On April 3rd, 1950, MacMillan Publishers-- a venerable and well-respected press known for releasing textbooks and the influential periodical Nature-- published a book by Immanuel Valikovsky entitled Worlds In Collision
Picture
Though he was a psychoanalyst by trade, Velikovsky's theories ventured far outside the confines of the human mind. He proposed a radical restructuring of our understanding of the solar system, upturning centuries of scientific understanding at a single stroke-- or trying to, anyway.

Using a hodgepodge of vague scientific claims, myths, and literary allusions, Velikovsky claimed in Worlds In Collision that the planet Venus dislodged from Jupiter sometime around 1500 BCE, narrowly avoided a collision with Earth, and settled into its present orbit around the sun.

The near miss left our planet literally shaken, changing our orbit and axis and inciting a host of natural catastrophes recorded in the myths and stories of various societies around the world.

A Schism of Opinion

Scientists rejected Velikovsky's claims out of hand, and with good reason-- his understanding of basic scientific principals was often flat wrong, his predictions stolen or too vague to test, and his claims contradicted by far more established and well-verified theories. 

But the public weren't so quick to dismiss him. Worlds In Collision topped the New York Times bestseller list for eleven weeks (no small feat for a book rife with footnotes, obscure literary allusions, and grad school diction), and factions supporting Velikovsky sprouted up in big cities and college campuses around the world. His specter loomed large on the fringes of scientific discourse well into the seventies, occasionally bolstered by a new bit of press, until Velikovsky died and the public lost interest.

For anyone who studied astronomy or physics, Velikovsky's enduring legacy was both maddening and deeply puzzling. His acceptance by much of the public spoke to an indifference, even a downright distrust, of scientific orthodoxy. When considering a subject rooted in astrophysics, why would so many people take the word of a psychiatrist over hundreds and hundreds of astronomers and physicists?

Perception

Well, for one thing, Velikovsky was an intelligent man. He was educated and well-spoken, with the poise and bearing of an intellectual. He possessed an earnest confidence in his theory that never overextended into arrogance. His medical credentials gave him a veneer of scientific credibility-- he may not have studied anything even remotely related to the subject on which he spoke, but his doctorate was enough to get him into the lobby of the Ivory Tower. From there, finding a free balcony from which to spout his bizarre iconoclastic gospel was a fairly simple matter. Toss out a few buzzwords, cloak your argument in references to myths and legends, and you have a pretty convincing bit of theater. As with all great stories, you wanted to believe it. 

But the biggest key to his success was, arguably, the care he took not to upend any beliefs the public held too dear. Venus exploding from Jupiter's belly is big and exciting. Esoteric complaints about Venus' atmospheric makeup and Newton's laws of motion got lost in the razzle-dazzle. If Velikovsky's theory had attempted to refute the existence of God, it would have raised some serious hackles. But it didn't. 

God On Your Side

In fact, Velikovsky shrewdly tipped his hat to Christianity, claiming the catastrophes outlined in Worlds In Collision lent scientific credence to the miracles outlined in the Old Testament. Perhaps his most notorious example was that Venus' passing close to Earth temporarily froze our planet on its axis, suspending the sun long enough for Joshua to conquer Gibeon

By using a seemingly scientific claim to reinforce a biblical passage, Velikovsky garnered his theory a great deal of social capital. Worlds In Collision transformed from an absurd hallucination by a crackpot pseudoscientist into a serious academic tome debated by two parties on more or less equal intellectual footing. On one side stood the Godless elites, their smug faces wrinkled with disdain; on the other was an earnest, intelligent, well-spoken underdog with the bible on his side. 

Brilliant marketing.

Branding Facts

The Velikovsky Affair, as it colourfully came to be known, reflects a larger problem within scientific orthodoxy. It is a crisis of reputation. The more we learn, the larger and deeper and abstract our thinking, the harder it becomes to accurately convey these ideas to the public. They become insular concepts, and the public is told they must accept them without reflecting on the evidence from which they came. 

As a result, people not educated in a given discipline aren't likely to spot a fake based on his or her ideas alone. Much of Velikovsky's "evidence" was provably wrong, but most of us-- myself included-- would struggle to prove it wrong ourselves without the aid of a more informed party-- namely, a physicist or astronomer or expert in the given field.

But how do we know the expert is right? Because he's an expert? That's hardly a proof capable of sustaining the pressures of scientific rigour. Yet without a point of reference, fact and fiction can become hopelessly blurred. The truth (as the public sees it) then pivots on marketing. And the truth has never been the successful marketer's modus operandi.

This can be a serious problem. Take, for instance, climate change. Scientists are more or less unanimous in their opinion that burning fossil fuels has had a real and detrimental impact on Earth's climate. By contrast, a quarter of Americans believe climate change to be an unproven theory. 

Why do they believe this? Because believing it might mean making some unpleasant changes to their lifestyle? Because a politician or celebrity or crazy uncle told them so? Because Al Gore's a filthy commie and everything he says is a lie? Who knows? Whatever the reason, what the latest evidence suggests about an issue and how people feel about that issue are by no means causally linked.

And when it comes down to making changes and implementing solutions to serious, perhaps even life-threatening problems, evidence takes a back seat to public opinion every time.

Science For the People

Science works best when it treats every hypothesis with absolute scrutiny, never dismissing an idea because it sounds wacky or clashes with the status quo. Unfortunately, no research department on Earth has the resources for that. 

So what's the solution? I'm not sure there is one. A greater focus on scientific literacy in schools would help. but I think the bigger issue might actually be on science's end. We need to educate, not simply inform. Pronouncements on high might sound good, but they're easy enough to refute. There'll always be another guy with a bushier beard and a taller mountain making pronouncements of his own.

 


Comments

Your article has helped me to read this subject on a different level. I would like to thank your efforts for exploring this issue

Reply

It definitely was a great article :)

Reply
08/09/2013 2:40am

Whatever the world considers Valikovsky to be, does not matter at all. What he really wanted to show was how the human mind worked and how the public believes are used to market a product. But every one failed to notice that simple fact.

Reply
08/29/2013 5:16am

Year 2012 has been quite eventful. SRSG also witnessed events and evolved in terms of business verticals, technologies, people and processes.

Reply
08/29/2013 5:17am

The Article is quite impressive and thoughts been put up has clearly got something to state. Nice Post!

Reply
01/28/2014 7:40am

Thank you for another essential article. Where else could anyone get that kind of information in such a complete way of writing

Reply
08/29/2013 5:18am

Great Post... Nice share for me, maybe nice for all reader of your post.. thanks

Reply
09/02/2013 3:38am

Green Power International was established in early 2002 in close cooperation with MWM GmbH (formerly Deutz Power System GmbH).

Reply
09/02/2013 3:39am

Really a very good read and very motivating.

Reply
09/02/2013 3:39am


Nice post . keep up the good work!

Reply
09/03/2013 2:10am

Gangaur Realtech is a professionally managed organisation specializing in real estate services where integrated services are provided by professionals to its clients seeking increased value by owning, occupying or investing in real estate.

Reply
09/03/2013 2:12am

Great Post... Nice share for me, maybe nice for all reader of your post.. thanks

Reply

The Article is quite impressive and thoughts been put up has clearly got something to state. Nice Post!

Reply
09/04/2013 4:17am

I want to see more about your work!

Reply

Iconoclasm might be carried external by persons of a dissimilar sect, only is frequent the end of bigoted squabbles amid groups of the invariable faith. Thank you.

Reply
09/10/2013 5:40pm

"MacMillan Publishers-- a venerable and well-respected press known for releasing textbooks and the influential periodical Nature-- published a book by Immanuel Valikovsky entitled Worlds In Collision"

- that's right. I do understand on what you mean here then.

Reply
10/24/2013 1:50pm

The article is clearly written and every point is factual and is no-nonsense. I have surf the internet looking for topics such as these and it is here where I find it written and stated well.

Reply
10/27/2013 11:23pm

Thanks for the unmatchable diary.it was rale useful for me.navigator sharing specified ideas in the instant as symptomless.this was actually what i was labour for,and i am voluntary to came here!

Reply
10/31/2013 3:26am

I really appreciate for your brilliant Efforts on spending time to post this information in a simple and systematic manner.

Reply
11/18/2013 6:35am

Find your way to happy and cheap shopping with best deals by using the coupon codes online at getcouponcodeonline.com.

Reply
01/15/2014 11:55am

He sounds like a interesting fellow. I have never read world of collision but I am sure he worked hard to finish it. Saying that a planet dislodged from another just a few thousand years ago does not sound right.

Reply
02/02/2014 7:01pm

Nice blog !!For anyone who studied astronomy or physics, Velikovsky's enduring legacy was both maddening and deeply puzzling. His acceptance by much of the public spoke to an indifference, even a downright distrust, of scientific orthodoxy. When considering a subject rooted in astrophysics, why would so many people take the word of a psychiatrist over hundreds and hundreds of astronomers and physicists?

Reply



Leave a Reply