Site Section Links
The Third Story
The Nature of Time
Nature of Time video
The Nature of Space
The Neutrino Aether
Nature of Force Fields
Origin of Modern
Niagara Falls Issues
Climate Change Model
Climate Change Questions
Modern Mythology Material
1994 Velikovsky Symposium
Horus Journals TOC
Kronos Journals TOC
Pensee Journals TOC
Velikovskian Journals TOC
Selected Velikovskian Article
State of Religious Diversity
PDF Download Files
Open letter to science editors
KRONOS Vol. I, Issue 1
The "Tao, the Way - the basic Chinese belief in an order and harmony in nature. This grand
concept originated in remote times, from observation of the heavens and of nature–the rising and
setting of sun, moon, and stars, the cycle of day and night, and the rotation of the seasons–suggesting
the existence of laws of nature, a sort of divine legislation that regulated the pattern in the heavens
and its counterpart on earth."(1)
The following essay has, for the most part, been extracted from an editorial which
appeared in the journal Chiron (2) and appropriately summarizes many of the ideas contained
within this present issue of KRONOS.
"Throughout antiquity priests and poets warned our ancestors that riot, plague,
and the fall of nations were merely the profane manifestations of celestial disharmony, or
what they called 'a perturbation of the heavenly spheres.' In fact this view of man's
relationship to the cosmos was still current less than four hundred years ago. In
Shakespeare's Troilus and Cressida (1602), for example, we find Ulysses saying:
. . .but when the planets
In evil mixture to disorder wander,
What plagues, and what portents, what mutiny,
What raging, of the sea, shaking of earth,
Commotion in the winds, frights, changes, horrors,
Divert and crack, rend and deracinate
The unity and married calm of states
Quite from their fixture!"
In contrast to the ancients, "modern" science holds a much different attitude towards the
Cosmos. Psychologically, a violent universe can be clearly recognized and tolerated, providing
our relative position in it is safely distant–which it is tacitly assumed to be.
The fundamental "difference, of course, between the [catastrophic] speculations of
most of today's scientists and Velikovsky's specific theory of celestial catastrophism" may
be summarized in two words - "space and time . . . Evidently speculations about
catastrophic phenomena occurring millions of years ago in time, or millions of light years
away in space, lead to little if any psychological discomfort. ('Out of sight, out mind'?)
When a similar idea is presented in terms of what may have taken place within the
sanctuary of our solar system and on our planet, the terror and uncertainty it conjures up
apparently become a bogy too horrible for conscious consideration."
"If Velikovsky is right, we may live in a . . . universe . . . which is extremely
unstable and, therefore, very unpredictable. Our universe, the 'cosmic heart,' as it were,
may prove to have a congenital murmur. What I mean to say, and forcefully, is this: The
next act in the cosmic drama of colliding celestial bodies may begin to unfold at almost
any moment - and without any intercession on our behalf by some benevolent deity. It
may be unfolding even now.
Here, indeed, is a tragic view of 'man's fate'!
Yet once we accept the reality of this fate, granting, of course, that it is a reality,
our willful decision to carry on - to create and strive, to live and love - in spite of it can
lend more heroic stature to our uncertain and precarious existence."
Both Velikovsky's supporters and critics "seem to expend their energies attempting
to either confirm or refute the particulars of Velikovskian catastrophism. Neither has
speculated on its potential ramifications in the field of philosophy. Why?
Look at our newspapers. When someone over eighty dies in his sleep, they tell us
he died 'of natural causes.' When someone dies in an automobile accident, or in combat, it
is 'unnatural'? Of course none of us likes to think about dying in an immediate sense, of
his own death occurring today, right now. Although we may recognize the ambivalence of
life, the fact that at birth we contract a terminal disease ('life') from which none of us
recovers, we tend to act as if we were going to live forever."
Sudden and violent death are all around us and occur day in and day out throughout the
course of months, years, decades, centuries, and millennia.
"Such abrupt deaths are 'unnatural' only if we fail to admit the obvious - sudden
and violent death is part of 'the nature of the universe.' If so, where is the logic in
believing what can happen to a man or to a tree cannot happen to a planet?
Were the ancients right all along? I am not thinking of only the obvious - sudden
and violent death is part of 'the nature of the universe.' Genesis Rabba, a midrash (or
exposition) on the Book of Genesis from fifth-century Palestine, which says: 'In the
beginning God created numerous worlds, destroying one after the other as they failed to
satisfy Him. All were inhabited by man, a thousand generations of whom He cut off,
leaving no record of them.' I am also reminded of this observation by Arthur Waley in The
Way and its Power (1949) – the law of the universe, its tao or 'way,' is ruthless, for 'when
autumn comes no leaf is spared because of its beauty, no flower because of its fragrance'."
1. Mai-mai Sze, The Way of Chinese Painting (Vintage Books: N. Y., 1959), p. 3.
2. Chiron (now defunct), Vol. I, Numbers 1&2 (Winter-Spring 1974), pp. 46-50.
Permission to reprint this editorial extract granted by the editor of Chiron.