
They say Japan was made by a sword. They say the old gods dipped a coral blade into the ocean, and when they pulled it out four perfect drops fell back into the sea, and those drops became the islands of Japan. I say, Japan was made by a handful of brave men. Warriors, willing to give their lives for what seems to have become a forgotten word: honor. -The Last Samurai
Even in the realm of anthropology there seems to be problems with the Velikovsky theories. According to Worlds in Collision Venus did not exist before about 1,500 B.C.. In his book Velikovsky says that neither the Hindus or the Babylonians recorded the planet Venus. However Peter Huber, from the Edgennossische Technische Hochschule, Zurich, reports that in Cuneiform texts stetching as far back as 3,000 B.C., Venus is mentioned as the star connected with the rising and setting sun. Clear evidence that it occupied an orbit in between the Earth and the sun as it does today. Also in records from 1580 to 1560 B.C. observations were made of Venus that clearly puts it in an orbit identical with the planet's current orbit.
They say Japan was made by a sword. They say the old gods dipped a coral blade into the ocean, and when they pulled it out four perfect drops fell back into the sea, and those drops became the islands of Japan. I say, Japan was made by a handful of brave men. Warriors, willing to give their lives for what seems to have become a forgotten word: honor. -The Last Samurai
They say Japan was made by a sword. They say the old gods dipped a coral blade into the ocean, and when they pulled it out four perfect drops fell back into the sea, and those drops became the islands of Japan. I say, Japan was made by a handful of brave men. Warriors, willing to give their lives for what seems to have become a forgotten word: honor. -The Last Samurai
Velikovsky made many valid predictions that were very strange at the time. e.g that Jupiter would be found to be a radio emitter. He also made some invalid predictions.
While skeptics no doubt are wonderful people, I am still waiting for them to provide even one interesting hypothesis to stimulate my thinking.
Velikovsky made many valid predictions that were very strange at the time. e.g that Jupiter would be found to be a radio emitter. He also made some invalid predictions.
While skeptics no doubt are wonderful people, I am still waiting for them to provide even one interesting hypothesis to stimulate my thinking.
Juptier emits radio waves, but not for the reasons given by Velikovsky. He was, like Sitchin and Van Daniken, a scientific ignoramus. If you actually bothered to read the entry, you would see that it covered your objection, i.e., Jupiter's radio emissions.
Exactly what kind of hypothesis would "stimulate" your interest? Must it always be the improbable?
They say Japan was made by a sword. They say the old gods dipped a coral blade into the ocean, and when they pulled it out four perfect drops fell back into the sea, and those drops became the islands of Japan. I say, Japan was made by a handful of brave men. Warriors, willing to give their lives for what seems to have become a forgotten word: honor. -The Last Samurai
... Jupiter emits radio waves, but not for the reasons given by Velikovsky. ....
I knew a man who was often inspired with what to do. His decisions sometimes seemed counter-intuitive and I would question him. He would give an explanation - sometimes it seemed really silly.
But it would often turn out that the strange thing he wanted to do was quite right. He knew what to do but did not understand why. Eventually I learned not to bother with his rationale but to examine the proposed action directly.
I had something similar when I built large economic models - I often perceived what to do in the model but it would take days before I understood how that was the right answer.
Some people use perception then logic. Others use logic and then perception.
Exactly what kind of hypothesis would "stimulate" your interest? Must it always be the improbable?
I can produce any number of logical hypotheses myself from within conventional theory. What I need help for is finding ideas that arise from right outside my frame of reference.
Velikovsky. He was, like Sitchin and Van Daniken, a scientific ignoramus.
It seems Einstein did not share your opinion Henka.
Meanwhile Velikovsky had been maintaining contact with Einstein - he would send him letters and manuscripts and Einstein would return them, usually with comments written in the margins. With regards to Earth in Upheaval, Einstein accepted all the evidence of sudden violence upon the Earth, but he rejected Venus as being the cause. Nine days after their final meeting Einstein died, and a copy of Worlds in Collision was found open on his desk. He was rereading it because latest discoveries concerning Jupiter had confirmed one of Velikovsky's predictions.
It is currently accepted that a comet wiped out the dinosaurs, yet in the 1950s, when Velikovsky suggested similar ideas, he was rejected. In fact many of his radical ideas that orthodox science originally laughed at, due to their lack of scientific foundation, have become proven facts:
· Jupiter periodically becomes unstable and ejects excess mass.
· Jupiter emits non-thermal radio noise.
· Comets can be rich in hydrocarbons, with highly energetic electrical tails.
· The Moon has had recent surface melting, seismic and volcanic activity, none of which should be true for a body that had supposedly been dead for 4.5 billion years.