Electric                    Astral               Pre-historical
Universe              Catastrophism        Reconstruction


     Mikamar
           Publishing
 

Articles & Products Supporting the Pre-historical Reconstruction and Plasma Cosmology
 home       features       science/philosophy       wholesale store       used books        contact

Site Section Links

Introduction Material
Articles
The Third Story

Cosmology, Origins
The Nature of Time
Nature of Time video
The Nature of Space
The Neutrino Aether
Nature of Force Fields

Geophysical Material
Origin of Modern Geology
Niagara Falls Issues
Climate Change Model
Climate Change Questions

Philosophy Material
Philosophy Links

Reconstruction &
Mythology Material
Modern Mythology Material
Language/Symbol Development
1994 Velikovsky Symposium
Pensee Journals TOC
Selected Velikovskian Article

Miscellaneous Material
Modern Mythology
State of Religious Diversity
PDF Download Files
Open letter to science editors

 

Editor's Page

A Look At the Evidence

Detached evaluation may be the hallmark of true science, but it is difficult to remain dispassionate when contemplating the scientific community's role in "the Velikovsky affair."  The libel and character assassination directed at Dr. Immanuel Velikovsky by leading scientists since the publication of his book, Worlds in Collision (1950); the refusal to grant him an opportunity to reply to his critics; the rude failure to acknowledge his correct prediction of "surprising scientific discoveries"; the unwillingness of scientific journals to retract factually erroneous and even farcical criticisms of his views—these black marks cast a disconcerting pall over the achievements of modern science.

But such matters are dealt with only secondarily in this special issue of Pensee.  The sordid story of Velikovsky's reception at the hands of scientific illuminati has been related elsewhere. (See American Behavioral Scientist, 1963; or The Velikovsky Affair, ed. de Grazia, available from COSMOS, 1503 Connecticut Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20036.) Meanwhile, evidence from diverse fields has mounted yearly, weighting the scales increasingly in Velikovsky's favor.  One need not endorse his theories in order to conclude that a full-scale discussion of their validity and implications ought to proceed immediately within all the affected disciplines.

This issue of Pensee represents an effort to stimulate that discussion.  We do not wish to argue the question whether Velikovsky's work merits serious scholarly evaluation.  Those who think not and who have not altered their stance during the past two decades, will be unlikely to change their minds now.  Indeed, many ruled out objective examination of new evidence by announcing long ago that they would never read Velikovsky: they already knew his books to be "lies-yes, lies" (the words of Dean McLaughlin, a Michigan astronomer).  Dr. Harold Urey open-mindedly instructed a correspondent: "My advice to you is to shut the book [Worlds in Collision] and never look at it again in your lifetime."

But their positions of honor are steadily being filled by young scientists who are less respectful of entrenched dogma, and whose minds are not blind to the meaning of empirical and historical evidence.  Discussion of this evidence proceeds even now, as the following articles demonstrate.  And in succeeding issues Pensee will encourage continuing critical analysis of all questions raised by Velikovsky's work.

Pensee is not a technical journal.  It ventures into matters scientific and historical quite timidly, and only to help fill the void created by the refusal of specialized journals to acknowledge the vitally important questions raised by Velikovsky's scholarship.  We do not attempt here to present "both sides of the issue." It is Velikovsky's views which have been systematically excluded from the scientific media, not those of his critics.  We hope to receive and print responses to the articles contained here, but that discussion must proceed in a manner allowing both sides to be heard.

The scope of Velikovsky's work as an interdisciplinary scholar easily overwhelms a reader. (We do not here pretend to offer more than a fragmentary look at that work.  Velikovsky's opus magnum, Ages in Chaos, is not even discussed in this month's issue.) His historical reconstructions offer a meaningful explanation for such diverse and "unrelated" phenomena as the instant freezing and entombment of mammoths in Siberia; the presence of coal and tropical corals inside the Arctic Circle; the remanent magnetism in lunar rocks; the Chaldeans' awareness that Venus passes through phases (like the moon); the repeated reversal of Earth's magnetic fields; and Egyptian sundials and water clocks which make no sense according to the present order of the solar system.

New theories often, if not usually, arise in order to explain puzzling facts which refuse to adapt themselves to existing explanations.  This very stubbornness, wherever it occurs, testifies to the inadequacy—possibly the fundamental inadequacy—of accepted theory.  That Velikovsky manages to account for anomalies in so many widely separated fields is powerful evidence for the truth of his ideas and requires, we think, a plausible explanation from his critics.

We trust that that explanation—and not an emotional outburst—is forthcoming.

*    *    *    *    *

Pensee wishes to acknowledge the assistance and cooperation of Lewis and Clark College (Portland, Oregon) in preparing this special issue.

We are grateful to Dr. Velikovsky for his willingness to assist in this project.  His technical knowledge and editorial advice proved in all cases to be sound.

PENSEE Journal I

 home       features       science/philosophy       wholesale store        policies        contact
Mikamar Publishing, 16871 SE 80th Pl,  Portland  OR  97267       503-974-9665