DR. VELIKOVSKY, the Floor is Your's!

Here's part of what Immanuel Velikovsky had written in the Preface
to the paperback edition of his best-seller, "Worlds in Collision,"
in the early 1960s:

========================

"The words found in the Preface to the 1950 edition, designating
the work as heresy in realms where the names of Newton and
Darwin reign supreme, should no longer evoke the same
spontaneous rejection on the part of even the most conservative
in science, unless it is a defense mechanism devised to protect
an inner realization of incertitude.

(Velikovsky then quoted Warren Weaver in "The Imperfections
of Science," which were part of the proceedings of the American
Philos. Soc. on Oct 17, 1960.)

"What, to the scientist, constitutes a really satisfactory sort of
success for a theory? (Weaver had asked) The answer lies
largely in the words generality, elegance, control and prediction."

As to generality, hardly anyone raised an objection. Possibly there
was some elegance in the timing: when these words were written
in 1960, ten years after the publication of my book and the great
opposition it provoked, some of the most compelling data were
radioed by the space vehicle, Pioneer V.

I would like to relate here a few details about the control and
prediction of two crucial tests, decisive for this book.

Early in my work I came to the understanding that Venus is
a newcomer to the planetary family, that it had a stormy if only
short history, and that it must still be very hot and "giving off
gas;" further, that it must be surrounded by a very extensive
envelope of hydrocarbon (petroleum) gas and dust.

Such claims were in total disagreement with what was known
in 1946 when I completed the manuscript of the work or in 1950
when it was published.

To stress the crucial nature of these claims, they were put under
the headings "The Gases of Venus" and "The Thermal Balance
of Venus" immediately preceding the section, "The End."

Should I be right in these claims, the entire chain of deductions --
of which the identification of the extraterrestrial agent of the
paroxysms described is but the final ring -- is strengthened.

And since these crucial claims were in flagrant discord with accepted
values, in case of confirmation they ought not to be denoted as lucky
guesses.

As late as 1959, Venus' ground temperature was calculated to be only
17 degrees C, three degrees above the mean annual temperature
of the Earth.

But by 1961, from the nature of the radio signals emitted by Venus, it
was found that Venus' ground temperature is about 315 degrees C,
or 600 degrees F.

Dr. F. D. Drake of the National Radio Astronomy Observatory,
responsible for this reading, wrote: "We would have expected a
temperature only slightly greater than that of the earth." and the
find was "a surprise . . . in a field in which the fewest surprises
were expected."

There was admittedly no satisfactory explanation of such high
temperature of Venus in the frame of the accepted notions.

Greenhouse effect could not explain so high a temperature, nor could
radioactivity decaying for billions of years.

The Mariner II, the space vehicle that passed Venus in December, 1962,
was instrumented to detect whether the heat is real and as high as 600
degrees. It found it real and a full 800 degrees.

It found, also, that the night side of Venus is, if anything, hotter
than the day side and that light does not penetrate the cloud cover.

The other crucial test concerned the gaseous envelope of the planet
(Venus).

In 1946, four years before the publication of this book, I directed
a request and inquiry to Professor R. Wildt of Yale and the late
Professor W. S. Adams of Mount Wilson and Palomar observatories,
foremost authorities on the subject of planetary atmosphere,
indicating that the presence of hydrocarbon gases and dust in the
cloud envelope of Venus would constitute a crucial test for the
cosmological concepts evolved from the study of historical sources.

Wildt wrote on Sept. 13, 1946: "The absorption spectrum of Venus'
atmosphere cannot be interpreted as resulting from gaseous
hydrocarbons."

Adams answered (Sept. 9, 1946): "There is no evidence of the presence
of hydrocarbon gas in the atmosphere of Venus."

I must have been completely firm in my belief of not having made
a wrong deduction -- from the first premise of global catastrophe
to the last one, of identifying the agent -- to have chosen to print,
in disregard of the expert opinions: "On the basis of this research
I assume that Venus must be rich in petroleum gases."

On Feb. 26, 1963, making known the results of the Mariner probe,
Dr. Homer Newell of NASA announced that, in his judgment of those
responsible for that part of the program, Venus is enshrouded in an
envelope of hydrocarbon gases and dust, 15 miles thick, 45 miles
above the ground of the planet."

Ed Conrad
http://www.edconrad.com

Man as Old as Coal

==========================

MIND-BOGGLING DISCOVERIES BETWEEN COAL VEINS

http://mysite.verizon.net/edconrad/F...tDiscovery.jpg
http://mysite.verizon.net/edconrad/F...HumanSkull.JPG
http://mysite.verizon.net/edconrad/F...HumanBrain.jpg
http://mysite.verizon.net/edconrad/F...sOldasCoal.jpg
http://mysite.verizon.net/edconrad/F...iscoveries.jpg
http://mysite.verizon.net/edconrad/F...oreFossils.jpg
http://mysite.verizon.net/edconrad/F...estResults.jpg
http://mysite.verizon.net/edconrad/FOSSILS/OldestTool.jpg
http://mysite.verizon.net/edconrad/FOSSILS/MVC-013F.JPG

=================

PETRIFIED FOSSILS STILL EMBEDDED IN SLATE

http://mysite.verizon.net/edconrad/N...s/MVC-002S.JPG
http://mysite.verizon.net/edconrad/N...s/MVC-003S.JPG
http://mysite.verizon.net/edconrad/N...s/MVC-006S.JPG
http://mysite.verizon.net/edconrad/N...s/MVC-007S.JPG
http://mysite.verizon.net/edconrad/N...s/MVC-009S.JPG
http://mysite.verizon.net/edconrad/N...s/MVC-010S.JPG
http://mysite.verizon.net/edconrad/N...s/MVC-012S.JPG

================================================

Ed Conrad
Man as Old as Coal
http://www.edconrad.com

================

American Association for the Advancement of Science
American Board of Forensic Anthropology
American Academy of Forensic Sciences
American Anthropological Association
American Board of Criminalistics
American Society of Crime Lab Directors
American Association of Physical Anthropologists
American Association of Anatomists
Human Biology Association
University of California-Berkeley
Penn State University
Paleontological Research Institution
BARFAA
Midwest Bioarchaeology and Forensic Anthropology Association
MD&C
Mountain, Desert, and Coastal Forensic Anthropologists.
Nude Beaches of Nevada
Canadian Association of Physical Anthropology
The Forensic Science Society (UK)
California Association of Criminalists
American College of Forensic Examiners Institute
Paleopathology Association
Paleoanthropology Society
SWAFS
Southwestern Association of Forensic Scientists
==
(cc) Larry King Live CNN ABC CBS NBC Fox News
MSNBC BBC C-span Meet the Press 911 Conspiracy
President Bush alt.war.iraq Baghdad Iraq Iran London
Tony Blair Rush Limbaugh Don Imus Ross Perot NYC
Lou Dobbs Chris Matthews Smithsonian Institution AP
Wall Street Journal Stock Market Nobel Foundation UPI
Keith Olbermann Dick Cheney Good Morning America
David Iain Greig talk.origins Fortune 500 sci.bio.evolution
OPEC Oil eBay Wal-Mart Target Extraterrestrials Hubble

"Ed Conrad" wrote in message


Dr. Velikovsky may have made more than his fair share of research
mistakes, but that's only because he was human. Fortunately, our
Velikovsky was sufficiently correct on a number of issues, more than
enough to benefit humanity. Venus is in fact a newish planet in the
makings, of becoming a viable planet (Earth-II) for those of us that are
becoming smart enough to tie our own shoe laces. John Ackerman deserves
some equal credit, as being of an open mindset that doesn't knowingly
exclude or otherwise banish evidence.

This following GUTH infomercial rant is simply being shared on behalf of
the old truth and nothing but the truth gipper. For starters, I bet the
likes of National Geographic isn't exactly one of the good guys, any
more so than GOOGLE/NOVA or a good dozen other mainstream publishers of
our government's infomercial lies upon lies, that as such wouldn't so
much as dare not publish and/or produce whatever's on behalf of our
government's pet agenda.

In spite of what we've been told is the truth, there's simply no hard
evidence, much less impirical that proves Shakespeare contributed each
and every word of his works, and there's no such evidence that our moon
came from within Earth, any more so than we have proof of having walked
on the moon as scribed to us by the one and only NASA/Apollo koran.

There is however empirical evidence that Columbus was by far not the
first to have discovered America, as well as we have empirical evidence
that the bible was not properly scribed as in it's original format, just
as we have empirical evidence that Cathars were in fact exterminated by
the Pope of their day, and otherwise empirical evidence that our
resident LLPOF warlord(GW Bush) lied his mostly pro-white and nearly
fachous born-again infomercial spewing butt off as of nearly
continually.

Other than all of that, and then some, there's actually lots of our
officially recorded history that's skewed off course and gotten
sufficiently past the point of no return, along with those of the Old
Testament mindset that would just as soon kill off and eat their own
kind, just like in the "Phineas T Puddleduck" world where apparently
only non-jews are the bad guys.

This next rant is for those of us honest village idiots that have had
just about enough of their mainstream status quo crapolla.

The raw soup and nuts gauntlet of this disinformation spewing Usenet's
anti-think-tank, that's from their very own cultivated infomercial LLPOF
hell, is getting yet another badly needed kick in their private parts.
This time it's getting delivered by CARL ZIMMER's steel toed boot.

A whole lotta liars / By CARL ZIMMER
Published: December 26, 2006

http://mygate.mailgate.org/mynews/sc...ma ilgate.org

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...a313acb656a366
(David Polewka)" wrote in
message oups.com

Different species may be prone to different levels of
deception. Solitary animals may evolve to be more
honest than animals that spend long lives in big societies.
If that is true, then humans may be exquisitely primed to
deceive.

That's really good stuff, way better off than I could have said it. As
"big societies" of humans, we're clearly a morphed species that's
born-again and otherwise cultivated to lie our infomercial spewing butts
off, and then some.

I'm not at all sure that our local evolution had all that much of
anything but negative impact upon our frail DNA code, especially of our
faith-based LLPOF code that's seriously running our species amuck.

If our faith in whatever and thereby faith-based DNA code is supposedly
linked to a common cosmic creator or whatever source of ET intelligent
design, then something terribly bad went seriously wrong along the way,
especially since there's so much of absolutely nifty DNA code that so
many other complex species of life (millions of years older than us)
still have at their disposal to work with, that we've somehow lost track
of or otherwise having knowingly disposed of.

Sort of makes you wonder, as to where the heck our extremely frail and
clearly deficient human DNA originated, doesn't it.

I have a fairly substantial shopping list of absolutely nifty DNA codes
that most of us humans could really use to our benefit. How about
yourself? GOT BETTER DNA ?
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

Oh, great...two pseudoscientists patting each other on the back because
a third pseudoscientist supports their beliefs...

R

"Ron Miller" wrote in message
oups.com

Oh, great...two pseudoscientists patting each other on the back because
a third pseudoscientist supports their beliefs...

Science that's replicated is good enough for me. Obviously you'll
accept upon absolutely anything that's NASA/Apollo scripted into your
little black book of infomercial-science and downright lies, that
matches your little black remorseless heart.

It looks as though we're being silly boys again, arnt we. Once again
there's born-again liars and then there's borgs or rather brown-nosed
minions of the status quo that simply can't tell one lie from another.

A whole lotta liars

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...31269616317291
"zzpat" wrote in message

All this lying in the animal kingdom reminds me of Fox News. It's too
bad Fox doesn't have "fair and balanced" stories from two crustaceans;
one lying his ass off and being praised, the other telling the truth and
being vilified.

I say that loot talks, doesn't it. But do these serious cults (aka
Skull and Bones or Old Testament whatevers) even care about loot nearly
as much as they do about sustaining their seat of power?

If a badly given anti-ruse is worth doing, you either do it at whatever
the cost or simply allow it to transpire by way of others. What's new
about orchestrated disinformation wars; isn't it what we do best?

Planting phony-baloney information (good or bad news) as supposed
evidence is certainly a good part of any half-assed plan of action,
isn't it.

Creating those supposed facts as newly uncovered or discovered evidence,
and if need be contributing whatever moles that you can rather easily
tear apart, is pretty much status quo of achieving whatever it takes in
order to win a given info war, even if it's a mutually perpetrated and
extremely spendy and unavoidably lethal cold-war that goes on and on for
decades.

Remember, in war there are no rules.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

In message .com, Ron
Miller writes
Oh, great...two pseudoscientists patting each other on the back because
a third pseudoscientist supports their beliefs...


I'm not sure why you're feeding the trolls, but the most interesting
thing about Bonehead's post is that he's been making the same
grammatical error for at least five years!

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.a...ead/thread/31c
a669eb4f0d897/5a15eeec3588d1e8?lnk=st&q=%22VELIKOVSKY%2C+the+Flo or+is+You
r%27s!%22&rnum=7#5a15eeec3588d1e8
http://tinyurl.com/ydmf2f

"Jonathan Silverlight"
wrote in message

Dr. Velikovsky's DNA is less than Einstein's, though way better than
yours or mine.

I've started up that new and improved topic: DNA, where are you?

However, I bet that many of you and others of your kind can't share and
share alike.

Be a good Usenet sport, and have at it. Tell us what DNA codes you're
missing, or not.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG