QUANTAVOLUTION AND CATASTROPHE

INTRODUCTION TO THE SERIES & Q-C TEST


PART 1: Introduction to the series

PART 2: The Q-C Test

C-Test
Instructions:

Fifteen Propositions

01. Gradualism
02. Independent Effects.
03. Terrestrial Isolation.
04. Gravitational Accumulations.
05. Elaborative Polymorphism.
06. Lunar Capture.
07. Perennial Geological Flux.
08. Uniformitarianism.
09. Evolution.
10. Homo Sapiens Sapiens.
11. Increasing Consciousness and Self-awareness.
12. Cultural and Institutional Invention.
13. Religious Sophistication.
14. Macrochronism.
15. Cross-validation of Time and Events.

Q-Test
Instructions:


15 Propositions

01. Quantavolution.
02. Holospherics.
03. Exoterrestrial Genesis.
04. Solaria Binaria.
05. Poly-episodic Catastrophes.
06. Lunar Explosions with Global Fracture.
07. Disturbed Geological Columns.
08.Exponential Apocalypses.
09. Species Mass Changes and Extinction.
10. Schizoid Humanization.
11. Mass Amnesia and Sublimation.
12. Cultural Hologenesis.
13. Divine Succession.
14. Microchronism.
15. Consonant Paradigmatics.


PART 3: A Comment on the Q-C Test and Its Individual Items

A ] C-TEST
B ] Instructions:
C ] ----
D ] ----
Fifteen Propositions
E ] 01. Gradualism.
F ] 02. Independent Effects.
G ] 03. Terrestrial Isolation.
H ] 04. Gravitational Accumulations.
I ] 05. Elaborative Polymorphism.
J ] 06. Lunar Capture.
K ] 07. Perennial Geological Flux.
L ] 08. Uniformitarianism.
M ] 09. Evolution.
N ] 10. Homo Sapiens Sapiens.
O ] 11. Increasing Consciousness and Self-awareness.
P ] 12. Cultural and Institutional Invention.
Q ] 13. Religious Sophistication.
R ] 14. Macrochronism.
S ] 15. Cross-validation of Time and Events.
T ] SCORE
U ] Q-TEST
Fifteen Propositions
V ] 01. Quantavolution.
W ] 02. Holospherics.
X ] 03. Exoterrestrial Genesis.
Y ] 04. Solaria Binaria.
Z ] 05. Poly-episodic Catastrophes.
AA ] 06. Lunar Explosions with Global Fracture.
BB ] 07. Disturbed Geological Columns.
CC ] 08. Exponential Apocalypses.
DD ] 09. Species Mass Changes and Extinction.
EE ] 10. Schizoid Humanization.
FF ] 11. Mass Amnesia and Sublimation.
GG ] 12. Cultural Hologenesis.
HH ] 13. Divine Succession.
II ] 14. Microchronism.
JJ ] 15. Consonant Paradigmatics.
KK ] SCORE


PART 4: PROSPECTIVE CHANGES IN THE Q-C TEST

1. Placebos:
2. Religious Dimension:
3. Additional Items:
4. Merging:
5. Validation:
6. Randomizing and Cross-sectioning the Sample:
7. Extending the number of special disciplines implicated in the results:
8. Uses:
a) Abetting theoretical studies.
b) Discovery of trends in public awareness of science.
c) Discovering relationship between creationist belief and quantavolutionary belief.
d) Q-C scores as a function of age, occupation, religion, formal schooling.
e) Discovery of trends in ideology of scientists.
f) Discovery of deficiencies and contradictions of belief brought on by specialization.
g) Enumerating the varieties of conventional and quantavolutionary thought.
h) Fostering interdisciplinary communication.


PART 5: The Scope of Quantavolution

ENCYCLOPEDIA OF QUANTAVOLUTION AND CATASTROPHE














QUANTAVOLUTION AND CATASTROPHE

PART ONE

by ALFRED DE GRAZIA

INTRODUCTION TO THE SERIES

Charles Darwin said in 1869 in the "Origin of Species" that "anyone whose disposition leads him
to attach more weight to unexplained difficulties than to the explanation of a certain number of
facts will certainly reject my theory." For a long time it seemed unwise to weigh too heavily
the anomalies. Now the time has arrived when "unexplained difficulties" have become indeed too
many for the Darwinian model of gradual incremental Evolution by natural selection to support.
It should be replaced by a theory of Quantavolution. Or, at least, it should be placed up
against a contrasting model.

Quantavolution theory maintains that the world from its beginnings, including the world of life
and humanity, has changed largely by quantum leaps, rather than by tiny increments over great
stretches of time. The over two million words of this collection of works by the author and
collaborators present the full range of ideas and phenomena that pertain to this theory. It may
be well to warn promptly against claiming any relationship to quantum field theory in physics,
although dire consequences to gravitation concepts may inhere, because of the seeming all-
sufficiency of new electromagnetic theory. Such a global change of perspective requires a search
for new evidence, a reformulation of old evidence, a reconsideration of anomalies, changes in
meanings of words and phrases, explorations of etymologies of words and concepts, and a
reexamination of assumptions, often when they are so accepted as to be trite and so trite as to
be ignored -- removed, indeed, from our very cognitive structures.

For example, there is an immense idea that persists in the literature to the effect that the
Moon was torn from the Earth; this story is told not only by scientists such as George Darwin
and George Fisher but also by myths of various cultures. Invariably, if a discussion of the
matter is allowed at all, the posited event is positioned in time billions of years ago in the
conventionally agreed upon youth of the Earth. Such an event, if it were to be treated seriously
in an encyclopedia, would invade hundreds of articles with its causes and effects, changing
practically every discipline in ways great and small. This set of works does not treat this idea
alone as the true theory; but it considers it properly so serious as to warrant consideration
under many headings.

Such theories of "quantavolution" play a part in all discussions as to the origin of the other
bodies of the solar system; one needs to explain the considerations that have led serious
scholars to ask whether and how the planets originated from the Sun or, if not, then from one or
another of themselves (such as Jupiter). Furthermore, the universal belief of ancient cultures
and legends, that the gods were born, and were members of the same family, would begin to stir
our interest.

In many cultures, there is said to have been an original chaos or world vapor and a catastrophic
event from which the father of the gods was born and from him (or her) was born the succession
of gods. Why "born" instead of having always been in existence? It is not enough to say that
these phrases are only analogies with the birth of animals in nature, or only fairy tales based
on the analogies. Why should this be? Many analogies cover realities: might this be such a case?
When one says, "Babies are born like puppies," one certainly is not denying that babies are
born. And why were all of these gods identified, if of any importance, with the planets and
other sky bodies? Most, if not all, cultures, have insisted that the planets and other sky
bodies are divinities. Does this not lend support to the hypothesis of a true succession of
birth throes in the heavens? Would this be evidence of a marvellous early philosophical
synthesis connecting the birth of the cosmos to that of the members of an earthly family? No
matter if the alarming thought should arise: the members of the solar system arose somehow from
one another in a series of catastrophes that somehow early humankind had some knowledge or
theory about.

This is the kind of reasoning that unsettles many scientists and ordinary people who are content
to rest with their ordinary perspectives on the universe; it is a "whistle-blower" on the
prevailing paradigm of the sciences and the humanities, calling back the play to the line of
scrimmage.

The catastrophes responsible for the development of the theory of quantavolution were immensely
greater than these, to be sure, but the elemental forces at work, the chemistry, the
electricity, the psychic reactions are typical and homologous. As with a host of experiences of
the past and present, the individual person must learn about catastrophes of the world --past,
present, and future -- from the testimony of the rocks, the skies, the fossils, the carvings,
the ruins, and then from recorded history and logical thought.

The theory of Quantavolution deals with the behavior of substances of the real world so far as
one can sense them. It proposes that change in nature and life occur largely as the result of
catastrophic events; the events originate in the skies, which contain forces that are
immeasurably greater than any in man or Earth and that are especially electrical. There are
numerous "catastrophists" who have contributed to Q.. It is vital to appreciate that in
Quantavolution, the word "catastrophe" loses its completely bad connotation; for what the world
is today is an effect of catastrophe or, better, of Quantavolution, whose goodness and badness
are intertwined and to be judged by the philosophy of good and bad consequences.

The underlying philosophy of Quantavolution inclines toward a phenomenological instrumentalism.
It regards a "truth" as a fitting and useful part of a system of such truths that constitute as
a whole a possible tolerable outlook upon existence. The terms pragmatism, logical positivism,
and operationism come to mind when reaching out for related perspectives. As with
catastrophists, many philosophers might be cited. Among them would be Plato, Ockham, Bruno,
Locke, Berkeley, Vico, Husserl, Freud, Dewey, Mead, Wittgenstein, and Bridgman. The day may not
be far off when a new philosopher will draw upon the applicable contributions of such thinkers
and the fast-growing body of quantavolutionary literature to produce a new philosophy of
science.















QUANTAVOLUTION AND CATASTROPHE

PART TWO

by ALFRED DE GRAZIA

THE Q-C TEST

[Note: this letter was attached to the first experimental copies of the Q-C Test, July 1997.]

ARE YOU CONVENTIONAL OR QUANTAVOLUTIONARY IN YOUR SCIENTIFIC OUTLOOK??

TEST YOURSELF HERE!!!

Dear Student of Cosmic Affairs:

It appears that the time may be right for a test to distinguish more or less conventional and
evolutionary scientists and scholars from what, for lack of better, can be called
quantavolutionary scientists and scholars.

I have accordingly devised a test in two parts of 15 items each, to determine the relative
position of a person in regard to these two paradigms. Your apparent interest in 'C'& 'Q'
sugests that your self-analysis would be most helpful in observing trends in science.

I would be much obliged if you would take a few minutes to circle the 30 items of the C-Q Test
and remand it to me by e-mail, or otherwise. Although it would be wonderful to obtain a number
of individualized replies to publish on http://www.grazian-archive.com

I shall withhold your identity if you say so, and merely incorporate the results in the
statistical analysis.

In either event, I would welcome your comments. I shall be improving the test and perhaps
merging the two parts with several additional "placebo" items before being done with it. Ought I
to proceed with a public discussion of the test and its cumulative findings?

Sincerely, Alfred de Grazia

Mail: Aldegrazia@ aol. com
P. O. BOX 1213,
Princeton, NJ 08542,
USA


C-TEST

To gauge agreement of individuals with the Paradigm of Conventional Science

Based on Fifteeen Primary Propositions of Conventional Science respecting natural and human
history, and the degree of adherence of an individual to them.

Instructions:

There follow fifteen statements of major theses, principles, or propositions of Conventional
Science, each one of which is preceded by a short name. Please react to each principle by
scoring it from one (1) for firm disagreement to (5) for firm agreement. Draw a circle around
the number or check your answer. Use number three (3) when you are without any belief or
knowledge or commitment one way or another regarding the statement.

Thus, for instance, a score of 15 for the test means that you disagree totally with the
principles of Conventional Science. A score of 75 means that you are in full agreement with the
principles of the version of Conventional Science expressed here. Actually, you would most
likely be termed fully Conventional only if you agreed with all fifteen of the propositions.

There is no time limit for completing the test, of course. Please answer every statement. When
finished, add up and insert your total score where indicated.

Fifteen Propositions

1. Gradualism.

The world has changed almost entirely by small-scale, incremental transactions of small or large
scope from earliest to present times.

1 2 3 4 5

2. Independent Effects.

Changes in one field of scientific observation normally are weakly discernible in other areas
and transfer into them slowly.

1 2 3 4 5

3. Terrestrial Isolation.

From earliest times, Earth has developed its physical and vital forms from internal sources of
materials and energy.

1 2 3 4 5

4. Gravitational Accumulations.

The solar system originated in gravitational condensations from a gigantic dust cloud
surrounding a young Sun.

1 2 3 4 5

5. Elaborative Polymorphism.

Great variations of all inorganic and organic forms occurred by lawful, regular processes of
nature.

1 2 3 4 5

6. Lunar Capture.

The Moon formed during the condensation of gases and dust that originated the solar system and
came within the gravitational grasp of the Earth.

1 2 3 4 5

7. Perennial Geological Flux.

In due course, the Earth's surface has been altered by the gradual limited and calculable play
of natural forces: waters, winds, pressures, and heat.

1 2 3 4 5

8. Uniformitarianism.

Inorganic and organic nature have transmuted, with minor exceptions, at low, uniform rates for
all of Earth history.

1 2 3 4 5

9. Evolution.

The present species of life have unexceptionally developed from ever earlier forms that
themselves originated by environmental adaptation in isolation and occasional successive
chemical mutations.

1 2 3 4 5

10. Homo Sapiens Sapiens.

In the course of evolution, natural selection, working at every vital level, eventuated in a
being of high intelligence, capable of deliberate, rational decisions.

1 2 3 4 5

11. Increasing Consciousness and Self-awareness.

Gradually humans developed a sense of history that let them order their lives presently and for
their future, and learned to exercise advanced faculties for pleasure.

1 2 3 4 5

12. Cultural and Institutional Invention.

Bit by bit, cultural traits were evolved in all of the various aspects of life, and could be
placed ever higher upon a ladder of complexity and utility.

1 2 3 4 5

13. Religious Sophistication.

From primitive fear and ignorance, gods were imagined, and afforded sacrifices, but eventually
higher religions, with a benign, single god and simple rites, prevailed.

1 2 3 4 5

14. Macrochronism.

The evolution of the solar system, Earth, and life forms, took up about five billion years, of
which the last several million were required to produce human beings with their advanced
societies.

1 2 3 4 5

15. Cross-validation of Time and Events.

Dozens of distinct measures and correlations have mutually supported macrochronism and, with
evolution theory, have proven the singular correctness of the historical path of science.

1 2 3 4 5

TOTAL SCORE =

AVERAGE SCORE =TOTAL/ 15=

Q-TEST

To gauge agreement of individuals with the Paradigm of Quantavolution

Based on fifteen key propositions of quantavolution, and the degree of adherence of a person to
them.

Instructions:

There follow fifteen statements of major theses, principles, or propositions of Quantavolution,
each one of which is preceded by a short name. Please react to each principle by scoring it from
one (1) for firm disagreement to (5) for firm agreement. Draw a circle around the number or
check your answer. Use number three (3) when you are without any belief or knowledge or
commitment one way or another regarding the statement.

Thus, for instance, a score of 15 for the test means that you disagree totally with the
principles of Quantavolution. A score of 75 means that you are in full agreement with the
principles of the version of Quantavolution expressed here. Actually, you would most likely be
termed a quantavolutionary even if you agreed with one or two of the propositions.

There is no time limit for completing the test, of course. Please answer every statement. When
finished, add up and insert your total score where indicated.

Fifteen Propositions

1. Quantavolution.

The world has changed mostly by large-scale and abrupt jumps or saltations or quantavolutions
from earliest to present times.

1 2 3 4 5

2. Holospherics.

Every quantavolution was holospheric such that, what became in late times human morals and
science, were affected in their every branch by its remnant evidence and its contemporary
effects.

1 2 3 4 5

3. Exoterrestrial Genesis.

The ultimate source of quantavolutions has been exoterrestrial.

1 2 3 4 5

4. Solaria Binaria.

The solar system originated and developed to this day as an often violent process of
transactions between the Sun and a solar-exploded body.

1 2 3 4 5

5. Poly-episodic Catastrophes.

Quantavolutions (usually referred to pejoratively as catastrophes) have been experienced on
sundry occasions and have been unequal in intensity.

1 2 3 4 5

6. Lunar Explosions with Global Fracture.

The explosion of Moon from Earth, and the global fracture accompanying it, produced the present
basic volume and morphology of Earth.

1 2 3 4 5

7. Disturbed Geological Columns.

Every geological column on Earth is ideosyncratically disturbed.

1 2 3 4 5

8.Exponential Apocalypses.

Every quantavolution has taken the form of an exponential catastrophic curve with a sharp ascent
and a negatively exponential descent, tailing off toward uniform change.

1 2 3 4 5

9. Species Mass Changes and Extinction.

Extant species have simultaneously on occcasion been drastically reduced in numbers and type or
extinguished while new species were being generated and old ones modified by holistic mutated
gene leadership.

1 2 3 4 5

10. Schizoid Humanization.

During a quantavolution, Homo Sapiens originated in a sudden gestalt as a schizoid species
controlling multiple selves, and preferably to be called Homo Sapiens Schizotypicalis.

1 2 3 4 5

11. Mass Amnesia and Sublimation.

Primeval Homo Sapiens experienced a traumatic suppression of memory and acquired a sublimatory
psychological complex.

1 2 3 4 5

12. Cultural Hologenesis.

Homo Sapiens promptly developed a poly-faceted language and full-function culture.

1 2 3 4 5

13. Divine Succession.

Originally gods were idealized by the human mind, and their basic traits and functions proceeded
through all successive major gods and families of gods.

1 2 3 4 5

14. Microchronism.

Quantavolutions, since the solar nova that instituted the solar system, occupied brief periods
of time, while intervals between them were also brief, measureable in thousands up to a million
years.

1 2 3 4 5

15. Consonant Paradigmatics.

Despite a much greater stress upon electromagnetic forces in all natural and vital events, the
experiences (including experiments) and logic employed in constructing and proving the
quantavolution paradigm are homologous with those of the conventional paradigm of scientific
method.

1 2 3 4 5


TOTAL SCORE =

AVERAGE SCORE = TOTAL / 15 =














QUANTAVOLUTION AND CATASTROPHE

PART THREE

by ALFRED DE GRAZIA

A Comment on the Q-C Test and Its Individual Items.

(Original text of test has a white background. The commentary is on normal font.)

A ] C-TEST

To gauge agreement of individuals with the Paradigm of Conventional Science

Based on Fifteeen Primary Propositions of Conventional Science respecting natural and human
history, and the degree of adherence of an individual to them.

The conventional science part of the C-test assumes that a common set of attitudes toward the
method and findings of science is possessed by scientists, a correct set which, put into
practice, gives a correct view of the real world, inorganic, organic, and human. These attitudes
or beliefs are but an intuitive sample of a larger unknown number that would presumably give the
same results when administered to the same individuals. The set of attitudes reflects with
limited but fair accuracy the paradigm mentally possessed by twentieth century scientists. Since
the paradigm is most general and cosmic, all propositions about it are partial, irregular,
insufficient, and the individuals taking the test will naturally distribute themselves in
different attitudes towards them.

B ] Instructions:

There follow fifteen statements of major theses, principles, or propositions of Conventional
Science, each one of which is preceded by a short name. Please react to each principle by
scoring it from one (1) for firm disagreement to (5) for firm agreement. Draw a circle around
the number or check your answer. Use number three (3) when you are without any belief or
knowledge or commitment one way or another regarding the statement.

There are many ways of posing the attitudes as principles. One could attempt to use five
propositions as the core of the conventional scientific ideology, or ten, or twenty or fifty.

Validity and realiability might be enhanced. Often in test-construction, a large number of test
items are chosen and then the invalid and unreliable subsequently discarded, until the smallest
number that completes the universe of inquiry is left remaining. Often the salient and valid few
are doubled or trebled to be sure that the respondent understands what the inquirer wishes him/
her to understand, especially when the universe of respondents is intellectually, morally,
linguistically and otherwise diverse. In the present situation, the Q-trenders may be even more
diverse, for once the constraints of conventional scientific ideology or scientism are broken,
the escapees and refugees scatter in every direction.

Most conventional scientists will largely accept the C-test, scoring high, whereas the
quantavolutionaries will score on the C-test in varying degrees of acceptance, or so we surmise.
As the test-constructor sees it, a mark of '5' means an item is most likely true, a mark of '4'
means the item approaches broadly some truths, a mark of '3' denotes uncertainty, a maybe-yes
maybe-no position or a lack of sufficient awareness or knowledge to cast a judgement, or both of
these plus a failure to understand what is intended or what is meant by the item. This is the
infamous "don't know" category that haunts the pollsters. If the individual's position is
important, usually the test-maker provides for an extensive and intensive interview, a depth
questioning, to get the nuances of the impasse, whereupon the test-maker places the individual
respondent more to theone way or the other. An item marked '2' would be deemed to mean that the
statement is wrong-headed and contains little broad truth. A '1' is to inform the test authority
that the item is almost surely untrue. Some experts would warn against even an attempt to order
the postures and attitudes of people in this most complex region of human thought. Aside from
all the technical and straight psychological arguments of the testing discipline, a substantial
contribution to the theory of this kind of test must come from works such as those of Karl
Mannheim on the sociology of knowledge, Hans Vaihinger on the nature and logic of fictions, and
Ludwig Wittgenstein on the construction of meaningful statements.

C]

Thus, for instance, a score of 15 for the test means that you disagree totally with the
principles of Conventional Science. A score of 75 means that you are in full agreement with the
principles of the version of Conventional Science expressed here. Actually, you would most
likely be termed fully Conventional only if you agreed with all fifteen of the propositions.

Here it should be made clear that there is no real-world difference of 1 or 5 or whatever
between the five phases of each item or between one item and another, and it has already been
said that there are different bands of respondents who will settle firmly upon one reply and
disdain a number of other items. The scores also say little about the degree of indignation with
which rejection of other markings is regarded. The very sight of an item on evolution will
elicit not only a mark of 1 or 5 but with the mark a snort of resentment against opposing
markings.

D]

There is no time limit for completing the test, of course. Please answer every statement. When
finished, add up and insert your total score where indicated.

E] Fifteen Propositions: - 1. Gradualism.

The world has changed almost entirely by small-scale, incremental transactions of small or large
scope from earliest to present times.

That is:

one observes everywhere and in all things differences between time A and time B, which are
almost always minute in relation to the total shape of things but amount to the vast differences
between what was and what is, owing to the accumulation of small changes over long periods of
time.

F] 2. Independent Effects.

Changes in one field of scientific observation normally are weakly discernible in other areas
and transfer into them slowly.

That is:

what happens to one being or existence has a limited scope, affecting others little or not at
all, as an avalance will affect whatever is in its path but little more, or the death of one
species will hardly affect many species.

G] 3. Terrestrial Isolation.

From earliest times, Earth has developed its physical and vital forms from internal sources of
materials and energy.

That is:

Practically all that is present on Earth has evolved solely under the influence of combinations
of ingredients and forces that preceded it on Earth and which in turn and ultimately go back to
the earliest ages of the Earth.

H] 4. Gravitational Accumulations.

The solar system originated in gravitational condensations from a gigantic dust cloud
surrounding a young Sun.

That is:

little by little, the material that composes the planets gathered in clumps that continued to
draw in other material until most of the original outbursts from the Sun were housed in them,
while space was vacated.

I ] 5. Elaborative Polymorphism.

Great variations of all inorganic and organic forms occurred by lawful, regular processes of
nature.

That is:

many shapes and physiologies and systems of being came about as one minor change succeeded
another and elaborated differences that were originally minor into major differences.

J ] 6.. Lunar Capture.

The Moon formed during the condensation of gases and dust that originated the solar system and
came within the gravitational grasp of the Earth.

That is:

the Moon began independently to agglomerate a large mass but lost its independent motion vis-a-
vis the Sun, as it was gradually carried into the Earth's orbit by the Earth's gravitational
field but maintained an acquired new equilibrium locked at a distance to the Earth.

K] 7. Perennial Geological Flux.

In due course, the Earth's surface has been altered by the gradual limited and calculable play
of natural forces: waters, winds, pressures, and heat.

That is:

soils and rocks and aquatic channels today can be shown to have been formed by the forces that
today uniformly with the past work upon them.

L] 8. Uniformitarianism.

Inorganic and organic nature have transmuted, with minor exceptions, at low, uniform rates for
all of Earth history.

That is:

on the whole, the past has been like the present, such that the changes in earth and life forms
have averaged changes proportionate to elapsed time, each being and existence developing a
unique pace owing to infinitely small changes in rate occurring through long ages.

M] 9. Evolution.

The present species of life have unexceptionally developed from ever earlier forms that
themselves originated by environmental adaptation in isolation and occasional successive
chemical mutations.

That is:

accommodating to its environment and multiplying by successfully competing for scarce goods with
other species and individuals, a given set of individuals, brought into being as a species by a
genetic mutation or related series of mutations, reinforces its identity by separation from
otherwise similar species, consciously or accidentally caused.

N] 10. Homo Sapiens Sapiens.

In the course of evolution, natural selection, working at every vital level, eventuated in a
being of high intelligence, capable of deliberate, rational decisions.

That is:

evolving like every other life form, an animal related to the great apes and sharing much of
their genetic and behavioral constitution, mutated and survived by virtue of an ever-growing
brain that could cope ever more successfully with a variety of environments through discoveries
prompted by realistic experimental reasoning.

O] 11. Increasing Consciousness and Self-awareness.

Gradually humans developed a sense of history that let them order their lives presently and for
their future, and learned to exercise advanced faculties for pleasure.

That is:

an orderly memory, which contained readily a great many lessons obtained from experience, and
permitted self-examination as well as systematic observation, brought on an accumulation of
useful information that could be used for material progress and amusement in many forms.

P] 12. Cultural and Institutional Invention.

Bit by bit, cultural traits were evolved in all of the various aspects of life, and could be
placed ever higher upon a ladder of complexity and utility.

That is:

cumulative experience in all aspects of life was put to work in the collective memory of the
group as the basis for suggestions of improvement in technique and organization, and in the
origination of new acceptable behavior and utensils.

Q] 13. Religious Sophistication.

From primitive fear and ignorance, gods were imagined, and afforded sacrifices, but eventually
higher religions, with a benign, single god and simple rites, prevailed.

That is:

lacking command over himself , his fellows, and his environment, the early human grasped for
support at whatever seemed more powerful and possibly helpful, gods who at first imitated his
savage qualities but later on gods and finally one God who were culturally advanced in their
offerings and demands of humans, to the point of being a large factor, for most unscientific
people at least, in inspiring them to virtuous conduct.

R] 14. Macrochronism.

The evolution of the solar system, Earth, and life forms, took up about five billion years, of
which the last several million were required to produce human beings with their advanced
societies.

That is:

although only rough estimates of the age of the Earth and the several periods of its organic and
inorganic evolution can be obtained, continued progress in chronometry has moved the age of the
earth and its epochs to ever longer times, allowing thus adequate time for all of the observed
transformations to have taken place.

S] 15. Cross-validation of Time and Events.

Dozens of distinct measures and correlations have mutually supported macrochronism and, with
evolution theory, have proven the singular correctness of the historical path of science.

That is:

radioactive decay, occurring at constant rates over enormous periods of time, has been measured
in association with its environment, organic and inorganic, and these have been shown to have
ages generally much greater than geological measures alone have produced, showing the latter to
have been partly conjectural, even if vastly longer than biblical time had been. Different radio
chronometries are highly correlated when applied to the same objects, and variations have been
successfully accommodated to settle differences. With the development of dendrochronology,
dating from layered ice cores, radiocarbon dating, thermoluminescence dating, and other
chemical, thermal, and historical methods, few lengthy gaps remain in the geological and
biological record that are unapproachable scientifically.

T]

TOTAL SCORE = _____

AVERAGE SCORE =TOTAL/15= ______

Note: two persons with the same average score may differ greatly in their fully described
positions. Paired comparisons are recommended, and ultimately also the comparison of individual
scores with a universe of hundreds and thousands of scores, not only as to averages but as to
matched item correlations and other parameters.

U]

Q-TEST

To gauge agreement of individuals with the Paradigm of Quantavolution

Based on fifteen key propositions of quantavolution, and the degree of adherence of a person to
them.

Instructions:
There follow fifteen statements of major theses, principles, or propositions of Quantavolution,
each one of which is preceded by a short name. Please react to each principle by scoring it from
one (1) for firm disagreement to (5) for firm agreement. Draw a circle around the number or
check your answer. Use number three (3) when you are without any belief or knowledge or
commitment one way or another regarding the statement.

Thus, for instance, a score of 15 for the test means that you disagree totally with the
principles of Quantavolution. A score of 75 means that you are in full agreement with the
principles of the version of Quantavolution expressed here. Actually, you would most likely be
termed a quantavolutionary even if you agreed with one or two of the propositions.

There is no time limit for completing the test, of course. Please answer every statement. When
finished, add up and insert your total score where indicated.

The above instructions repeat closely those for the Conventional section. Perhaps it should be
added here that unmarked items should be scored as 3 on grounds that they are the effect of
confusion or unreadiness to commit an attitude.

V] Propositions 1: Quantavolution.

The world has changed mostly by large-scale and abrupt jumps or saltations or quantavolutions
from earliest to present times.

The key words behind quantavolution (Q) are change, large-scale, and abrupt. Essentially, change
refers to a detectable difference in anything between Time 1 and Time 2 . By the world is meant
the universe and all that it may contain, including its motions and events.

By most is meant something not much less than entirely, and what is left over consists of
changes that are local and gradual. Large-scale applies to spaces and things and behaviors that
rather arbitrarily we would envision as at least the size and features of Russia or South
America or the Caribbean Sea. The change would occur abruptly, which we define as time durations
from an instant to a century in which 50% of the total physical transformation happens. Terms
used for quantavolution, "development by packets", include catastrophism, neo-catastrophism,
saltation (a jump), revolution, apocalpse and punctuated equilibrium. A salient argument against
the use of the term "catastrophism" is that it denotes a total misfortune, whereas a moment's
reflection will persuade one that a great part of the fortunate inheritance of the world comes
from the same catastrophes -- including the quantavolution or abrupt evolution of the human
being.

W] 2. Holospherics.

Every quantavolution was holospheric such that, what became in late times human morals and
science, were affected in their every branch by its remnant evidence and its contemporary
effects.

Quantavolutions were not contained to a set of rocks, a chosen people, a given language, a
particular climatic sector, etc., but within their large limits were all-encompassing. All
spheres of nature and humanity were directly affected, and their effects were transmitted to
every succeeding generation of rocks, genera, and cultures. Too, a Q employed all forces of
nature: if the Q took the form of a meteoroid, water, fire, wind, and exploded earth acted
simultaneously and in chains and mutual interactions.

X] 3. Exoterrestrial Genesis.

The ultimate source of quantavolutions has been exoterrestrial.

The Earth was itself formed from exoterrestrial elements, an obvious deduction, but the fact
leads to a realization that probably at no time in its existence has the Earth been out of touch
with the exosphere. From its beginnings, the Earth had no internal force or energy that was not
exoterrestrial in origin. Its volcanism, earthquakes, hurricanes, and floods have been compelled
by exoterrestrial bodies composed of perhaps every kind of mineral and gas, and of every degree
of density.

Y] 4. Solaria Binaria.

The solar system originated and developed to this day as an often violent process of
transactions between the Sun and a solar-exploded body.

Explaining the solar system is readily accomplished by introducing a theory of binary stars,
ever more frequently observed, in which the explosion of a heavily charged sun expels a mass of
debris whose largest portion, though a small fraction of the sun, acts as an electrical pole
exchanging charge with the sun along a current of electric fire, which also serves to create a
vast electromagnetic plenum in which planets, with their own electrical properties, develop.
Conditions for the growth of life forms are often favorable and persist until the electrical
axis and the tube around it expire, whereupon the planets are "on their own," so to speak.
Although the theory of solaria binaria is unique, it can easily entertain a number of
quantavolutionary theories that have been developing in recent years that portray the solar
system undergoing a series of explosive and high energy events.

Z] 5. Poly-episodic Catastrophes.

Quantavolutions (usually referred to pejoratively as catastrophes) have been experienced on
sundry occasions and have been unequal in intensity.

Geological, astronomical, paleontological, legendary, and archaeological research has settled
upon more than one and conjectured up to a score of global catastrophes in natural history, such
that it is possible now to hypothesize a quantavolution at the end of and beginning of every
major section of the geological column and every cultural period of the brinze and iron age.
Among the greatest in effect have been, among geologists, those associated with the global
fracture system circling the world, among paleontologists, those associated with the
disappearance of the dinosaurs, and the flowering of life forms early in the Permian period, and
among ancient historians those deemed by the ancients to be connected to the conduct of the
planets and affording evidence in the wholesale destruction of ancient civilizations repeatedly.

AA] 6. Lunar Explosions with Global Fracture.

The explosion of Moon from Earth, and the global fracture accompanying it, produced the present
basic volume and morphology of Earth

Scientists divide unevenly into a majority who believe that the Moon was captured by the Earth a
billion and more years ago, and a minority who believe that the Moon separated from the Earth at
an equally early date, most of these expert grant that the event was catastrophic and
quantavolutionary. Evidence points to the Pacific Ocean Basin as the source of the crust that
was wrenched from the Earth by an electrically attractive passing body, coincidentally with a
fracture that shot around the world as the continents-to-be swung in a great gravity slide to
fill the basin. Besides the mainly crustal loss of the Moon-gathering, the fully-encrusted Earth
lost additional material as debris into farther space and swelled in volume as its charge
diminished.

BB] 7. Disturbed Geological Columns.

Every geological column on Earth is ideosyncratically disturbed.

If one were to dig anywhere in the world, one would find practically everywhere an incomplete
series of rock types and periods, with no two such drillings being alike. This claim goes
counter to the prevailing belief in conventional science that a normal deep drilling to basic
rock usually would produce mineral and fossil layers in their proper chronological order with
few or no layers or ages missing.

CC] 8.Exponential Apocalypses.

Every quantavolution has taken the form of an exponential catastrophic curve with a sharp ascent
and a negatively exponential descent, tailing off toward uniform change.

Apocalypses refer to the catastrophes pictured and popularly revered in the Christian epic of
St. John. Here it is a mnemonic nickname for quantavolutions. If charted, a Q occurs with little
warning in years, days, and other units of time, except that a repeated threat is historically
marked and watched obsessively by special priesthoods and the populace. Despite the warning, the
events themselves, of course, are precipitous; what is one day here is gone tomorrow, a
civilization, a culture, a great plain, a river, etc. After the peak period of activity,
however, the Q at first steeply declines and then ever more slowly diminishes its effects until
it establishes a mood of "it will not happen again." Thus, according to Q theory, C continental
drift theory, even though its acceptance was a concession to a Q theory, is incorrect in
believing that the continents have always been drifting very slowly, but that what is slow now
was once a continental cracking and rafting at considerable speed.

DD] 9. Species Mass Changes and Extinction.

Extant species have simultaneously on occcasion been drastically reduced in numbers and type or
extinguished while new species were being generated and old ones modified by holistic mutated
gene leadership.

The scale and intensity of Q implies the decimation of species and paleontology increasingly
locates and admits to the catastrophic ending of species. At the same time, C theory will not
admit the sudden creation of new species in the same conditions of catastrophe whereas the Q
theorists can claim that the same conditions allowed the springing forth in quick time of new
families and species. Q theory accounts for the persistence of species as well as the
destruction and creation of species to produce the puzzling array of flora and fauna of today.

EE] 10. Schizoid Humanization.

During a quantavolution, Homo Sapiens originated in a sudden gestalt as a schizoid species
controlling multiple selves, and preferably to be called Homo Sapiens Schizotypicalis.

Several Q theories of the birth of man are possible. One is indicated here. A gestalt is a
sudden complex perception and cognition of a large body of mental material that has hitherto
been disassembled and unknowledgeable. In a suddenly new natural environment and atmospheric
state and in a minor genetic change from the hominid, a new being emerged with a delayed
instinctive apparatus, connected with the bilateralism of brain hemispheres and functioning,
such that a microdelay in the transmission of menal oeprations ensued, sufficient to expand the
destinations around the brain of stimuli and the awareness of doubt about the meaning of the
stimuli and a fearful need to control the multiple selves that were groping "thoughtfully" with
the disparate end-locations of the stimuli. The mentation and behavior of the new animal is
diagnosable today as a general schizophrenia, with its basic symptoms of shock, aggression,
compulsion, and displacement.

FF] 11. Mass Amnesia and Sublimation.

Primeval Homo Sapiens experienced a traumatic suppression of memory and acquired a sublimatory
psychological complex.

The instinct-delay cerebral system genetically or permanently demanded by a new environmental
constant quickly installed a memory blockage or amnesiac system to limit the flood of fears and
doubts and contradictory demands on the new person. The amnesiac system allowed, or was
compelled by overload problems to bring about, an amorphous unconscious. The unconscious
fostered a random, partially controlled, and imaginative surfacing of materials that were the
source both of aesthetic creations and hypotheses, which, when subjected to demands to restore
the more comfortable if less competent instinctive system of the hominid, also developed logic,
calculation, science, and, in a word, rationality.

GG] 12. Cultural Hologenesis.

Homo Sapiens promptly developed a poly-faceted language and full-function culture.

Speech and variegated behaviors emerged promptly and spontaneously with the poly-ego and its
talking to itself. Transfer of first epithets, imprecations, and commands to the greatest powers
known, the happenings in the sky and the responses of the earth, would impregnate catastrophe in
the language as it developed for mundane use. The same would characterize the swiftly developing
culture -- with rites, priests, magic, acoustical and electrical performances, fire-control and
cuisine, etc. This hologenetic Q-theory stands alone perhaps to contend with conventional
theories of linguistic and cultural genesis.

HH] 13. Divine Succession.

Originally gods were idealized by the human mind, and their basic traits and functions proceeded
through all successive major gods and families of gods.

Practically all religions, although some exceptional persons will claim the opposite, are in the
line of descent from the primordial religiousness. With the illusory establishment of the first
gods and of delusory devices to control them, the basic elements of religious practices from
then until now were fixed: appeasement, obsessive forms of divine communication, sacrifice,
basic artistic forms, authoritative ideologies, institutional imitations of the sky and earth-
connected divine illusions. Successive quantavolutions repeated the same types of physical
disasters and fell upon peoples that were inclined to fortify their old religions rather than to
devise new ones, but at the same time would often rename the old and condemn them to try their
fortunes with new, more powerful gods.

II] 14. Microchronism.

Quantavolutions, since the solar nova that instituted the solar system, occupied brief periods
of time, while intervals between them were also brief, measureable in thousands up to a million
years.

Some Q theorists have attempted to preserve the appearances and save a great many reputations by
staging their quantavolutions in accord with the present billions of years of "proven" earth
history. Such would be, for instance, the theory of "punctuated equilibrium," an awkward
euphemism as well as a scarcely justified faith in the swollen periods given to the past, now
approaching 5 billion years. The problem of erasing these billions is easy when it comes to
traditional geological measurements of time that employ stratigraphy, that apply uniform erosion
rates of today to the past, et al. The problem is more difficult when it comes to measurements
by radioactive decay of chemical elements, but here, too, uniformitarian assumptions can be
brought into question: electromagnetic conditions of the past, far different than those of
today, could eradicate the great stretches of time claimed by conventional scientists.

JJ] 15. Consonant Paradigmatics.

Despite a much greater stress upon electromagnetic forces in all natural and vital events, the
experiences (including experiments) and logic employed in constructing and proving the
quantavolution paradigm are homologous with those of the conventional paradigm of scientific
method.

At least one branch of Q theory questions the roots of so-called rationality, yet accepts the
newer logic and linguistics as its only tools for arriving at "truth." It accepts experiments
and the scientific method generally and it guards the method by psycho-sociological analysis of
the processes. It is not mystic nor magical nor religious nor populist. The Q paradigm
reconstructs the historical and scientific world with the historical and scientifically
defensible weapons of science.

KK]

Total Score and Average are calculated in the same way as in the Conventional section of the
Test.













QUANTAVOLUTION AND CATASTROPHE

PART FOUR

by ALFRED DE GRAZIA

PROSPECTIVE CHANGES IN THE Q-C TEST

1. Placebos:

Placebos would designate items in the test that indicate nothing valid or useful to know for the
purposes of the test. They function to prove a lack of unrelated differences between those who
score differently on the test. For instance, it might be useful to add several items such as
"Whether fast or slow, evolution by definition must occur in natural history." And,
"Conventional science is more a matter of etiquette of science than it is a set of accepted
theories." And, "A decline in the productivity of science, noticeable in the late twentieth
century, is attributable in part to an increase in the extent of political corruption in
advanced nations." It might occur that both C and Q respondents would score similarly on these
items, whether by scattered or concentrated agreement.


2. Religious Dimension:
Creationism; agnosticism; mysticism; atheism; personal deism; scientific deism.

Religious ideologies have been shown to play a considerable role in adhering to scientific
propositions of one kind or another. It would be possible to uncover some of these connections
either by a couple of questions accompanying the test (such as, "How would you identify yourself
in respect to the list of religious positions below: accept, reject, indifferent?" or by
including distinguishing items as propositions such as "Quantavolution fortifies logically and
evidentially religions that maintain a recent creation of the world and mankind by divine
intervention."

3. Additional Items:

Adding a number of items would help to validate existing items and at the same time lend
reliability to the test as a whole. Thus, proposing that the dinosaurs and most other species
were destroyed en masse in a brief time interval by the impact of an extra-terrestrial object,
or proposing that the continental crust of the earth has been creeping by tiny increments over
most of the global surface over all of Earth's history.

4. Merging:

The Q-C Test will be henceforth merged into a mixed set of items, such that the respondent will
be encountering items of C, Q and other significance randomly in the course of taking the test.
Merging will promote a more independent series of judgements on the part of the respondent, and
contribute to the significance of aggregated scores, in part and totality.

5. Validation:

Validating a test that seeks to elicit ideological syndromes can be most difficult, depending
upon the degree of certainty that the Thing exists in the first place and then the elusive and
unconscious ways in which people are disposed to mal-describe and conceal their ideologies.
Still, with the improvements already suggested, some approach to defining a Q and a C nuclear
ideology, and in the process a Q mind and a C mind, can find credence.

6. Randomizing and Cross-sectioning the Sample:

These ordinary problems of test development should present no unusual difficulties when
developing the Q-C test. Inasmuch as over half of the adult population cannot read well enough
nor are tutored enough to understand any considerable part of the test, either a special test
should be constructed for them or they should be passed over in favor of administering the test
only to persons who have passed three or more years of college. In the end, the test results
most useful would be the results obtained from the professional and managerial classes. Since
these are the people running the governmental, corporate, media and educational systems of the
modern state, their ideologies are a matter of practical as well as contemplative interest.

7. Extending the number of special disciplines implicated in the results:

In Part Five below will be found a list of entries planned for the Encyclopedia of
Quantavolution and Catastrophe. Every discipline will be found there, and thus a case is made
for finding Q relevant to all disciplines. It would not be too difficult to revise the test so
as to apply it more directly to each and every major discipline -- geology, anthropology,
theology, astronomy, mythology and so forth.

8. Uses:

a) Abetting theoretical studies.

In this connection, the Q-C test can suggest that a wholesale replacement of received doctrines
of science may be useful and possible.

b) Discovery of trends in public awareness of science.

Are popular notions of what is occurring in science changing? Perhaps the test will give some
indication of how and why the contents of the mass media are changing with regard to science and
scientists.

c) Discovering relationship between creationist belief and quantavolutionary belief.

Popular creationist belief is strong and seeks, spearheaded by a small group of intellectuals,
to adapt quantavolutionary research and treatises to its own needs. Creationist scientists are
inclined to dominate quantavolutionary circles, naturally, and certainly feel comfortable moving
in and out of them. Much opposition to Q work by C scientists comes from a fear that Q is merely
a front for creationism.

d) Q-C scores as a function of age, occupation, religion, formal schooling.

The sociology of science and educators would gain by the knowledge of how Q and C ideas have
been penetrating various social formations and categories. Psychological applications are
suggested: is there a radical and conservative position on C and Q that conforms to political,
intellectual, and social radicalism?

e) Discovery of trends in ideology of scientists.

At a time when it is widely believed that the vast majorityof scientists would be high-scorers
on the C-test and low-scorers on the Q-test, the distribution of the component beliefs in the
population of scientists would reveal the actual condition in this regard. Too, one may expect
to learn whether the scientific elite, the so-called establishment, has moved from the
conventional center of gravity more or less than the mass of scientists.

f) Discovery of deficiencies and contradictions of belief brought on by specialization.

Especially with longer versions of the Q-C test, it may be observed how far and near the various
special fields of the scientists stand in relation to the conventional consensus. What medical
specialty, for instance, is most radical in acceptance of Q tendencies? How do homeopathic
practitioners rate?

g) Enumerating the varieties of conventional and quantavolutionary thought.

A great many controversies characterize both the conventional and the quantavolutionary camps.
From the hi-score C camp, it appears that the conventional scientists are divided and the Q
enemy is united, whereas nothing is more obvious to the Q, and angrily regrettable, than the
splintering into tiny fragments of the Q outlook.

h) Fostering interdisciplinary communication.

Scientists and educators who have deplored the lack of sympathy and understanding between the
public and politicians on the one side and scientists on the other might regard the results of
extensive Q-C testing as indicative of the gravity of the problem, or of improvements occurring.
At the same time, tests results of different scientific groups might demonstrate that
communication among scientists is as serious a problem as it is between science as a whole and
the public. Test results among scientific cohorts might illustrate, too, the togetherness of the
scientific fraternity as a whole. Deviations fro consensus might be regarded as deviations of
thought or deficiencies in knowledge of sciences other than one's own.













QUANTAVOLUTION AND CATASTROPHE

PART FIVE

by ALFRED DE GRAZIA

THE SCOPE OF QUANTAVOLUTION

There follows a list of terms to be used as entries in the Encyclopedia of Quantavolution and
Catastrophes. Although there is no planned correlation between this list and the contents of
the present CD-Rom of 14 volumes of Quantavolution, and although the 14 volumes have an
embedded search engine for calling up all references to any idea or person or incident that
maybe contained in the volumes, the list here may be suggestive as to subjects that might be
present and treated in the 14 volumes, and then searched for and found therein.

Scores of scientific and humanistic fields have evolved. Actually every field of knowledge has
standing behind it one or more fields of science, and therefore may be considered as a field of
applied science, as for instance, architecture or fictional romances. One way of comprehending
the extended meaning of general theory of quantavolution is to browse amidst the list of
entries that are contemplated for the Encyclopedia of Quantavolution and Catastrophe. These
number several thousands and another thousand will probably be added before the first edition
is finished. It will be recalled that the criteria for including an entry in the Encyclopedia
is that at least prima facie the entry directly or indirectly affects the theory of
quantavolution. Thus, the abundance of gods carried in the work would be expected if one
considers that every known god is connected directly or indirectly with global quantavolution.
Every physical law of science is involved. Most concepts of biology and genetics are relevent.
Every part of solar system astronomy enters the work, so, too, numerous stars. By small stretch
of the imagination, every scientific and humanistic discipline has many concerns to take from
and give to the quantavolutionary paradigm. To take a seemingly removed case, political
science, in both its historical and contemporary materials, must consider many aspects of
quantavolution --legends, distortions of history, movements generated by the belief in the
immediacy of catastrophe, the behavior of not only politicians but also seemingly far-removed
scientists who are consciously and unconsciously influenced by catastrophic ideas in their
belifs and by power manipulations in their collectivities. Many entries, it must be said, are
built into the Encyclopedia on a need to understand what conventional science is saying and on
a suspicion that there must be some quantavolutionary content to the thing or idea if it were
to be more extensively pursued. Excluded from the entry are thousands, and then millions, of
things and persons and events, such as are found in general encyclopedias and library catalogs.
After all, even a football player might conceivably be included as an entry on the ground that
the origin of the game lay in the most ancient religious practices wherein the ball and the
players stood for celestial gods and other divine events long remembered. Thus one stands on
the brink of declaring that all events are subject to the core events of quantavolution.

LIST OF ENTRIES

ENCYCLOPEDIA OF QUANTAVOLUTION AND CATASTROPHE
(Copyright Metron 1997)


A
==================================================================
aa
Aar Gorge
Aaron
Aaron's rod
abacus
Abell, George D.
Abell-35 nebula
aberrational Earth forces
Abery, Jill
abiogenesis
abiotic compound
ablation
aboriginal humans
aborigine
Abraham
abrupt transform
absolute zero
absorption
Abydos
abyss, oceanic
Acadian disturbance
acanthode
Acapulco Bay
acceleration
accelerator
acclimatization
accretion by comet
accumulation, precipitate
accumulator, bioenergy
achondrite
acid rain
acid-base reaction
acoustics
acquired immune deficiency syndrome (| aids|)
Acropolis
actinide elements
action at a distance
action, unit of
actor, acting
Adam & Eve
Adams, R. M. C
Adams, Walker S.
Aden, Gulf of
adhesion (bonding)
adiabatic process
Aditi
Adityas
administration
Adonis
Adrastus of Cyzicus
adrenal gland
Adriatic Coast
Adriatic Sea
Adriatica
adsorption
Aegea
Aegean region
aegis
Aeneas
Aeon
aeon, eon
aerial photography
aersol
Aeschylus
aesthetics
aether, ether
Afar Depression
affection
Afghanistan
Africa
African Rift
African Rift volcanism
African veldt
afterglow
Agassiz, Louis
agate
Agate, Nebraska
Age
age determination
Age of Discovery
Ager, Derek
aggression
agnatha
Agni
agnosticism
Agricola, Giorgius
agriculture
Agua, Guatemala
Ahaggar mountains
Ahura-Mazda and Ahriman
Ain ez Zarqa
aircraft
Airy, G. B.
Ajios Jakovos
Akhnaton
Akkad, Akkadian
Alabama
Alaca Hyk
Aland Islands
Alaska
Alaskan oriented lakes
albedo
Alberta
Albretton, Claude C.
alchemy
Alcock, Norman Z.
alcohol
alcohol, drinking of
Alcor
Aleutian arc
Alfven, Hannes
algae
algebra
Algeria
Algonquian, Algonquin Indians
alignment
Alisar, Alishar Hyk
alkali metal
alkaline rock
Alkman
All Saints Day & All Souls Day
Allah
Allchin, F. R.
Allegheny Mountains (| USA|)
Allen, F.
Allen, Richard Hinkley
allergic reaction
allocthon
allogenic sediment
alluvial fan
alphabet
alpine
Alps Mountains
Alt, David
altar
Alter, Dinsmore
altiplano
altitude
Alvarez, Luis Walter
AM Herculis
Amargorosa fault
Amarna Letters
Amarna, tell-el
amateur
Amatitlan, Guatemala
Amazon
Amazon River, basin
Amazon submarine channel
Amazonia
amber
ambivilance
Ambrasey, N. N.
ambrosia
Ameghino, Fiorentino
Amelan, Ralph
Amen, Amun
American cultures, -502 to -9| y|
American hemisphere
American sign language
Amerindians, ancient
amino acid
amino acid racemization dating
Ammizaduga tablets
Ammon, Amon
amnesia, collective
amnesia, individual
amoeba
Amojjar pass
Amos
amphibia
amphibole, amphibolite
amplitude, seasonal
Amudar'ya delta, U. S. S. R.
amulet
Amundsun, Roald
Ana, Anat( h)
Anafi Island
analog logic
analytic & linguistic philosophy
Ananta
anatexis
Anatolia
anatomy
Anaxagoras
Anaximander
ancient astronauts
ancient concensus
ancient eclipses
ancient knowledge
Andean volcanism
Anderson, J. L.
Andes Mountains
andesite
Andriessen, Poul
androgeny
Anemospilia, Crete
angel
Angel Falls, Venezuela
angiosperm
Angola
Angola
anguilliform
angular momentum
angular velocity
anhedonia
animal
nimal behavior
animal breeding
animal instinct
animism
ankh
Anluck
annelida
anniversary
annual layer
anode
anoint
anolis
anomoly
anseriformes
Antarctic dryland
Antarctic Ocean
Antarctica
Antelope County, NE
Antelope Valley, CA
Anthes, Rudolf
Anthony and Cleopatra
anthropism
anthropology
anthropomorphism
anthropophagy
anthroposphere
anti-semitism
anticline
Antillia
antiparticle
Antofagasta mudslide
Anura
anvil
anxiety
apastron
apathy
Aphek, Caanan
aphelion
Aphrodite
apis
apocalypse
apogee
Apollo and Artemis
Apollo, asteroid family
Apollo-p
Apollo-s
Apollodoris
Apollonius of Rhodes
Apophis
apotheosis
Appalachian Mountains
apparition, comet
appearence of species
Appenine Range
applied science
April
Apuane Alps
Apuseni Mountains
Aqaba, Gulf of
Aqua Hedionda Creek basins
aquatic ape
aquatic ecosystem
aqueous environment, primordial
aquifer
Arabia
Arabian dunes
Arabian Sea
arachnida
aragonite
Arak Gorges, Algeria
Aral Sea
Aramaic alphabet
Ararat, Mount, Turkey
Aratus of Soli
Araucanian Indians
arbitration
arc
arc welding
arc-second
arch
archaeoastronomy
archaeobacteria
archaeology
archaeomagnetic
archaeopteryx
archaeozoic, archean
archetype
archicortex
architecture
Arctic Ocean, floor
Arctic Region, lands
Arcturus
arcuate structure
Ardche marl fossils
arecales
Arend-Roland, comet
Ares
Argentina
argon
Ariadne
arid regions, global
Arieti
Aristotle
arithmetic
Arizona
Ark of the Covenant
ark, arch( e)
Arkansas
Armageddon
armed force
Armenia
armor
Arnol'd, V. I.
Arnold, James R.
aromatic hydrocarbon
Arp, Halton C.
art
artesian well, flowing spring
arthropoda
artificial aurora
artificial intelligence
artriodactyla
Aryabhataya( m)
Aryan
As, tell
Asakawa, Y.
Asama, Mount
Ascalon, Ashqelon
asceticisim
aschelminthes
Asgard
ash
Ashanti crater
ashera( h) tree
Asia
Asimov, Isaac
aspartic acid racemization
asphalt
Assal, Lake
Assam earthquakes
assemblage, fossil
assertion
Assyria, Assyrian
Astarte, Ashtarat
asteroid
Astour, M. C.
Astra
astral concern
astral wind
astrobleme
astrogeology
astrolabe
astrolabes, Assyrian
astrology
astron
astronaut, cosmonaut
astronomer's vision
astronomical chronometry
astronomical mapping
astronomical motif
astronomical spectroscopy
astronomical transformation
astronomical unit
astronomy, astronomical
astrophysics
asymmetry of brain hemispheres
Atchana
Atharva Veda
atheism
Athene
Athens
athletic contest
Atlantic Ocean
Atlantis
Atlantis Nigeria
Atlas
Atlas Mountains
atmosphere
atmospheric science
atom
atomic orbital
atomic period
atomic structure
atomic weight
atonement
attention
Attis
attitude
Atum (TM)
Atwater, Gordon
audiovisual aid
Aughrabies falls
augury
Augustine, Saint
Auigancan Culture
Aurora
aurora at ground level
Aurora-g
auroral form
auroral oval
auroral storm
Australasia
Australia
Australian Bight
Australian glaciation
Australian string dunes
Australopithicus
Austria
Austroafrican
authority
autumn
avalanche
Avebury
aversion, personal
awareness of self
axe, ax
Axel Heiberg Island
axial spin and tilt
axiom
axis
Axis Mundi
axis of fire, electric
Ayala, Francisco J.
Ayre's Rock
Azerbaijan
Azores
Azov, Sea of
Azovia
Aztec




B
==================================================================
Baal
Baalbek, Lebanon
Babbage, Charles
Babcock, Harold Delos
Babel, Tower of (Babilu)
Babylon, Babylonia
Babylonian exile
bacchanalia
background radiation
Bacon, Edward
bacteria
Bad-Hora
badland
Badlands of South Dakota
Baffin island
Baha Calif. cobblestones
Bahamas
Baikal lake
Bailey, Valentine A.
Baity, Elizabeth Chesley
Baja California Gulf Coast
Baker, Howard, B.
Bakersfield sand hills
Balaam text
Bali
Balkan Penninsula
ball lightning
ballgame, ballcourt
Baltic sea
Baltica
Bam Bam ampitheaters
Bamboo Annal
Bancroftt, Hubert H.
banded rock formation
Banff, Alberta
Bangladesh
Bangladesh cyclone, 1991
Bantu forge
baptism
barad
Barandiarn, JosBarchan dunes, Lima, Peru
Barendregt, Ren
Barnes, Thomas G.
Barnes, Virgil Everett
barometric light
Barong
Barranca del Cobre
barrier burst flood
barrier island
barrier reef
Barringer Meteor Crater
Barstow sand, CA
basin
Basque
Bass, Robert
Bassinger, James
Bast( et)
Batavia
Batk plateaus
Bateson, William
Batten, Alan H.
Bauer, Henry
Baume Latrone, France
bay
Bay of Fundy
Bayeux (Queen Matilda's) tapestry
be, (to)
beach
Beals Carleton S.
Bear River, Alaska
Bearsden, Scotland
Beaty, Chester B.
Beaumont, William C.
Beaver fireball
bedrock
beds of destruction
bedu mask
Beehive House (tomb)
Beersheba
Bego Monte
behavioral sciences
behaviorism
behemoth
being
Beisan
Beit Mirsim
Bel, Belos
Belgium
Belit (Ninlil)
Belize
Belize Reef
bell
Bell's paradox
Bellamy, Hans Schindler
Belorussia, Byelorussia
belt series
Beltane
Ben Hadad
Ben Nevis, Scotland
Benbulbin, Ireland
Beni Basin, Bolivia
Bennett, William Harrison
Bennu (phoenix)
Benten (Benzaiten)
Bentley, John
bentonite
Beppu thermal area
Bequerel, Henri
Beringea
Bermuda
Bermuda collision theory
Bermuda deep
Bermuda triangle
Bernal, Ignaco
Berosus (Bel-usur)
Berthelot, A.
beta () decay
Beta () Geminorium (Pollux)
Beta () Lyrae
Beta () Persei (Algol)
Beth Mirsim, Palestine
Beth She'an, Israel
Bhopal
Bible, religious interpretation
Bible, scientific study of
Bible, translations
Biblical Deluge
bicameral
Biela's comet
Bifrost
Big Bang, theory
bilateral symmetry
Billings, Montana
Bilma, erg of
Bimson, John J.
binary star
binding energy
bindu
biochemistry
bioelectricity
biogenesis
biography
biological ages
biological magnetism
biological pulsation
biological transformation
Biological tree
biology
bion
biophysics
biosphere
Biosphere 2000
bipedalism
bird
bird migration
bird navigation
Bird, W. R.
Birth-giving Male
Bishop gravel, CA
Bismark archipelago
bison, primative representation
Bittersprings Formation,
Aust= l black hole
Black Sea
black shale
Black Stone of Mecca
Black virgin
Blackett, P. M. S.
blasphemy
Blavatsky, Helena
Blegen, Carl
blood of the pharoahs
blood sacrifice
blood type
bloodstone
blue green algae
blue hole
Blue Ridge mountains
Blummer, Max
Blytt, Axel
boar
Bode's Law
bodies, orbiting
body, physical
Bog Lake, Michigan
Boghazkeui
Bohemian Massif
Bolsena, Lake
bombardment
Bonneville River and Lake
Bora Bora
bore hole
boreal
boreal opening
Borrego Valley, CA
Bosomtwe crater
Bosque de Rocas, Peru
Bosumtwi, Lake
Boulanger, N. A.
boulder
boulder field
Boulder gravel fan, Sea of Cortez
boulder train
boundary clay
boundary value
bow and arrow
Boxhole crater, Australian
boycott, of q-works
Brahma, Brahmanna
Brahmaputra River
braided stream flow
brain
Brak, tell
Brandon, S. F. G.
Brassenpouy
Brasseur de Bourbourg
Bray forest
Brazil
Breasted, James Henry
breccia, volcanic
breeding
Brent crater, Ontario
(Bubastis, Egypt
Bretz, J. H.
Breuil, Henri
brewing
Briareux
brick magnetism
Briffault, Robert
Brigit (Brigantia)
brimstone
brine
bristlecone pine
Britain
Brittany
brontosaur
bronze
Bronze Ages
bronze serpent
Brough, James
Brouwer, -. -.
Brown, E. W.
Brown, Hugh A.
Bruce, Charles E. R.
Bruno, Giordano
Bryce Canyon
Buckland, W. M.
Budge, Sir Ernest Alfred Thompson Wallis
Buffon
Bug Creek fossil
bull worship
Bullard, Edward
buoyancy
bureaucracy
Burgess shale
burial
Burma
burning bush
Bushmen
Byblos Baalat)




C
==================================================================
Cacahuamilpa caverns
Cadmus, Kadmos
Callisto-p
Calymene (trilobite)
Cambrian Period
Camp Pendelton shoreline erosion, CA
Canuto, V.
canyon, submarine
canyon, surface
capacitor
Cape Canaveral, Florida
Cape Hatteras, NC
Capella rising point
carbon
carbon cycle
carbon dioxide
carbon-14
carbonate mineral
Carboniferous Period
carbonization
carcinogenic material
Cardona, Dwardu
Carey, Warren C.
Caribbean Region
Caribou Mountains
Cadomin conglomerates
caduceus
Cajon Pass
Calaveras man
calcareous ooze
calcinology
calcite
caldera
Caledonian orogeny
calendar
Calgary silt
California
California, gulf of
Callanish
Campo del Cielo craters
Canaan, Canaanite
Canada
Canadian arctic islands
Canadian boulder broadcasts
Canadian Rocky mountains Canadian shield
Canadian Society for Interdisciplinary Studies (| CSIS|)
Canary islands
Candlemas
Cango caves
cannibalism
Canning basin
Canopus stone
canopy theory
Carli-Rubbi, Giovanni R.
Carlsbad crater
Carlson, J. B.
Carmel, Mount
carnival
Carolina Bays
Carozzi, A. V.
Carpenter, Rhys
Carquinez strait
Carsbad caverns
Carson Valley, NV
Carthage
Caspian Sea
Cassini, Jacques
cataclastic rock
cataclysm
cataforms
Catal Hayuk
catalysis
catapulted ice
catastrophe
catastrophe, mathematics
catastrophic dualism
catastrophism
catastrophist
catatonism
catechism
cathode
cattle
cattle sacrifice
Caucasoid
Caucasus Mountains
causality
cave
cave art
cave dweller
cave, bones found in
cave, ice contained in
caves, limestone
celestial nucleogenesis
celestial observation
celestial sphere
cell division
cell, biological
cellular necessity
Celsius
Celt, Celtic
cementation, natural
Cenozoic Era
Cenozoic volcanism
Central Australia
central fire
centrifugal force
Cepola fish
ceramic
cerebral cortex
cerebral hemispheres
ceremonial & ritual object
Ceres, planetoid
Cerro
Cerro Fitz Roy, Argentina
Cetus
Chad, lake
Chagar Bazar, tell
Chaldea, Chaldean
chalk cliff
Challinor, R. A.
Chandler wobble
Chandler, S. C.
Chang Dynasty, China
Chang Jiang (Yangtse River)
change in nature
change of environment
change, attributes of
change, cosmic
change, human
channel, river & stream
Channelled Scablands, WA
chaos
Chardin, Teilhard de
charge, electric
chariot
charisma
charlatan
Charon
Charriere, -. -.
chauvanism
Chela, serra de
Chellean man
chemical bond
chemical bonding
chemical compound
chemical element
chemical marker, strata
chemical reaction
chemistry
Chernoble
cherubim
chess
Chetwynd, Thomas
Cheyenne mounds, WY
Chicago Fire
chidren's songs & stories
childhood
children's rhymes
chiliasm
chimpanzee
China
Chinese choreography
Chinook wind
Chipewa indians
Chiron
chlorophyl
Christian, Christianity
christmas tree
chromosphere
chronology
chronology, historical
chronology, natural history
chronometry, techniques
Chubb crater, Quebec
church architecture
Churchill-Sempel, Ellen
cinnamon
cinnebar
circle, stone (lithic)
circular logic
circular structure
circum-Pacific pyric belt
circumcision
cither, kitharis
city planning
civilizations
cladistic
Clark, D. M.
Clark, J. D.
classification
clastic sediment
clay
Clayton, Robert, N.
Clearwater lake, crater
cleavage of Earth
climate
climate, polar
climate, temperate
climate, tropical
climatology
clothing
cloud
club, (wooden)
Clube, S. Victor
coal
coastal feature
coastal landforms
cobblestone anomaly
cocolith
code
Coe, Michael D.
coelacanth
Coelus
coesite
cognition
cognitive disorder
Cohen, I. Bernard
Cohen, J. P.
cold fusion
collective amnesia
collective behavior
collective memory
colligative property
collision, cosmic
Colorado
Colorado Plateau
Colorado River delta
Columbia (tidal) Glacier, AK
Columbia flood basalts
Columbia Icefield
Columbia Plateau
Columbia/ Frazer Valley system
column, rock
combat, ceremonial
combustion
comedy
comet
comet catastrophe
comet composition
comet encounter
Comet Halley
comet impact
comet spectrum
comet tail
comet, core of
comet, failed
comet, omen
comet, orbit decay of
cometary injecta
commensurable motion
Commoner, Barry
communication, biological & human
communication, theory of
companion star
compass
competition
compound
comprehension of quantity
comptinology
compulsion, compulsiveness
compulsive repetition
concensus
conduction, thermal
conductivity, accoustic
conductivity, electric
conference expertise
confession, religious
conflagration, universal
conflict, interpersonal
conflicting dates
conjunction, planetary
Connecticut
conscience
consciousness
conservation principle, in nature
conspiracy
Constance, Lake
constancy
constellation
contamination
continent
continent, quantavolution of
continental drift (rafting)
continental margin
continental plate
continental shelf
continental shield
continental tropism, lunagenic
contours, topographic
contraction of Earth Cantril, Hadley
control, of self & others
convection
convection, atmospheric
conventional science
Cook, Melvin A.
Cook, Mount
cooking
Copernicus, Nikolas
copper
copulation
copulation, celestial
Coral islands
coral, atol
Corban Karst region
cord
Cordillera Blanca, Peru
Cordilleran megashear
core drilling
core, deep sea
core, ice
Coriolis effect
Corliss, William
corona, solar
Corprates Canyon
corprolite
corpus callosum
correlation, stratigraphic
cosmic dust
cosmic egg
Cosmic Heretic
cosmic lightning
cosmic pillar
cosmic pressure
cosmic ray
cosmogony
cosmology
cosmos
Cosmos-s
cotton
count
countervalancy of high energy forces
countervalence
Courville, Donovan, A.
covenant
cow, sacred
Cox, Allen
Cox, Douglas
crater
rater lake, Oregon
crater ring, South Astralia
crater, impact
Craters of the Moon, Idaho
craters with central mountains
craton
creation myths & systems
creationism, biological
creationism, geological
creativity
Cresswell crags, England
Cretaceous Period
Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary event
Crete
Crew, Eric
crime, criminality
crinoid
crisis
Cro-Magnon man
crocodile
Croll, J.
cross
cross-bedding
crown of metal
Crozier, W. D.
crucifiction
crust, displacement of Earth's
crust, Earth's
crustal rebound
crustal spreading
crustal subsidence
crux anasta
crystal
Cuaretes, -.
cuisine
cultural change
cultural hologenesis
cultural relativity
cultural synchronism
culture
culture, dating of
Cumberland, MD
cure
Curetes
Curie temperature
Curie, unit of radiation
current, Earth
current, surface & deep sea
Cuvier, Georges
Cuyama Valley, CA
cyanide
Cyclades
cycle
cycle, historical & catastrophical
cyclic stratification
cyclolith
cyclone
Cyclops
Cypress Hills gravel accumulation
Cyprus
Cyr, Donald




D
==================================================================
Dachille, Frank
Dades gorges
dadophoroi
Daedala
Daedalus
Dagon
Dalgacanga crater
Dallol salt flats
Dan, Lebanon
dance
Daniken, Erich von
Danjon, Andre
Danu (dana, anu)
Danube River
darekh
Darius
Dark Age( s)
darkness
Darwin, Charles Robert
Darwin, Sir George Howard
Darwinian revolution
dating method
Dating the World
dating, absolute
dating, relative
datum, data
Davies, James C.
Davies, Paul
Davis, Chester
Davison, Charles
day
day length
Dayak peoples
de Geer, -.
de Leonard, Carmen C.
de Shaves, G.
Dead Sea
Dead Sea scrolls
death
Death Valley, CA
decan
decay constant
Deccan traps, India
deccan traps, India
Dechend, Hertha von
Deep Bay crater
Deep Springs valley, CA
deformation
deGrazia, Alfred
degree
deification
Deimos
deity
deity
Dekkas volcanic formation
Delaware
Deloria, Vine
Delphi
delta
deluge
dema
demagnetization
Demodocus
demon
Dendera, Zodiac of
dendochronology
Denis of Halikarnassos
density
deoxyribose nucleic acid (| dna|)
deoxyribose nucleic acid (DNA)
depolarization
deposit, deposition
depression, land
depression, mental
derivation, source
desertification
dessication, planetary
detection
detonation
detritus
Deucalion Flood
deus otiosus
deuteron
deva, daeva
devadasi
devastation
Devi
devil
Devil's tower
Devonian period
deVries, -.
dew
Dewey, John
diagenic reaction
diamond
diapir, diapirism
diastrophism
diatom
Diego-Suarez bay
dielectric material
Diespiter (Jupiter)
diet
Dietz, Robert Sinclair
diffusion, cultural
diffusion, physical
Dilmun
Dingle, Herbert
dinosaur
Dionysus
Dioskouri
dioxin
dipole
Dirac sea
Dirac's equation
Dirac, Paul A. M.
disaster effects
disasterous processes
discharge of electricity
discipline
Disco Island,
discontinuity
discordant ages
disease
dismemberment
dispersal
displacement
dissociation
dissolved load
distillation
distortion
distribution
divine succession
divinity, classes of
Djamshidi, Tepe
Djerid, Chott
Dnebi
Dobzhansky, -.
Doda Fallet, Sweden
Dodds, E. R.
dog star
Dogon tribe
dolmen
dolomite
Dolomite mountains
dome mountain
domestication of animals
Dominican Republic
Donnelly, Ignatius
Doppler effect
Doran, Patrick
dormancy
double layer, electrical
double star
Dover, chalk cliffs of
dowsing
DQ Herculis
dragon
Drakensberg volcanics
drama
dramaturgy
Dravidian Culture
dream
Dreamtime
dress
drift, continental
drift, glacial
drink
drought
drug
Druid
drum
drumlin field
Dry Falls, Washington
Dubrow, -.
Dudley, H. C.
dumb-bell orbit
dune
Dunsmuir granite spires, CA
Drer, Albrecht
dust storm
duToit, -.
Dyaus




E
==================================================================
Ea (Enki)
early human
Earth axis
Earth axis change
earth charge
earth chimney, hoodoos
Earth crust
Earth dilation
Earth energy
Earth expansion
Earth figure
Earth fracture
Earth history
Earth interior
Earth magnetism
Earth Mother
Earth pole
Earth radius
Earth size
Earth surface
Earth's mantle
Earth, composition
Earth, development
Earth, interior
Earth, origin
Earth, structure
Earth-g
Earth-p
earthquake
earthquake light
earthquake prediction
East African Rift
Easter Island
Ebla
eclipse
eclipse cycle
ecliptic
ecliptic precession
ecology, ecological
ecosphere
ecstasy
Ecuador
ecumene
Edda
Eddington, Sir Arthur Stanley
Eddy, John A.
Eden, Garden of
education
eel
Eglinton River Valley, NZ
ego
Egyed, -.
Egypt, Egyptian
Egyptian calendar
Egyptian Chronology
Egyptian Dark Ages
Einstein, Albert
Eiseley, Loren.
Eisley, Loren
Eisriesenwelt
El Chichon volcano
El, Elohim
Elam
Elbrus, Mount
electric
electric behavior
electric cosmos
electrical charge
electrical discharge
electrical engineering
electricity
electrification on mountain tops
electrolyte
electromagnet
electromagnetic encounter
electromagnetic energy
electromagnetic field
electromagnetic spectrum
electron
electron bond
electron-antielectron pair
electron-deficient atom
electronic microscope
electrophoresis
electrophysical effect
electrosphere
element
element, chemical
elephant
Eleusis
Elgon, Mount
Eliade, Mircea
Elijah
Ellenberger, Charles L.
Ellesmere Island
elm
embryo
Emery, G. T.
Emi Koussi
Emiliani, Cesare
emission spectrum
empirical method
Encke's Comet
encounter, cosmic
encounter, electromagnetic
endocranial cast
endocrine system
energy
energy budget, annual
energy level
energy source
energy, conservation of
Engels, -.
England
English fens
Enki
Enkomi
Enlil
Ennedi plateau
Enosh
entropy
environment
enzyme
Eocene Epoch
eolith
eon, aeon
Eosphaerra tyleri
Eoster
Etvs torsion balance
epoch
equation, conceptual
equation, mathematical
equator
equatorial bulge
equilibrium
equinox
equipartition, of energy
equipotential surface
equivalence principle
Er
era
Erebus, Mount
Ericson, David B.
Eridu (Abu)
Eros
erosion
erosional debris, missing
erratic
eruption
escape velocity
esker
espionage in science
estimate
ether, aether
ethics
Etna, Mount
Etruria, Etruscan
Etruscan alphabet
euphemism
Euphrates River
Europa-g
Europa-p
Evans, Sir Arthur John
evening star
Everest, Mount
Everglades swamp, Florida
evidence, rules of
evolution
evolved star
Ewing, Maurice
excited state
excrement, fossilized
exfoliation
exile
existential fear
Exodus, the
exosphere
exoterrestrial
exothermic expansion
exothermic process
exploding star
exploration techniques
explosion
exponential notation
exponential principle
extinction( s)
extremely low frequency energy, |elf|
eye, cosmic
Eyre, Lake




F
==================================================================
fable
facies
fact
facula
faggot
fail
Fairbanks, Alaska
fairy
faith
fall
fall of a city
fall of gas
fall of glass
fall of ice
fall of metal
fall of rock and mineral
fall of water and vapor
fall, of ash and dust
Fall, The
falling star
fallout
Fara
Faraday, Michael
Farquahar, x. x.
fatalism
Faul, Henry
fault
fault-block mountains
fauna
faunal and floral succession
fear
feast
feast of light
feedback
feldspar
Fell, B.
feminism
Fennoscandian Rise
feral humans
ferro-electricity
ferromagnetism
fertility rite
feruginous pigments
Fester, R.
festival
Festival of Light
fictional character
field of knowledge
field, physical
Fig Tree rock series
fine particle
Fingal's cave
Finland
fire
fire ritual
fireball
fired material
firemaking
Firsoff, V. A.
first born"
fish
Fisher, Osmund
fission dating
fission, atomic
fission, of large body
fissure
fjord, origin of
flagellation
flare, solar
flash burn
Flathead Valley, BC
flight
flint
flood
flood basalts
flood gravel anomaly
flood plain
flood, catastrophic
Florida
Florida sediments
flow of material
fluvial pattern
fluvial process
flux
flywheel
Foehn wind
fold morphology
Folgheraiter, Guiseppe
Folkin, A. V.
folktale
food and drink
footprint
forbidden energy state
force, chemical
force, electrical
force, fundamental
force, gravitational
force, mechanical
force, nuclear
forces of Nature
Forel, F.
forget, forgetting
formalism
formation
forminifera
formula
Forrest, Bob
Forshufvud, Ragnar
fort, ancient
fossil
fossil assemblage
fossil imprint
fossil record
fossil river
fossil string dunes
fossil, radioactivity in
fossilization
foundations; philanthropic
fourth dimension
fractional crystalization
fractional distillation
fractionation
fracture
France
Franco-Canabrian School
Frank landslide
Franklin Institute
Franklin, Benjamin
Frasnian Revolution
fraud in science
Frazer River Canyon
Frazer, James George
free will
fresh water
Freud, Sigmund
Freya, Freyja
friction
fright
frog
fuel
Fuhr, Ilse
Fujiyama, Mount
fulgurite
fundamentalism
Fundy, Bay of
funeral rite
fungi
Funkhauser
Furies
fusain
fusion
fusion, nuclear
future



G
==================================================================
Gabon
Gabriel, Archangel
Gaea, Gaia
Gaietto, Piettro
Galapagos islands
galaxy
Galilean satellites of Jupiter
Galilei, Galileo
Galileo-s
Gallant, Rene
Galton, Sir Francis
Gambutis, Maria
game
gamma ray
Gammon, Geoffrey
Ganges delta
Ganymede-p
Garden of Eden
gas
gastrobleme
Gawra, tepe
Gaza
Geb
Geiranger Fjord
geiser
Geminid progenitor comet
gender
gene
geneology
general adaptation syndrome
generation
genesis
genesis and extinction of species
genetic realization
genetics
Geneva, lake
Gentry, Robert
geocentrism
geochemistry
geographically isolated population
geography, history of
geoid
geologic column
geological age
geological ages, duration of
geology
geomagnetic
geometry
geomorphology
geophysics
Georgia, U. S. A.
geosphere
Gerard, Ralph
Germany
germination
gestalt of creation
gesture
geyser
Ghats, India
ghost, spirit
giant
Giant's causeway
giantism
Giantopethecus
Gibraltar
Gilboa
Gilgamesh
Gimbutas, Maria
Ginenthal, Charles
Ginzberg, Louis
Gisement of Micoque
Gisement of Pennon
Giyan, tepe
glacial ice, origin
glacier
gland
glass
Glass, Billy
global event
global fracture
global warming
global warming
Glomar Challenger
gnomon
gnosticism
goat
Gobi desert
god
God's Day
God's fire
god, goddess
gold
Gold, Thomas
Golden age
Golden fleece
Goldfield Summit, NV
Goldschmidt, R.
Gomorrah
Gondwana
good and evil
Goosen, Doeko
Gordion
Gordon, Cyrus
gorge
gorgon
Gosselin, Pascal Francois
Goetterdaemmerung
Gould, Stephen Jay
government
Gowans, Alan
grace
gradualism
Graf, S. M.
grammar
Grand Aarrat
Grand Canyon
Grand Coulee
Grand Karroo
Grand Teton Range
granite
granule
graphite
gravel
Graves, Robert
gravity, gravitation
Great "Nevada" basin
Great African rift valley
Great barrier reef
Great Basin
Great Bear
Great Bear Lake
Great Britain
Great flood
Great Lakes
Great Lakes Basin
Great Pyramid
Great Red spot
Great Salt lake
Great Slave Lake
great tidal flooding
Great Valley deposits
Great Western Erg
Great Year
Greater Melanesia
Greater Micronesia
Greater Polynesia
Greater Tasmania
Greece, Greek
Greek history
Greenberg, Lewis
greenhouse effect
greenhouse, atmospheric
Greenland
Greenland crater
Greenland ice cores
Gregorian calendar
Gregory, J. W.
Gribbin, John
Griffard, David
Grinnell, George
Gros Brukkaros structure
group
growth
Guatemala
guilt
Guinea
gulf
Gulf of Mexico
Gulf of Saint Lawrence
Gunn, Ross
Gunnison, Black Canyon of the
Gurr, Ted
Guthrie, W. K. C.
Guyana
Guyot
Gwarkuh, (Persian crater)
gypsum
gypsy moth
gyroscope




H
==================================================================
habit
habitability
Hadas, Moses
Hades
Hadrosaurs
hail
hairy star"
half-life
halicination
Halley's Comet
Halloway, -.
hallucination
Hama, Syria
Hamath
Hammam-Meskoutine
Hammon
hand, handedness
hand-axe
Hapgood, Charles
Har Karkom, mount
Harakhte
Harappa Culture
Harkenss, Doug
harmonic motion
harmony, of the spheres
Harper's Ferry
Harras
Harris papyrus
Harrison, E. R.
Harrison, Jane
Hartung, Jack, B
Harz mountains
Hathor
Hatteras, Cape
Hawaii, Hawaiian
Hawkes, Jaequetta
heat
heaven
Heavenly host
heavens
heavens, constancy
Hebrades
Hebrew, Hebraic
Hecate
hedonism
Heezen, Bruce C.
Heinsohn, Gunnar
Heiratic writing
heiroglyph
Hekla volcano
Helen of Troy
heliocentrism
Heliopolis
Helios
heliosphere
helium
Heller, Joseph
hematite
Hemen-g
Henbury crater field
Hephestus
Hera
Heracles
Heraclid
Heraclitus
Herakles
Herculeneum
heresy
Hermes
Hermes stone
Hermist
hero
Herodotus
Herois
Hertzler, J. R.
Hesiod
Hespherus
Hess, Harry
Hesy, tell-el-Heyrdahl,
Thor
Hibben, -.
Hienghene bay
hieroglyph
hierophany
Hieroplanes
high-place
Hills, J. G.
Himalaya
Himmalayan Orogony
Hindu
Hindu Kush
Hindu lunar catastophe
hippopotamous
Hiroshima
Hissarlik, Asia Minor
historigraphy
historism
history
Hitler, Adolf
Hittite
hoax, in science
Hoba meteorite
hog-back
Holbrook, John
holism
Holister
Holleford crater
Holmsoland Klit
holocaust
Holocene
hologenesis
hologram, brain model
holosphere
Holy Dreamtime
Holy Ghost
Holy Mountain"
homeland of mankind
homeopathy
homeostasis
Homer
Homeric Age
Homeric aristocracy
Homeric heros
Homeric language
Hominid
hominid reversion
Homo erectus
Homo sapiens
Homo sapiens schizotypicus
Homo schizo
Homo schizo reformation
homo sinemento
Homo...
homology
homosexuality
honey
Hooker, J. T.
hopeful monster"
Hopi, people
Hoerbiger, Hans
horizontal strata
hormone
horns
horse
Horseshoe falls
Horus-g
Hosea
Hoskins(-Boisen), R. G.
hot spring
Howorth, Henry
Hoyle, Sir Fred
hubris
Hudson's Bay
Hueyatlaco
Huggett, Richard
Huitzilopochtli
human engineering
human evolution
human genesis
human migration
human nature
human settlement
human survival
human variation
humanist-scientist division
humanization
Humbolt, A. von
Hume, David
humidity
humor
Hungary
hunger
hunter, hunting
hunter-gatherer
hurricane
Hutton, James
Huxley, Thomas
Hwang Ho river
hydrocarbons, in manna
hydrocarbons, in soil
hydrocarbons, on Venus
hydrogen bomb
hydrolic cataforms
hydrologic cycle
hydrous meteorite
hygene
Hyginus
Hyksos
hymm
Hyperborean
Hyperion
hypothetical construct




I
==================================================================
Iapetus
ice
Ice Age termination
Ice age( s)
ice cap
ice cave
ice core
ice dump
ice fall
ice-free corridor
iceberg
Iceland
icon
iconography
id
Idaho
idealism
identification
identity
ideology
iderot, -.
idol, idolatry
igneous rock
Iguanadon
Iliad
Illimani, Bolivia
illo tempore
illusion in scripture
illusion, spatial
illusion, temporal
Ilopango, El Salvador
image
image synthesis
imagination, tricks of
Imbolc
immortality
immunological
impact
impact (shock) metamorphism
impact erratic
impedance
Imperial Valley, CA
Inanna
inbreeding
Inca Indians
incantation
incarnation
incense
incest
incline
inclusion
India, Indian
Indian Ocean
Indiana
individuation
Indo-Chinese penninsula
Indo-European
Indo-European language
Indo-Iranian subfamily
Indonesia
Indra
induction
Indus River
Indus Valley civilization
inertia
infantacide
inferiority complex
infra-red
inheritance
initiation rites
inner language
Inntal, Tyrole
Inquisition
insanity
inscription
insect
insect, queen
inspiration
instability
instinct
instinct delay
institution
institutions, primeval
insulation, electrical
integration of ideas
integration of ideas
intelligence
intensity
interference
intermolecular force
interstellar matter
introgenesis
intrusion
invention
inversion of strata
invertebrate
invisibility
invisible matter
Io, ion torus
Io-g
ion
ionosphere
Ions, Veronica
Iowa
Ipuwer papyrus
Iran
Iraq
Ireland
iridium anomalies
iron
Iron age
iron formations
irradiance
irrational number
Irrawddy River
Isaac
Isaacson, Israel M.
Isaiah
Isbell, William
Isenberg, Aurthur
Ishim, Kazakhstan
Ishmael
Ishtar
Isis
Islam
island arcs
Isle-de-France
isostacy
isotope
isotope ratio
isotopes, table of
Israel
Issyk Kul
Itabirito, Brazil
Italy
Ithica, Ithaki
ithyphallic
ivory
Ivory Coast
Ivory Island, Siberia
Ix Chel




J
==================================================================
Jacob (Israel)
Jacot, L
jaguar
James, Peter
James, William
Janet, Pierre
Japan, geography
Japan, Japanese
Japan, mythology
Japanese language
Jashar, Book of
Jaspers, Karl
Jastrow, Robert
Java man
Java trench
Java, Island of
Jaynes, Julian
jazz
Jebel-Irhoud
Jeferson, Thomas
Jefferys, Harrold
Jehovah
Jehovah's Witnesses
Jeremiah
Jerico
Jeroboam
Jerome, Saint
Jerusalem
Jesus (Christ)
jet-rain
jet-stream, atmospheric
jewelry
jewelry, celestial
jewelry, motifs
jewelry, uses
Jewish historiography
Jewish history
Jewish legends
Jewish, calendars and festivals
Jewish, cosmic philosopy
Jewish, mysticism
Jews
Jews, early wandering
Job
Job, Book of
Johanson, Donald O.
John, Saint, the apostle
Johnson, F
Jones, J. C.
Jordan, Pascual
JOS
Joseph of Egypt
Josephus Flavius
Joshua
Joule's Law
Joule, James Prescott
journalism, scientific
Jovea, age of
Jovian
jubilee
Jubilee Pass
Judah ha-Levi
Judaic monotheism
Judaism
Judaism, catastrophes influencing
Judaism, divine entities
Judaism, earliest sources and practices
Judaism, Mosaism
Judeideh, tell
judgement of the soul, depiction
Judges, Book of
Jueneman, Frederick
Juergens, Ralph C.
juggernaut
June
Jung, Carl
jungle and tropical forests
Jupiter effect
Jupiter-g, attributes and behaviors
Jupiter-g, specific latin legends
Jupiter-g, typical effects produced by
Jupiter-g, world-wide identification
Jupiter-p, composition and appearence
Jupiter-p, external transactions
Jupiter-p, history and origins
Jupiter-p, radio-noises
Jupiter-p, satellites of
Jupiter-p, typical phenomena associated with
Jura Mountains
Jurassic Period
Justin, the historian




K
==================================================================
Ka
Kadesh
Kadmus
Kafer-Djarra, necropolis of
Kagra River
Kaibab formation
Kalambo Falls
Kalevala
Kali
Kallen, Horace
Kalopsida
Kalos, Kalotics
Kalpas
Kamchatka
kames
Kansas
Kant, Emmanuel
Kapitza
Kaplan, Lewis
kara structure
Karakoram, India
Karkom, Mount
karma
karst topography
Kas shipwreck
Kashmir
Kassite
Katewe Craters
Kazakhstan
Keen Camp summit
Keewatin
Keill, John
Keller, Gerta
Kellogg, V. L.
Kelly, Alan O.
Kelvin, Lord (Wm. Thompson)
Kennett, J. P.
Kentucky
Kentucky, Mammoth Cave
Kenya
Kepler
Kern River boulders and cobblestones
kerykeion
Kesil
Kessler Loch
Kester
kettle
Khima
Kicking Horse Pass
Kilamanjaro
Kilauea, Hawaii
Kimberlites
Kimberly mines
kinetic energy
kinetic molecular theory
king list
King shepherd
King, Clarence I.
King, Henry, C.
Kinnekulle, Sweden
Kinsborn
kinship
kitchen midden
kitharis
Klamath mountain arc
Kloosterman, Hans
Knossos
knowledge
Knudtson, J. A.
Kobuk Sand Hills, AK
Koch, R. H.
Koestler, Arthur
Kofarh, Robert E.
Kogan, Shulamith
Kohoutek, Comet
Kojiki scripture
Koko Nor, China
Kola Bore Hole
Kola Penninsula, Russia
Komarek, Edourd V. Sr.
Kondratov, Alexander
Kopal, Zdenek
Koran
Korea
kosher
kosmos
Kosmos-s
Kotelnoi island
Kotor, Gulf of
Koyukok River
Krakatoa
Kramer, Richard
Kramer, Samuel
Krishna
Kronia Group, publishers of AEON
Kronos, Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies
krypton
Kugler, Francis Xavier
kuh-i-Namack
Kuhn, Thomas
Kukla, G. J.
Kumar S.
Kumara
Kurdistan
Krten, Bjoeren
Kurtz, Paul
Kuwait
Kwale islands
Kweilin karst



L
==================================================================
La Brea pit, California
La Cluna cave
La Malbaie crater, Quebec
Laacher See
Labrador
labrynth
Lachish
lady of Nordic Pantheon carbon laetoli beds
Lagrange, restricted solution
Lagrangian point
lahar
Lake Agassiz
Lake Bonneville
Lake Calgary flood
lake dwelling
Lake Humbolt
Lake Isabella, CA
Lake Missoula
Lake Pend Oreille, ice dam
Lake Wackitupe, NZ
lake, origins of
Lamark, -.
lamina
Lammas
land bridge
landform
landform, shaping of
landslide
Lane, Frank
Lang, Andrew
Langerie Haute
language
language, diffusion
Laos
LaPlace, Pierre Simon, Marquis
de
Lapland
LaPonit, P. I.
Laramie formation
Larderello hot spring
Larry, R. D.
Lascaux Caves
laser
Laskar
Lassen Peak
Lasswell, Harold D.
Late Kingdom
latent heat
lateral displacement
laterate
laurel
lava
laws, in science
lead
leader gene hypothesis
Leaky, Louis B., Mary & Richard
least interaction action
Lebanon
Leclerc, G. L.
Lederer, Wolfgang
legend
Lehmann, -.
Leibnitz, Gottfried
Leiden papyrus
Lemaire, J.
Lena river
lens
Leonardo da Vinci
Leroi-Gourhan
Les Eyzies de Tayac
LeSage, George-Louis
Letopolis
Levant/ Dead Sea Rift
Levi-Strauss, Claude
Leviathan
Leviathan cave
Lexell's Comet
Leyden jar
Liakhov island
Libby, Willard Frank
libedo
liberalism
Liberia
liberty
Libra
library
Libya, Libyan
lichen
life
life and entropy
life span
life, biotic precursors of
light
light pressure
light refraction
lightning
lignite
Lilith
limbic system
limestone
Linear B script
Lingua Adamisa
linguistic ideology
linguistics
lion
lion, rampant
Lisbon earthquake
listric fault
literature
litergy
lithic wear analysis
lithosphere
Lithuania
Little Salt spring
Littlewood, -. -.
loam
local neutral
Loch Ness
loess
logic
Loham mountain
Loma Prieta earthquake
London Geologic Society
Long, C. H.
lost tribe
Lot
Lotan
love
low elevation meteor
Lowel, Percival
Lowery, Malcolm
Lucerne, lake
Lucifer
luck
Luckenbill, D. D.
Luckerman, Marvin
Lucretius, -.
Lucy"
Lukens
luminosity
lunagenesis
lunar ...
lunar calendar
lunar fission
Luxor
Lycia, tombs of
Lycosoura
Lyell, Charles
Lyons, France
lyre
Lystrosaurus
Lyttleton, Raymond




M
==================================================================
Ma, E. M.
Maadin
Mabon
Maccoby, Hyam
MacCrea, W. H.
MacDonnel Bay, Australia
MacGowan, -.
MacGregor, J.
machine
Mackenzie river
Mackie, Evan W.
MacMillan Book Co.
MacNeish, Richard S.
macro-evolution
Macrobius
Madura, Australia
Magdalenian
Mage, Shane
Magi
magic
Magiddo
magistrate
Magna Grecia
magnetic decay
magnetic mapping
magnetic pole
magnetic reversal
magnetic tube
magnetism
magnetite
magnetization
magnetosphere
magnitude
magnolia
Mahabharata
Mahemet
main sequence star
Mainwaring, Bruce
Maiori
maize
Majdalouna, necropolis of
Malagasi
Malapina Glacier
Malay Penninsula
Maldeve Islands
Mali
Malkus, W. V. R.
Malta
Malthus, David
mammal
mammoth
Mammoth cave, Kentucky
Man (early in America)
Manavgat River
Mandelkehr, Moe
Mandraka falls
Manetho
manganese
manic depressive
Manitoba
mankind
manna
manna, medicinal properties
manna, nutritional properties
Manson structure
Manson, Lewis A.
Manu
Maori lore
map
Maran, S. P.
Maranatos, S.
Marble Canyon sand deposit, AZ
Marcanton, Pierre L.
March
Marduk
Mare Imbrium
marfa lights
Margolis, Howard
Mari
marine extinction
Mariner-s
marriage
Mars-g
Mars-p
Marshak, Alexander
marsupial
Martia, age of
Martin, P. S.
Martinatos, Spiridon
Marut
Marx, Christoph
Marx, Karl
Marxist paradigm
Maryland
mascon
mass organization
mass spectrum
mass, physical
mass, religious
mass-luminosity relation
Massif Central, France
massive dunes, Somali coast
massive ion
massive sand-deposit
mastaba
mastodon
materialism
mathematics
matter
Mauna Loa, Hawaii
Maunder minimun
Mauritania
mausoleum
Maxwell, James Clerk
May
Maya, Mayan
maypole
Mazama mountain
Mazda
Mazzuroth
MBI" people
McClintock, Barb
McKinnon, Roy
McLaren, D. J.
meaning
measure and test
Mecalli scale
Mecca
mechanics
mechanism
Mecklenberg Lake
medicine, medicinal
megalithic monument
megalomania
Megiddo
megolith
Meinesz, Venning F. A.
meiosis
Mekong river
melt
melting point
membrane, cellular
memorial generation
memory
Memphis
Mendel, Gregor
Mendeleev, D. I.
Mendocino, CA
menstruation, menstrual
mental health/ illness
mentation
Menzel, Donald
mer
Merapi, mount
Mercalli scale
Mercanton, P. L.
Mercator projection
Mercator, Gerardus
Mercuria, Mercurian Period
Mercury-g
Mercury-p
Merovingian period
Meservey, R.
mesiah, mesianism
Meso, ..., Middle...
Meso-America, Mesoamerican
mesocortex
Mesolithic period
meson
Mesopotamia, Mesapotamian
Mesopotamian chronology
Mesozoic era
Mesquite gravel, NV
Messabi Iron Range
metabolism
metal
metalurgy
metamorphic rock
metamorphosis
metaphor
metaphysics
meteor
meteor crater
Meteor Crater," AZ
meteor shower
Meteora, Greece
meteorite
meteorite, encounter with
meteorites from Mars
meteoroid
meteorology
meter, metre
methane
methodology
Methusalah
Meton
Metonic Cycle
metric system
Mexico
mica
Micah
Michael, Archangel
Michell, John
Michelsohn, Irving
Michigan
Michigan, Lake
micro-comets
microlithic technique
microrganism
microscope
microwave energy
Mid-Atlantic ridge
Middle Bronze age
Middle East
Midgard
Midsummer
Midsummer Night's Dream
migraine
migration, animal
migration, bird
migration, human
Milankovitch, M.
Milford Sound, N. Z.
Milford Sound, NZ
Milkom"
Milky Way
millennialism
Miller, Alice
Miller, Hugh
mima mound
Mimas
mimicry
mind
mineral
Minerva
mining
Minnesota
Minoa, Minoan
Miocene epoch
miracle
mirage
Mireaux, Emile
Mishrife
missing link
missing mass
Mississippi River
Mississippi, U. S. A.
Mississippi-Missouri Basin
Missoula, Lake
Missouri, U. S. A.
Mistaseni (Sask. rock)
misteltoe
Mitanni
Mithra
mitosis
mixture, chemical
mnemonic
Moazcas
model, scientific
Moen Cliffs, Denmark
Mogollon Rim river gravel, AZ
Mohenjo-daro
moho (discontinuity)
mohole
Moldavite tektites
molecule
Moloch
momentum
Monaco
Monan
monarch
money, catastrophic origin
Mongolia
monolith
monotheism
monsoon
monster
Mont Blanc, France
Montana
Montazuma Hills, CA
Monte Bolca
Montgomery Creek formation
month
Monument Valley
monumentalism
Moon
moon worship
Moon-g
Moon-p
Moore, Brian
Moorea, French Polynesia
morality
Morar Loch, Scotland
Morgan, Elaine
Morgan, Lewis H.
Morning Star
Morocco
Morris, Charles
Morris, Henry
Morrison, Philip
Moses
motion
motive
Motz, Lloyd
mound builder
Mount Saint Helens
Mount Shasta mineral deposits
Mount Shasta, CA
Mount Sinai
Mount Whitney, CA
Mount Woodson granite
mountain range
mouse
mouse, cosmic
Mousterean culture
Mozambique
Mt. Pelee
Mt. Pinatubo, Phillipines
Mu"
muck
mud
Mudies
Muir Glacier, Alaska
Muldrow Glacier, Alaska
Mullen, William (Bill)
Mller, Max
Muller, William.
multiple star system
Munk, W. H.
Murchison meteorite
murmmurings, of crowd
museum
music
music of the spheres
mutagenic agent
mutation
mutual repulsion
Mycenea, Mycenean
Myres, John
mysticism
myth interpretation
myth, mythology
mythical and celestial movement
mytho-linguistic
mythology



N
==================================================================
Nabonnasar
Nafud Desert depression
Nagasaki
names of gods
names of planets
Namibia
Nammu
Nampa image
Nanga Parbat
Nansen, F.
Naos of El Arish
Napier, William M.
naptha
narcissism
Narmada River, India
Narryer, mount
Nasca, Peru
nastic
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
natural force
natural history
natural law
natural rights
natural scientist
natural selection
naturalism
nature
Nature, periodical
Naughton
Navajo sandstone
navigation, primitive
Naxos, Greece
Nazis, Nazism
Neanderthal man
Near East
Nebo
Nebraska
Nebraska Sand Hills
Nebuchadnezzar
nebula
nebular cosmogony
Nectanebo
nectar
Needham, -.
needs, human
negative electrical charge
negative exponentialism
negro race
Nelson, John H.
Nemesis
Nemi Lake
Neo..., New...
neocortex
Neolithic age
Nepal
Neptune-g
Neptune-p
Nergal
nervous system
nest
Nestor, Palace of
Netherlands
Neugebauer, Otto
neurons
neurosis
neurotic
neutral, neutrality; electric
neutrino
neutron star
neutron transformation
Nevada
Nevadan Revolution
Neville, -.
New Brunswick, Canada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Madrid earthquake
New Mexico
New River, CA
New Scientist, periodical
New Testament
New Year's Day
New York
New Zealand
Newcomb, Simon
Newfoundland
Newgrosh, Bernard
Newham, -.
Newton, Sir Isaac
Newtonian definitions
Newtonian formulations
Ngorongoro Crater
Niagra falls
Nibelungen
Nicaragua
Nichmed
nickel
Niederberger, Chistine
Niemann, V. D.
Nieto, M. M.
Nietzsche, Friedrich W.
Niger Republic
Niger river
Nigeria
nihillism
Nile river
Nilsson, Herbert
nimbus
Nimrod
Nineveh
Ninninger, H. H.
Ninurta
Nipponia
Nippur
Nirvana
Nishapur mines
Nitovikla
nitrate
nitrite
nitrogen
nitrogen cycle
nitrogen oxides
Nix Olympia
Noah's flood
Noah, Noachian
noble savage"
node
Noga
noise pollution
noise, accoustic
noise, cosmic
noise, electrical
nonconformity, geological
Nonnos
Nordic myth
Nordic, Norse
normal
normality, abnormality
Norman, John
North America
North American Flood
North American Lacustrian Rift
North American tektite field
North Carolina
North Dakota
North Pole
North Sea
North Star
North, Robert G.
Northern Kingdom of Israel
Northwest Territories, Canada
Norway
nova
Nova Komenei
Nova Scotia
Novaya Zemlya, Siberia
novel
November
nuclear energy
nuclear missile
nuclear physics
nuclear reaction
nuclear synthesis
nucleic acid
nucleon
nucleotide
nucleus, atomic
nucleus, cell
nuclidic masses
Numa Pompilius
number
numbers, sequences and series
numen
nursery rhyme
Nut
nutrition




O
==================================================================
O'Geoghan, Brendon
O'Keefe, John A.
O. K.
Oahu, Hawaii
Oannes
oasis
Ob-Irtysh Basin
obliquity
obliquity, changes
oblisk
observatory
obsession
obsidian
Occam, William of
occultism
ocean
ocean basin
Oceana, cultures of
oceanic flood gravel
Oceanic plate subduction
oceanogrophy
ocher
October
Odessa
Odin
Odysseus
Odyssey
Oedipus
Oesel island
Oestrus
Ogden, J. G. III
Ogyges
Ohio
oil
oilfield
Okeanos
Oklahoma
Okotoks erratic
Old Crow Basin, Yukon
Old Faithful geyser
Old Man of Hoy
Old One of the Sea"
old red sandstone
Old Testament
Olgas, the
olive oil
Olivet, mount
Olmec world
Olympia
Olympic games
Olympus Mt., Mars
Olympus, Mt., Greece
Oman
omen
Ometepe Island and volcanoes
omnipotence of thought
Omo River
Omoroca
Ontario
Oort cloud of comets
Oosterhout, G. van
ooze
Oparin, A. I.
ophiolite
Ophiolites
Optimkist's Cave, U. S. S. R.
oracle
orbit
orbit transition (solar system)
Orbiter-s
order
Ordovician hammer
ore deposit
Oregon
organic geochemistry
organic illness
organic sediment
organization
orgy, orgiastic
orientation
oriented lakes
origin of life
original horizontality" concept
original man
Ormuzd
Ornstein
orogeny
Orontius Fineus
Orphic hymns
Orphic mysteries
orthogenesis
oscillator
Osiris
Osmaniye
osmium
Othus
Otto, Walter F.
Ouadi es Seboua
ought"
ought-is" problem
Ouranos
Ouroboros
outcropping
outwash
Ovendon, Michael W.
overfold
overturned strata
Ovid
Owens Valley aprons
owl
ox-bow lake
Oxnard, Charles
oxygen
oxygen isotope ratio
oxygen, transmutation of
oxygenation of the atmosphere
oyster
ozone




P
==================================================================
Pacific ring of fire
Pacific rise
Pacifica
Padagonian man
paean
pagan
Page, Denys
Paine-Gaposchkin, Celia
Pakicetus fossil
Pakistan
palaeo-anthropology
palaeo-biochemistry
palaeo-climate
palaeontology
Palenque
paleography
Paleokoutella
Paleolithic Age, Palaeolithic
paleomagnetism
paleontology
Paleozoic Era
Palestine
palladium
Pallas
Palmer
Paluxy footprints
Pamir range
Panama
pandemonium
Pangea, Pangaea
pangenesis
panic
Panku
pantheism
pantomine
papurus
parable
paradigm
Paraguay
parallax
paranatellonta
paranoia
parapsychology
Paricutin, Mexico
Paris, France
Paris-g
Parry, Alan
parthenogenesis
Parthenon
particle
particle physics
particle/ wave duality
parturition
Pascal, Blaise
Passover
Patagonia, fjords of
patriachy
Patroni, Giovanni
Patten, Donald
Patterson, Clair
paucity of evidence
Pausanias, -.
Payne-Gaposhkin, Cecilia
peace
peat
pebble
pediment
peer review
Peirce, Charles
Peking man
Pelasgians
Pelean volcano
Peleg
Peloponnesian Penninsula
Peltier, Jean
penance
pendulum
peneplain
Penniston, G. B.
Pennsylvania
Pennsylvanian Period
Pensee
Pentecost
penumbra
Peoples of the sea
Pepi
peptide
percept
perception
periastron
pericentron
perigee
perihelion
period
period, geologic
period, resonant
period, sidereal
period, synodic
Periodic table
permafrost
Permean period
Permian Period
Persia, ancient
Persia, Persian
Persian Gulf
personality
personification
perspective
perturbation
Peru
Peruvian gravel anomalies
Pestigo fire
pestilence
Petrie, W. M. S.
petrifaction, petrification
petrified forest
Petrified Forest, AZ
petroglyph
petroleum
Petrona skull
Petterson, Hans
Pfeiffer, John
Pfeiffer, Robert H.
Phaeacia
Phaeton
phallic
Pharoah Ramses
phase
phenol
phenomenology
phenomenon
philanthropy
Philippine Islands
Philistine pick
philosophy
phlogiston
Phobos
Phoebe
Phoebus
Phoenicia, Phoenician
Phoenix, AZ
phonetic, phonemic
phosphate
phosphoresence
phosphorous
photochemistry
photoelectricity
photography
photometry
photon
photosphere
photosynthesis
phylogenic inheritance
physical binary system
physics
physiology
Phystos
Phythian oracle
pi
Pi-ha-kiroth
Pickering, William
pictograph
piezoelectricity
pigmentation
Pikaia
Pikering, William
Pilat dunes
pilgrim
pillar
pillar of fire"
Pillars of Hercules
Piltdown man
Piltdown, England
Pindar, -.
pingo
Pioneer-s
Piri Reis map
placebo
plague
Plagues of Egypt
plain
planaria
planarian
Planck, Max
plane, ecliptic
planet
planetarium
planetary gods
planetary motion
planetary nebula
planetary tide
planetary, transaction
planets and human directives
planets, in language
plant
plasma
plasma, cosmic
plastic flow
Plata, rio de la
plate tectonics
plateau
Plato
pleasure
Pleiades
Pleione
pleisiosaurus
Pleistocene Epoch
Pleistocene-Holocene Boundary
plenum
Plinian eruption
Pliny
Pliocene epoch
plot
Plotinus
plural environment
plural selves
Plutarch
Pluto-g, god
Pluto-p, planet
plutonic rock
plutonium
plutonium, toxicity
Pobitite Kamani
poetic meter
Poincare, Jules Henri
Point Loma erratics
poison
Polaki, Lake
Poland
Polanyi, Michael
polar icecap, shift
polarization
political control
political science
politics
politics of science
pollen
polluted sediment
pollution
Polonium
poly-ego
Polybius
polycyclic aromatic compounds (PAC)
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, PAH
polymerase chain reaction
polymorphism
Polynesia
polyploidism
polytheism
Pont d'Ambon
Ponto-Aralian Mediterranean
Ponway gravel
Popocatepetl
Popol Vuh Epic
popular science
population
porosity
Porphyrion
Portugal
Poseidon
positivism
Postojna Cave
potassium-argon dating
potential energy
potential, electric
pottery
poultry
Poverty Point, Louisiana
power, intellectual
power, physical
power, political
Poznansky, Arthur
pragmatics of legend
Pratt, J. H.
prayer
Pre-Cambrian Era
precession of equinoxes
precident, need for
precipitation
predestination
Predmost, Moravia
prehistory
preservation
pressure group, lobby
pressure of light
pressure, biological
pressure, environmental
pressure, physical
Prestley, Joseph
Prestwich, Joseph
prevailing wind
Priam, T.
priapic wand
Pribriam, Carl
Price, George McCready
priest
primary
primate
primeval sculpture
primevalogy
primordial soup"
principal star in binary system
priority in scientific discovery
pro-human ape
pro-selenes
pro-Selenian
probability
process
Proclus
professionalism
progress
projection
Prometheus
promised land"
proof
prophecy of doom
prophet
propoganda
protein
protoplasm
protozoa
Prouty, W. F.
Psyche
psychiatry
psychic mechanism
psychoanalysis
psychobiographical
psychological therapy
psychology
psychoneurosis, psychosis
psychosomatic genetics
psychosomatism
Ptah
Pterosaur
Ptolemy, Claudius
public policy
publishing
pulsar
pumice
punctuated equilibrium
punishment
punition
punt
Puys volcanic chain
Pylos
pyramid
Pyrannes, mountain range
Pysanky
Pythagoras
python




Q
==================================================================
q, charge on electron
q-quantavolution
Q-series
Qalaat-er-Rouss
Qraye, necropolis of
quackery
quadrant
quadrature
quantavolution
quantification
quantity
quantum
quantum relativity
quantum sedimentation
quantum-mechanics, theory of
quark
quartz
quasar
Quaternary Period
Quebec
Queen of Heaven"
Queen of Sheba
Queenstown, NZ
Quetzelquotl
Quiche Mayans
quicksand
quintessence




R
==================================================================
Ra, Re
Raabjerg mile dunes
Rabbitkettle hot springs
Rabinowitz, Eugene
race
radar
Radhakrishnah, V.
radiant genesis
radiation
radiation chemistry
radiation detector
radiation sickness
radiation storm
radiation therapy
radiation, biological effects of
radical, chemical
radient genesis
radio
radio-halo
radioactive dating, (RAD)
radioactive decay
radioactive halo
radioactive isotope
radioactive waste
radioactive, radioactivity
radioastronomy
radiochemistry
radiochronometry
radiogenic helium
radiometry
radium
radon
rafting
rafting of land masses
Raikes, Robert J.
rainbow
Rainbow Bridge, Utah
rainmaking
raised sealevel
Rakha
Ralph, Elizabeth
Rama
Ramadan
Ramapithicus
Ramayana
Ramesses II
Ramona cobbles, CA
Rampino, M. R.
Ramses II
Ramses III
Ramses VI
Rank, Otto
Raphael
Rapp, George
Ras Shamra
Ras-el-Ain
rational
rationalism
rationality
Raup, David M.
Rawanda
Rawlinson, Gerald
rayed crater
reading backwards
realism
reasonable
reasoning
recall
recency
recent time
reception system, science
Reck, H.
recombination, genetic
red colored environmental substances
Red Deer badlands
red dwarf star
Red Sea
red shift
red tide
reductionism
reef
refining, metal
refining, natural
refraction
refrigeration, natural
Rehoboam
Reich, Theodor
Reich, Willhelm
Reid, G. C.
relative density
relativity in physics
relativity, social
relief
religion
religion, reformation
religion, sociology of
REM, unit
remains, human & animal
remanence, magnetic
remission
remnant, celestial
renaissance
repetitiveness
reproduction, exponential rates
reproductive system
reptile
reservoir, natural
Reshetov, Yuri
resistance
resonance
resonance, physical
resonant ratio
respiration
retired god
reversed magnetism
reversion to hominidae
revolution, intellectual
revolution, political
revolution, scientific
revolution, social
Rezanov, I. A.
Rhaecus
Rhea
rheology
Rhine river
Rhine River valley
Rhodesia
Rhone glacier
Rhone River
rhyme
Rhys-Carpenter
rhythm
rhythm, biological
Ricci
Richat structure
ridge
Ries Crater
Rift, African
Rift, Mid Atlantic
rifting
Rig Veda
right handedness
right hemisphere
Riley, C. J.
rille
rille, lunar
Rilli, Nicola
ring of fire"
ring, planetary
ring-around-the-rosey"
Rio de Janeiro
ripple mark
ripple marking in rock
rising land
rite of passage
Rittmann, A.
ritual
river
river delta
Rivers, W. H. R.
Rix, Ziv
Roche Limit"
Rochenbach
rock
rock art
rock chimney
rock salt
Rock, Fritz
Rocky Mountain structures
Rocky Mountains
rod
Rodabaugh, David
rodent
Roheim, Geza
role-playing
Roman religion
Rome, Roman
Rommulus, Remmus
Rooser, R. G.
Rose, Lynn
Rosetta stone
Ross ice shelf
rotation
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques
Roussel, Rene
routine
rubble hill
Rubezahl
Ruffignac
Rugus, Carl W.
rulers
runaway" star
Runcorn, S. .K
Russell, Bertrand
Russell, D. A.
Russell, Henry Norris
Russia
Rutherford scatter
Ryan, W. B. F.




S
==================================================================
Sabbat
Sacral man
sacrament
sacred
sacrifice
sacrifice ritual
saga
Sagan, Carl
Saguenay river
Sahara
Sahara, Saharan Sea
Sahul
Saint-Hilaire, Geoffrey
Salinas Valley alluvial fan, CA
Salop, L. J.
salt
salt dome, salt plug
salt flat, salt pan
salt lake
Salt Lake crater
Salt pans, S Australia
salt, evaporation of brine
saltation
Salton Sea, California
Salzkammergut, Austria
Sammer, Jan
Samoa
Samson
San Andreas Fault
San Diego Hills, CA
San Felipe ocean flood apron
San Francisco earthquakes
San Jacinto Mountains
sanctification
sand
sand barrier
sand dune
sandstone
sandstorm
Sanhain
sanity
Santa Klaus
Santillana, Giorgio di
Santorini remnant
Sardinia
Sargasso Sea
Sargon
Saskatchewan
Saskatchewan gravels
Satan
satellite
satellite, artificial
satellite, celestial
satrap
Saturn symbol
Saturn's rings
Saturn, binary
Saturn-g
Saturn-p
Saturnalia
Saturnia, Saturnian Age
Saturnian Deluge
Saturnian nova
satyr
Saudia Arabia
Saul
Saul, John
Saussure, F de
scabland
scale-m
scale-w
Scaligar, J. J.
scanning electron microscope
scarab
Scarisora Cave
Schaeffer, Claude
Schindewolf, Otto H.
schist
schizophrenia, schizophrenic
schizotypicality
Schliemann, Heinrich
Schorr, Edward
Schramm, David
Sciaparelli
science
science fiction
Science, Organ of the American Association for the Advancement of Science
scientific espionage
Scotia Sea
scripture
Scrope, George Poulett
sculpture, ancient
sea feature
sea level
Sea level changes in
seafloor exploration
seafloor, spreading
seamount
season, seasonal
Second Millennium BC
secret word
secularism
sediment
sedimentary meteorite
sedimentation
sedition & science
seed
seismic discontinuity
seismic sea wave
seismism
seismology
Selene
self awareness
self control
self destructiveness
self fulfillment
self-rule
Selimiye
Selye, Hans
semantics
Semele
semiconductor
Semiotics
semite
Seneca
Senegal
Senmut
Sennacherib
sense( s)
separation of heaven & earth
serpent
Serpent mound
serpentine
Servan, lake
Set, Seth
settlement, primeval
Seuss, H. E.
Sewa
Sewalich Hills
sex
sexual selection
sexuality
Seychelles
shadow
Shakespeare
shale
Shaman
Shamash
Shamayim
Shansi Loess region
Shapley, Harlow
sheath, electric
Sheldrake, R.
Shelton, John S.
Sherman Glacier, AK
Shiaparelli, Giovanni V.
shield volcano
Shimkunas
Shinto
Ship rock
Shishak
Shiva
Shklovskii, I. S.
shock
shock metamophism
shock therapy
Shocked quartz
shoreline
sial
Siberia
Siberian craters
Sicily
Sieff, Martin
Sierra foothills sand blanket, CA
Sierra Leone
sign
sign language
Sigri, petrefied forest
Sihkism
silica, silicate
silicon
silification
silt
silver
Simiriyan, tell
simple harmonic motion, SHM
Simpson, George G.
Simpson, John, A.
simultaneous havoc
sin
Sinai
Sinanthrupus
Singer, Fred
sink
sinkhole
sinking land
Sinn
Sirius
Sisthrus
Sithylemenkat, lake
Siwalik hills
size
Sizemore, Warner
Skidi Pawnee
sky
sky mimicry
sky movement
sky-gods
Slabinsky, Victor
slavery
Slavs
sleep
Sleeping Bear dunes
slip fault
Slovensky Raj
Smart, W. M.
smelting
smite
Smith, William
Smokey Valley, NV
snake
Snake River Canyon
social imprinting
social invention
social science
socialism
Society For Interdisciplinary Studies (London), SIS
society over time
sociology
Socrates
Soda Lake, Chad
sodium chloride
Sodom
soft landing
soil
solar antapex
solar flare
Solar magnetic field
solar mansion"
Solar motion
solar power
solar prominence
solar radar
solar size
solar storm
Solar System
solar wind
Solaria Binaria
solid
Solinus
Solomon
Solomon's temple
Solon
solstice
solution, chemical
Somaliland
songs, sacred
sonic boom
Soos Springs, Czechoslovakia
soot in sediments
Sophist
Sorenson, I.
Sorokin, Pitrim
Sothic dating
Soufriere volcano
sound, catastrophic
South Africa
South America
South Carolina
South China Sea
South Dakota
South Pole
South Sea Islands
South-East Asia
Soviet Union
space exploration
space infra-charge
space medicine
space plasma
space science
space, concept of
space-charge sheath
space-time
Spain
Spangler, George W.
Spanish Sahara
Spanos
spark, electrical
Sparkling Goat"
Sparta, Spartan
specialization
species
specific charge ratio
specific gravity
spectre
spectroscopy
spectrum
spectrum class of stars
spectrum measurement
speech
speech disorders
speleothem
Spencer, Herbert
sperm
Sphinx
Spinden
spirituality
Spitzbergen
Spokane Flood
sport
spring
Spring Equinox
Sri Lanka
St. Elmo's Fire
St. Gervais, France
St. Lawrence River
stability, constancy
Stag dance
stalactite
stalagmite
Stalinism
stampede
standard atmosphere
standard geologic column
Stanley, Steven M.
star
star as pointed emblem
star dunes, W Algeria
star emblem
statics
statistics
statitc electrification
Stecchini, Livio
Steibing, Wm.
Steinhaur, Loren C.
stellar evolution
stellar population
stellar structure
Stengler, William
Steno, Nicholas Surinam
Stenson, Niels
Stephanos, Robert
stereotyping
Stetson, -.
Stevanson, ?. ?.
Still, Elmer G.
stimulus-responce
stoicism
stone
Stone Age
Stone calendar
stone circle
Stone Mountain, Georgia
Stonehenge
stones, falling
strata, statification
stratigraphy
stratographic column
stratosphere
stream channel
striation
strike
string dunes, Arabia
Stromboli, volcano
strontium
structure
structure of nature
Stube, -.
styx
subatomic particle
subduction
sublimation
submarine canyon
submarine mountain
submarine seep
subsidence
succession of gods
Sudbury, Ontario
Suess, Eduard
Sugarloaf mountain
Suhr, E. George
suicide
sulfur compound
Sullivan, Walter
sulphur
Sumer, Sumerian
Sumner, William Graham
sun worship
Sun, James
Sun, myths & dances
Sun, Sol
Sunda Arc
sundial
sunken land
sunspot
super ego
Super Saturn
Super Uranus
superconductivity
supernatural
supernova
superstition
supression, devices of
supression, techniques of
Surabhi
Surtsey, Iceland
Surveyor-s
survival
survival of the fittest"
survivor
Sutherland Falls, NZ
Sutter Buttes, Marysville, CA
Swaddle, T. W.
Swanscombe Man
swastika
Sweden
Swift-Tuttle, Comet
Switzerland
Sybil
syllogism
symbol
symbolic logic
symmetry of form
symptom
Synagogue
synapse
synchronization of history
syncline
synodos, synodic period
synthetic Q-theory
Syria
Syrian-Palastinian Rift Valley
Syro-Palestine
systemic mutation
Szasz, Thomas



T
==================================================================
T'ien
Ta-hsueh Mountains
Taal Lake & Volcano
Taannek, tell
tabernacle
Tabernacle of Moses
Table Mountain
taboo
tail
Talbott, David N.
Talbott, George
Talbott, Stephen L.
Talmud & Midrash
talos
Talyche
Tamboro Volcano
Tamil
Tammuz
Taoism
tar sand
Tarse
tarsier
taxonomy
Taylor, Thomas
Teays River
Tecate Summit
technology, development of
technology, origin
Teilhard de Chardin, Pierre
Teishebaini
tektite
teleology
teleostei
telescope, optical
telescope, radio
tell
Temecula Valley
temperature
temple
Temple of Jerusalem
temple, archetecture
temple, origin
Temple, Robert
Ten Commandments
Tenerife, Canary Islands
tensile strength
Teotihuacan
tera-ampere
Terminal Cretaceous Catastrophe
Ternifine fossils
terra-cotta relief
Terrace, H. S.
terrestrial ecosystem
terrestrial methane
territory as claimed habitat
terror
Tertiary Period
Tesla, Nikola
test
test of time
test, general
test, of matter
test, philosophical
testing, mental
Tethyan Sea
Tethys belt
tetrapyrrole pigment
Teutonic religion
textual critiscism
texture & structure of rock
Tey Gawra
Tezcatlipoca
Thackrey, Ted
Thailand
Thales of Miletus
Thamud
Thanatos
Thenus
theology
theomachy
theophobia
theory
theotrophic
theotropy
Thera, Thira
therapsids
therapy
thermal energy
thermal expansion
thermal metamorphism
thermocline
thermodynamics, laws of
thermoluminescence in dating
thermonuclear reaction, fusion
thermosphere
Theseus
Thira
tholos
Thom, Rene
Thomson, Sir William
Thor
thorium series
Thoth
thought
thought disorder
thought process, thinking
Thoum, Pharaoh Thao
Three Valley Gap gravels
throne
thrust
thrusting, rock
Thule
thunderstorm
Thutmose I
Thutmose II
Thutmose III
Tiahuanaco
Tiamat-Apsu
Tibet
tidal bore
tidal flat
tidal friction
tide
Tiglath Pileser III
Tigris River
Tikal
till, glacial
tilting, axial
Timaeus
time
time of humanization
time, current measurements of
time, disclosure in rocks
time, disclosure in statigraphy
time, perception of
time, physiological clock
time, psychology of
timescale
Timna
tin
Tiryns
Titan
titanotheres
Tithonius Lacus
Titicaca, Lake
Tiubergen, Nickolaos
Tlachtli
Tlaloc
Tlazolteotl
Toba lake, Indonesia
tohu-bohu
tomb
Tompkins, Peter
tool
topography
Torah
tornado, whirlwind & waterspout
torque
torus
totem, totemism
toungues, speaking in
Tower of Babel"
town plan
toxicity, plutonium
trace element
tradition
tragedy
Trainor, Lynn
transactive matrix
Transarctic Mountains
translation
transmission of brain messages
transmutation
transmutation of chemical elements
transparency of water
trap, petroleum
trauma
tree
tree, cosmic
tree-ring dating
trenche, submarine
trepidation
Tresman, Harold
Triassic Period
Triassic-Jurassic Boundary
tribe, tribal
tribology
Trinil faunal zone
tripod cauldron
Triton
Triton, Lake
Trojan asteroids
Trojan Wars
tropics
tropism
troposphere
trough
Troy
truth
truth, in science & sociology
Tsaidan Basin
tsunami
Tsunoda, Tadanobu
Tuba, Lake
Tucson Mountains, AZ
Tula
Tunguska Explosion
turbidity current
turbulance, aquatic
turbulence, atmosphere
turbulence, lithic
Turfan Depression
Turin Papyrus
Turkey
Turkistan
Turkmenian
Turman, B. W.
turpentine
Twelve Tribes of Israel
Two Creeks Interglacial Stage
Tycho's nova
Tyndal, John
Typhon
typhoon
typology
Tyr
Tyrannosaurus
Tyrrhenia



U
==================================================================
U. S. Northeast Coast
Ubeidiya
Ugarit
Uke-mochi-no-kami
Ukko
ultramafic chemistry
ultrasonic
ultraviolet
Ulysses
Umbgrove, J. H. F.
uncertainty principle
unconformity, cartographical
unconformity, classificatory
unconformity, geological
unconscious
undersea exploration
unidentified flying objects, UFO
unified field theory
unified science
uniformitarian, uniformitarianism
universal language
Universe, development of
Universe, dynamics of
Universe, origin
Universe, structure of
unseen body
Upham, Warren
uplift
Ur
Uralian Geosyncline
Urania, age of
uranium
uranium-thorium-lead dating
Uranus Minor
Uranus-g, as god
Uranus-p, as planet
Uranus-p, satellites of
Urartu
urban revolution
Urey, Harold C.
Ursa Major constellation
utopia
Uweinat
Uxmal




V
==================================================================
vacuum
Vail, Isaac
Vajrapani
Van Allan radiation belts
van Andel, Tjeerd
van Flandern, Thomas C.
van Oosterhout, G. W.
Van, Lake
Vanderpool, Eugene, Sr.
vapor pressure
vaporization
variation, biological
Varuna
varve
varve, dating by
varve, deposits in
Vaucluse, Fontaine de
Vaughn, Raymond
Veda, Vedic
Vedism
Velikovsky, Immanuel
velocity
velocity of light
Venezuela
Venus, comet
Venus-g
Venus-g, mythology
Venus-p
Venusia, Age of
Venuturi Harbor, Tijuana River
Veracruz erratics, Mexico
Verdon Gorge, France
vermin
Vernal Equinox
Vesuvius
Vico, Giambattista
Victoria, Australia, Lake Nyanza
Victoria, Lake, Africa
Vietnam
Vijin, mexican bullcart
Vilks, -.
Villanovan
violence
virgin birth
Virgin River, NV
virus
viscosity
Vishnu, Visnu
Vissidhi-Maggia
visual agnosia
visual binary
Vita-Finzi, Claudio
Vitaliano, Dorothy
vitrified structures
Vitryas
vocalization
void
volatility
volcanic surge cloud
volcanism, explosive
volcano light
voltage
voluntarism
von Buch, Leonard
Von Fange, Eric
Vredefort Structure
Vsekhsviatskii, Sergi K.
vulcanism




W
==================================================================
Wabar craters
Waddenzee, Netherlands
Wadjak fossils
Walker Pass impact cones, CA
Wallace, Alfred Russel
Wanlesa, Harold R.
warfare
Warlow, Peter
Warner's Ranch sand hills
Warwick, James, W.
wassail
water
water depositions, UT
water transport
water, effects
water, origin of
water, World resources of
Watson, Alan
wave, in physics
wave, seismic
wave, tidal
wavelength
Wealden Series
weather
weather dynamics
weathering, rocks
Weaver, Warren
Webb, Willis L.
Weber, Max
Wegener, Alfred
weight
weights & measures
Weiner, J. S.
welding
well
welt
West Frisian Islands
West Indies
Westcott, Roger
Western cordilleras
Westfall, Richard S.
Whakarewarewa Thermal Area, NZ
whale
whammy
Wheeler, Mortimer, R. F.
Whelton, Clark
Whipple, Fred
whirl wind
whistling atmospheric
Whiston, William
White, J. P.
Whitney, J. D.
Whorf, Benjamin Lee
Whyte, Martin A.
Wickenberg flood gravel, AZ
Wickramasinghe, D. T.
Willamette Valley
Willis, B.
Wilson, Colin & A. T.
Wilson, J. Tuzo
Winchell, Alexander
wind
wind and water anomalies
wind tunnel
wine-making
Winsconsin glacial stage
Wise, D. U.
wiseman
witch
Wituratersrand system
Witwatersrand formation
Wolf of Rome"
Wolfe, Irving
Wollin, Goesta
women
Wondjina pictures
Wong, Kee Kuong
Wonguri
Wonguri ceremonies
wood, preserved
Wood, Robert Muir
Woodmoappe, John
Woodward, John
Wooley, Leonard
word
work
world government
World Order
World Tree
World, celestial archetypes
Worrad
worship
Worzel, J. Lamar
Wotan
Wreschener, Ernst
Wright, Frederick G.
writing
Wyoming


X
==================================================================
x-ray burst
x-ray source
x-ray style, in Art
xenophobia




Y
==================================================================
Yahweh
Yamato mountains
Yangtze River, Yellow River
Yayanos, Aristes
year, calendar
year, cermonies of
year, concept & calendar
Year, Great
Yellowstone National Park
YHWH
yin-yang
yoga
Yosemite National Park
Yosemite Valley
Yuba River, CA
Yucatan karst
yuga
Yugoslavia
Yukatan
Yukon Territory, Canada
Yule



Z
==================================================================
Zagros Mountains
zedec
Zeus
Ziegler, Jerry L.
ziggurat
zinc
Zinjanthropus
Zion
zodiac
zodiacal light
Zoroaster
Zysman, Milton














COSMIC HERETICS:

by Alfred de Grazia


A Personal History of Attempts
to Establish and Resist Theories of Quantavolution
and Catastrophe in the Natural and Human Sciences,
1963 to 1983.

by
Alfred de Grazia

Metron Publications
Princeton, N. J.

Notes on first printed version of this book

ISBN: 0-940268-08-6

Copyright (c) 1984 by Alfred de Grazia

All rights reserved Printed in the U. S. A. Limited first edition of 300 copies.


Address:

Metron Publications,
P. O. Box 1213,
Princeton, N. J.,
08542, U. S. A.

Cosmic Heretics was processed by the Princeton University Computing Center, using the processing
language called Script.

Photocomposition, printing, and binding were accomplished by the Princeton University Printing
Services.

The text is set in 10 and 9 point Times Roman.

The Author thanks Rick Bender, Steve Pearson, and Skip Plank for managing ably and considerately
the production of this and other works of the Quantavolution Series, and also thanks Marion
Carty for her contributions to the designs and formatting of the books.

On the cover, Isodensitometer tracing of comet Morehouse 1908 III, in J. Rahe et al., Atlas of
Cometary Forms (Washington: NASA, 1962), 63-4.



This book
is dedicated
to whoever figures in it,
whether or not
by name.


The most elementary books of science betrayed the inadequacy of old implements of thought.
Chapter after chapter closed with phrases such as one never met in older literature:

"The cause of this phenomenon is not understood;"

"science no longer ventures to explain causes;"

"the first step towards a causal explanation still remains to be taken;"

"opinions are very much divided;"

"in spite of the contradictions involved;"

"science gets on only by adopting different theories, sometimes contradictory."

Evidently the new American would need to think in contradictions, and instead of Kant's famous
four antinomies, the new universe would know no law that could not be proved by its anti-law. To
educate -- one's self to begin with -- had been the effort of one's life for sixty years; and
the difficulties of education had gone on doubling with the coal-output, until the prospect of
waiting another ten years, in order to face a seventh doubling of complexities, allured one's
imagination but slightly.

From :

The Education of Henry Adams : An Autobiography.

Privately published in 1906, in 100 copies, and sent to interested persons for comment. General
publication ensued in 1918. In 1975 republished by Berg: Dunwoody, Georgia.














COSMIC HERETICS
by

ALFRED DE GRAZIA

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TITLE-PAGE

FOREWORD:

IN SEARCH OF TIMES PAST


PART ONE

1. ROYAL INCEST
2. THE PRODIGAL ARCHIVE
3. CHEERS AND HISSES
4. A PROPER RESPECT FOR AUTHORITY
5. THE BRITISH CONNECTION


PART TWO

6. HOLOCAUST AND AMNESIA
7. FROM VENUS WITH LOVE
8. HOMO SCHIZO MEETS GOD


PART THREE

9. NEW FASHIONS IN CATASTROPHISM
10. ABC'S OF ASTROPHYSICS
11. CLOCKWORK


PART FOUR

12. THE THIRD WORLD OF SCIENCE
13. THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK
14. THE FOIBLES OF HERETICS


PART FIVE

15. THE KNOWLEDGE INDUSTRY
16. PRECURSORS OF QUANTAVOLUTION
17. THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE


EPILOGUE














COSMIC HERETICS:

by Alfred de Grazia


FOREWORD



IN SEARCH OF TIMES PAST

I did not obtain Alfred de Grazia's materials for this book without remonstrance and persiflage.
I had thought that he would be pleased to have someone writing about his activities, especially
someone like myself who could be counted upon for sympathy, and indeed intended to do so, in
several volumes, no less. Strange, for Immanuel Velikovsky had responded to me in the same way!

When I muttered something about reminiscence and the consolations of old age, he was primed for
the retort, and I learned that Leonard Woolf had written his autobiography in his eighties, in
five volumes, and Woolf was then old enough to be his father, and Bertrand Russell at the same
age in three volumes. And I had better read them.

Furthermore, said he, I have a lot to recount, think of it, a boyhood spent sniffing the stench
of the Chicago stockyards, shivering in the icy blasts off the prairies, a small critter's
glance up the skirts of the Roaring Twenties. Then the University of Chicago in the heyday of
Robert Maynard Hutchins. And more, seven campaigns of World War II, and still more, an island of
the Aegean Sea, an experimental college in the Swiss Alps, intelligent women, singular, even
beautiful, women, even beautiful men, for that matter. No, I can't let you take it away, there's
too much to say.

Let me try, I said, there'll be no conflict of interest. I'll hew to the line of the Cosmic
Heretics as they tried to break into the halls of science. It's got to be dull. It'll save you
doing the chore. I can't take in your enfants terribles or your politicking, your love affairs
or your friends who escaped your involvement in cosmic heresies. Or your poetry or attempts at
educational revolution. No Naxos, not the beautiful ideas by half. No grueling trips, failures,
pains, unless they're cosmical. No Vietnam, no University life.

Then Deg began to reproach me for taking a person's life out of its context, arguing that you
have to talk about everything to say the truth about anything, whereupon I argued that no field
of science could exist if most of everything weren't left out of the investigation of single
thing.

Well certainly, he granted, you'll have a better chance of excising the insignificant details of
life. Yes, exactly, I said, but I thought there's the problem and the genius of biography,
fixing upon the details which may be the fulcrum of a change of life, precisely the sort of
thing that is often lost in sociology and history.

Where will it start, where will it end, he wondered. I'll start, I said, at the time when you
met Immanuel Velikovsky, the beginning of 1963, and carry it down to the publication of your
Quantavolution Series, that is, the beginning of 1984. Not in chronological order of course. The
story will lurch from side to side and pitch and roll.

Using your iconoclastic word "quantavolution" will help to define the dramatis personae. If a
person's been observed by you amidst the melee provoked by the claim that nature and mankind
have been fashioned by disaster, then that person belongs to the cast of characters.

Deg told me that the cosmic heretics were many, and their number would grow with the acceptance
of the heresy. But, he warned me, if the heresy were to fail, I would be guilty of slandering
decent citizens by inclusion. In either event, he said, history will be rewritten; it always is.

To whom will you dedicate your book, he asked, which was tantamount to giving his blessing to
the project. To the Cosmic Heretics, naturally, I answered Anyhow, I have already taken care of
Velikovsky with the dedication of my first book in the field. V. died four years ago, seventeen
years after we met, and before we met had done almost all of his writing. For my own part,
previously I had done a lot in political behavior and methodology, but nothing that might be
called quantavolution. It was a sociological problem that brought us together in the first
instance -- the reception system of science I called it afterwards. Although I might have known
better, I almost immediately entered into the substantive theory of catastrophe; I couldn't
resist the challenge. And I am just about finished now. (I grinned, and so did he.) I'm
beginning to repeat myself, too, so it's not a bad time to end with your book. By the way, have
you read everything that I've ever written? Yes, of course. Just wondering, he mused, because V.
tried never to talk to a person about his works who hadn't read the pertinent volumes. It makes
sense and saved his time.

I don't feel strongly about it: my books are children who have gone off somewhere, on their own
responsibility. I don't possess them, though I ask that they not be mistreated -- the same as I
would for other people's children. Who is entirely read, anyhow, he asked of me almost angrily,
as if I had raised the subject.

I said I didn't know. Once I had met a psychologist who had read the 24 volumes of Freud's
collected works. Still, commented Deg, some of his pieces escaped the Hogarth Press. William
Yeats dedicated his autobiography "to those few people mainly personal friends who had read all
that I have written," but probably no one qualified. It's good that nobody has read everything
of anybody. It might abet the idea that where the pen stops the person vanishes. Rather,
although the powers of expression tower above life, life rampages uncontrollably below.














COSMIC HERETICS: Part 1 :

by Alfred de Grazia


CHAPTER ONE


ROYAL INCEST
Alfred de Grazia was entering his forty-fourth year when he met a self-styled cosmic heretic,
Immanuel Velikovsky, who was already sixty-seven, and for the next twenty years a wide band of
life's spectrum was colored by their relationship. As with a love affair, all that happened in
the beginning presaged what would happen later, stretched out on the scale of time, themes
doubling back upon themselves, attractions and reservations never to be erased, continuing
accumulations.

The men changed, the world of science changed, too, and also the political world, yet this
latter less; for, after all, one man died and the other grew old, whereas science and politics,
those statistical behemoths of collective behavior, go on forever, compounded of many millions
of individuals whose average age hardly varies, exhibiting trends whose progress, if it could be
called such, is hardly discernible and might indeed have constituted a regression. At least so
it seemed to these two men who were trying to affect the science and politics of their time.

Velikovsky died a heretic, with scattered generally unfavorable press, while his friend de
Grazia moved on with a spirit that could be called existential, convinced as before that
politics (and he insisted upon regarding science, too, as politics and often included politics
in psychopathology) -- that politics, although probably irredeemable, was the elemental hydrogen
of human behavior, no matter how compounded into life styles.

As the winter days of 1962 became 1963 in Princeton, New Jersey, 08540 U. S. A., families and
friends gathered into clusters like the last of the leaves, so the half-consciously and driven
by eddies of customs and calendar, de Grazia saw more of his friends like Livio Catullus
Stecchini and of his brother Sebastian. He did not know Velikovsky, and if he had been asked
about him, he would have replied that he had never heard of him.

This may appear strange, considering that Deg was to be numbered, by whatever scales a social
psychologist might invent to distinguish the "informed and involved" from the "ignorant and
apathetic," as a high-scorer on information and involvement. He had enough children in the
Princeton school system, a half-dozen, to catch the sound of names from all quarters. He spent
part of each week in New York City and at Greenwich village where, of all places, the name of
Velikovsky might have been brutted about. He had since 1957 published and edited a magazine, the
American Behavioral Scientist, which pretended to cover those matters that were or should be the
concern of social scientists. He personally

scanned a hundred and fifty magazines in the social sciences and current affairs each month. He
had many students, several of them close friends. His parents and the families of two brothers
were living most of the time at Princeton.

He was not socially pretentious, nor a prideful man, not a University snob, and had had to pawn
his professional reputation several times on behalf of scholarly and political iconoclasm.
Withal, when it came down to it, he claimed that he had never heard of a man about whom a
million or more Americans could have delivered him a rancorous account. One feature that makes
mass society a horror-show is the actual anonymity of the famous. (However, the mass scatoma of
social realities may be a worse feature.)

This he confessed when Livio Stecchini, as they walked a along Nassau street on that cold day,
brought up the matter, disjointedly, as happens with men walking down the street to no end,
intellectuals with minds chock-full of oddly related and far-off affairs, old friends whose
thoughts needed no introduction nor conclusion. Knowing the two men, I imagine that their
conversation would have gone something like this:

There is a man in Princeton with good material on the scientific establishment...
Cosmogonist... They suppressed his books." "What do you mean, suppressed his books ?" "They
smeared him." "Like Reich? Like Semmelweis?" "Yes." "What does he do?" "He lives here. He
writes." "About what?" "Mythology, astronomy, the Bible, ancient catastrophes." "What does he
live on?" "His books. They are very well sold." "That's not our topic." "No. The ABS could take
up the sociological side. It's rich.

Deg was skeptical. Although his American Behavioral Scientist would stop at nothing, every
scientist had his one or two little scandals of defamation, every professor his Dean's crime,
his edgy paranoia, and you had to take his word for it. It was the same in politics, dirty
tricks everywhere and defamation as a matter of course. As for the juggernaut of science, it
rolled along smashing unconscionably the god's celebrants who crowded in upon it from all sides
with fresh ideas and reputations.

His materials are rich." Again that remark. "Really?" "I can introduce you. We can go to his
house. He lives on Hartley Avenue." "Down near the Lake." "To take a look at his stuff."
"Maybe... What's his name?" "Velikovsky." "Never heard of him.

A few days later Stecchini received a phone call from Deg. Deg had been to dinner at Sebastian's
home. There was the usual babble and movement afterwards. He circled around the front room with
its piles of papers and open bookshelves, pausing at the one where books of high mobility and
heterogeneity sunned themselves for a few days. He picked out a forcefully jacketed book,
Oedipus and Akhnaton, the author: Velikovsky. First the large photograph of the author, then the
flyleaf, then the , then the index

-- he is grasping now for the thesis: the ill-fated incestuous Oedipus was none other than the
Egyptian monotheistic pharaoh Akhnaton --more riffling of pages -- the small definite sparking
of the book browser.

"What's this?" He poked the book at Sebastian. "Any good ?" Sebastian was non-committal:
probably he had not read it. "Mind if I borrow it ?"

He began to read it that evening. It was "True Detective," connecting two eminent figures never
before joined. He finished it the next day.

How did he find the time to read it so promptly? A man who attends to a wife, a passel of kids,
a dog, a cat, a station wagon, a large house with many doors and windows to mind, fireplaces to
dampen, a busy telephone, a fat folder marked "action now", with half a dozen jobs, including a
professorship and an editorship, with a propensity to daydream, and in that American society
which tries in a hundred ways to pry into one's time and makes life tough for readers, and
needing seven hours of sleep -- how does he read a book? They say, "When you want something
done, go to a busy man." His urges are compelling.

This act of devouring the book was typical of Deg. He would seize things out of his life-stream
like a bear grabbing fish and do something with them, a compulsion to undertake and a compulsion
to complete, not unlike Velikovsky, and the tie between the two men had something to do with
V.'s recognition of this similarity, and perhaps with his growing problem of completion after
the compulsion to take on matters lingered: but both men too sometimes had to drop affairs that
needed completion or stuck to them beyond their point of pay-off, beyond hope also, so I would
not stress the trait, and I even think that it may be so common as to be undistinguished.
Velikovsky had made wide turns in his life too, architecture, medical practice, psychoanalysis,
politics, and now all this catastrophism which had something of everything.

Outwardly, they differed most apparently. Deg of medium height and compact build, V. tall and
spare, the one with a midwestern back ground and accent, the other with a heavy Russian accent,
Jewish above all. To V outrage was a simple, direct emotion; Deg had the youngness of Americans
that comes from promiscuous outrage and wide dispersal of feelings inimical to authorities.
Pablo Picasso used to tell Gertrude Stein: "They are not men; they are not women; they are
Americans." So how could Deg become outraged at the enemies of V.? Living was parceled among
sporadic outrages; indignation cropped out all over the American landscape.

While I am at it, I might say something, too, about Deg's attitude to his own writing because
this also explains how he might view V.'s troubles. It is also about Gertrude Stein: " In those
days she never asked anyone what they thought of her work, but were they interested enough to
read it. Now she says if they bring themselves to read it they will be interested."

Victim of the Rule of Three, Deg added a first phrase: at first he thought what he wrote was
interesting and everyone should be required to read it. Then, after he had passed most of his
life in Gertrude Stein's second stage, he postulated a final stage, a nirvana where what he
wrote was objectively of interest but neither he nor anyone else should be interested to read
it.

This is too early to be analyzing character, but I cannot refrain from another comparison, a
fatal difference. Whatever V. completed, he fiercely possessed; whatever Deg completed he
relinquished. This made their cash flows, you might say, very different. And their advice to
each other very different. Deg was saying to V.. "Give it away. Let it go !" and V. to Deg,
baffled; "Why didn't you hold on to that?" Moreover V. overvalued whatever he gave, and
undervalued what he received.

Halfway through the book -- before Akhnaton had espoused his own mother. Queen Ty, Deg was
committed to V., the author. A literary tour de force of the rarest kind, it succeeds in making
a single person out of two of the most famous heroes of antiquity. Nor are they of the so
numerous type of military heroes. They are the active substances of the raging intellect,
flourishing amongst squirmy snakes of psychology and religion. Should the temporal sequence be
right, then the book would be valid, that Moses preceded Akhnaton and Akhnaton came before
Oedipus. The legendary, historical, psychological and archaeological evidence marched in
brilliant composition and concordance on behalf of V.'s thesis. That Moses had come first
follows from V.'s book, Ages in Chaos, already a decade old, which was to be read and to
convince Deg in a matter of weeks. That the Oedipus legend developed after the history of
Akhnaton was established in the book itself to Deg's satisfaction, and he confirmed it once
again when it came time to write The Disastrous Love Affair of Moon and Mars, years later.

By then he was convinced of V.'s theory that Greek Dark Ages were in fact several centuries that
had never existed, and then, within a couple of years, the masterful work of young Eddie Schorr
effectively closed up the gap in two articles on Mycenae, Pylos, Troy, Gordion, and other sites.
Velikovsky himself here speculated that Nikmed of Ugarit became Cadmus the founder of Thebes and
carried the Oedipus legend from the East to the North. V. 's reconstructed chronology closed the
centuries like a vise, to where Akhnaton could readily reach to Nikmed and Nikmed to Cadmus and
out of it all came the Oedipus Rex of Thebes, the fabled character who gave name to the most
popular concept of Sigmund Freud, and it was Freud who had brought on all of this work by his
psychoanalytic disciple, but had himself missed both the precession of Moses and the identity of
Oedipus as Akhnaton, although he had written directly about all three figures.

The book was the best produced of V.'s which were ordinarily drab. Oedipus and Akhnaton carried
many fine illustrations, a superior jacket, an excellent typeface, and good printing paper.
Still, it did not sell as well as any of a dozen detective novels of the day, and, vibrant and
valid, was marked by its publisher for abandonment in 1984.

Deg could be sure that practically none of his hundreds of friends and colleagues, students and
acquaintances had yet read the book or would ever do so... But then he, too, had written books
of which none but the textbooks had sold over a thousand copies. And he could recite the names
of many distinguished scholars whose books had sold less. The dream of best-selling great books
nevertheless carries on, a myth, deadly to most and profitable to a very few.











COSMIC HERETICS: Part 1 :

by Alfred de Grazia


CHAPTER TWO


THE PRODIGAL ARCHIVE

The other book, that which won Velikovsky fame, income, and scientific disgrace, was a happy
accident of publishing. It could hardly have become a best-seller on its merits; very few books
do, and this one was not easy to read or flamboyant. Worlds in Collision was reluctantly
published, deceptively publicized, and foolishly attacked. It was written in the 1940's, after
Ages in Chaos had been completed and had been circulating among publishers and collecting one
rejection after another. Evidently the later work had the better chance, because of its larger,
more explosive message.

But Worlds in Collision, too, was rejected time after time, this all during a period of high
prosperity when publishing company shares boomed on the stock market and practically anything
might be brought out. Velikovsky was desperate. One evening he walked the Upper West Side of
Manhattan with Elisheva, telling her of how he would buy a typesetting machine and they would
compose the book at home and he would sell it himself. He would have done so.

All of his publications before then -- there were not many -- had been in some sense subsidized,
the articles appearing in psychoanalytic journals, supported by small intellectual circles, the
pamphlets appearing under the shadowy imprint of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem when this
was only a few dedicated utopians enjoying an impetus from Simon Velikovsky's purse. V. knew
something about publishing, as he did about many things.

V. would never have been "himself", a revered image to countless readers and a buffoon to
scientists and scholars, had he not fallen into the crazy typical pattern of a popular author.
He was able to catch the attention of John J. O'Neill, Science Editor of the New York Herald
Tribune, who was thrilled by the manuscript and wrote about it in an article of August 11, 1946.
James Putnam, an Editor of Macmillan Company, took it up, praised it among his acquaintances,
processed it through several readers, and achieved a favorable vote. A chapter of the book was
sold to the Reader's Digest and other selections to Collier's Magazine. Collier's, struggling
for circulation, took a large ad in the Herald Tribune, headlining that modern science had now
proved the Bible correct, while the Reader's Digest carried the story of the Sun's standing
still at Beth-Horon by the command of Joshua, so as to let the Israelites finish off their
enemies.

Both stories and the publicity attendant upon them played directly to a large audience of
bemused Jews and "Old Testament" Christians, including what would be called creationists and
millennialists. Then, even before its readers could discover that it was not quite what they had
expected, the wrath of scientists descended upon the book. Velikovsky's figure, until then only
that of a minor personage in psychoanalytic reading circles, was elevated to a pyre of fame and
burned to the ground. Macmillan hastily sold its rights to Doubleday publishers.

Of all this that occurred between 1950 and 1962, Deg learned upon his first meetings with V. "I
want you to read everything," he said and handed over to him two monumental manuscripts entitled
Stargazers and Gravediggers. "Everything" meant also Worlds in Collision and Ages in Chaos. Deg
complimented him upon the Oedipus book and wondered at the documentation piled upon the living
floor for examination.

Velikovsky wondered, too for none came to him as innocently as his new acquaintance. He was
thankful but also dismayed at this walking effect of the suppression of his books. (It hardly
occurred to him that his book might have sold under a thousand copies if it had been published
by a university press without the publicity that he himself found rather obnoxious, in which
case practically everyone might have been expected to be ignorant of it, but the ilk of Deg
might have known it).

V.'s correspondence was still heavy after a dozen years. His readers sent him every scrap of
publicity that they found and he kept it all and tried to reply, far more so than any other
author of Deg's acquaintance. A large public was out there somewhere, a heterogeneous network of
bright students, people suspicious of the scientific and academic establishments, Bible
believers in profusion.

Mrs. V. was present; she tried always to be on hand when visitors came and to Deg at least, hers
was always a welcome presence. V. kept nothing from Elisheva that he was not also keeping from
his visitors. Sheva's grand piano stood in the next room, between a desk loaded with papers and
a great cabinet stuffed with books. In the front room were couches and chairs, none too
comfortable, and a large coffee table accommodating the tea, crackers and cheese, cakes and dry
Israeli white wine that would be brought forth. There were ashtrays, too, for then many were
smokers, not V., for he had quit years before after he had suffered a stomach cancer, whose
removal had forced a lightened diet as well. Oriental rugs stretched across the floors.

The ponderous front porch let in little light, nor did the rooms have much place for an elegant
style; or perhaps they reflected an empiricist, not a philosopher. Their charm depended upon the
objects in themselves: Sheva's piano and the music resting on it, her strong marble sculptures,
several handsome and less useful books on art and archaeology that had entered lately, like
those at Sebastian's from which Deg had plucked Oedipus and Akhnaton.

From the porch, one penetrated into the sitting room through heavy gray stone walls in five
stages: first up the flagstone walk through thick bushes, then up the stairs, then through the
first heavy door into a tiny hall, then another heavy door, then an anteroom with a mail-
cluttered table and clothes-closet, and finally into the front room.

Elisheva, like her husband, had a strong character and great energy. She had large hands and a
solid body, maintained a direct and friendly stare through thick glasses, and was perhaps of his
age. She had mastered the arts of music and sculpture. Perhaps all the laborious functionalism
of its occupants gave the rooms a lack-luster belying the considerable value of their contents.
Poor cooks have dazzling automated kitchens; disemployed people have smart interiors. Much later
on, when he finally released his books to Dell Publishers for publication in paperback and
received a hundred thousand dollars, V. went into a fit of remodeling, building a garage and new
airy light-struck rooms, redistributing books and papers for greater efficiency, buying flashy
cars for himself and his grandchildren, reminding Deg of Parkinson's "Law", that, as an Empire
enters upon its finale, it builds extravagantly.

Deg had often to consider, when he taught courses on leadership and creativity, whether a
person's appearance correlated with his mind and effectiveness. The stereotype is, of course,
"Yes, it does." A great general has a martial air, a scholar looks like a parsnip, an athlete is
muscle-bound, and so on.

Deg had arrived at the all-answering concept of sociology -- the mutual interaction of physique
and role. Little Napoleon looked more imperial than tall de Gaulle, who was an obstinate dumb-
bell. But de Gaulle thought he looked like a Great Leader and worthy husband to La Belle France,
and played the part and became a great leader. (" France is a widow," Pompidou orated when De
Gaulle died.)

"The Russian Jews are the handsomest of all," Stephanie Neuman told Deg, and he, looking at her,
had of course to agree. The best explanation of the phenomenon comes in a note by V. himself,
published posthumously. The "lost Tribes of Israel" had been moved North, and passed through the
Caucasus between the Black and Caspian Seas into the lower Volga River Basin. There they mingled
genetically with the ever-changing population, with always at least a critical fraction
maintaining the Judaic culture-core. Deg had won a piece of the action; his wife's family, with
its cluster of Teutonic cognomens - Oppenheim, Lauterbach, Weinstein, Fleishacker, etc. - had
managed some handsome blonde alternatives in the aftermath of the Diaspora.

"But see here..." to use a common interjection of V. Velikovsky stretched his large spare frame
a full two meters, his face will all its big bones and high forehead was clean-shaven and
forceful, his large brown eyes open and direct behind his reading glasses, his movements from
his favorite low chair, up and down, across the room, were untiring and easy, not graceful but
neither awkward. His voice was sure, slow, deep, his words marvelously well-chosen, uttered in
the language that he knew least well of Russian, Hebrew, and German, while Arabic and French
came after. He couldn't match Stecchini, who had these, plus Italian, Latin, Greek and Arabic,
plus the dead languages of Babylon and Egypt, while Deg with his modest portions of French and
Italian and smattering of German, Latin, and Spanish was in a pitiable state.

V.'s English was formal, never Americanized; his dignity forbade slang or the vernacular, though
it amused him to have the vernacular explained. Deg was fond of H. L. Mencken and played loose
with the language when let off the field of science. "Sand-bag them," he remarked when V was
expostulating over the attempts of a panel of the American Association for the Advancement of
Science to get hold of his finalized paper without revealing to him their final replies to it.
"What does 'sand-bag' mean?" V asked. "It's what thugs use to hit people with from behind. Let
them have the paper; let them rewrite their papers; then withdraw your paper." Then he explained
how in some impolite poker games, if you have a good hand, you sometimes pass on it, enticing
the other players to bet on their own hands, then double their bets. That's sand-bagging, too.

V. wrote well, better than Deg, I think, although he denied it and had to make liberal use of
copy-editors. For he explained his every step carefully and was rarely abstract or harsh,
whereas Deg usually wrote condensedly, abstractly, and stridently.

Looking at V. in these first meetings in a more analytic way. Deg questioned whether a person so
physically modeled to the ideal expectation of a heroic figure could nevertheless be a genius
and not an actor, an honest victim and not a charlatan. Of what could V complain; he was famous;
his books sold by the tens of thousands; his messages had carried throughout the English-
speaking world, into several language-areas of the western world besides.

Deg flipped through the loose-leaf volumes as they talked. He could read fast and V. was
alternately suspicious and admiring of this facility. "I am a slow reader," he announced on
occasion. "Yes, but I don't have your memory," grumbled Deg. V. had a superb memory for details.
Deg gulped down batches of material, retained their forms, and excreted the details. This is
what happened when he read; the stuff was gobbled up by pre-existing forms.

Every detail of the volumes before them was remembered by V., though he could hardly have seen
most of it for some years. Every few pages contained another foolish review, comment or letter
by a scientist or historian or archaeologist. Just to be preserved and collected, side by side,
they damned themselves and each other as envious, illogical, irrelevant, ignorant, narrow, and
incompetent.

Why haven't you published this, it's great? he asked V. V. had strung together a large and
complicated story with only rare descriptions and without editorial comment; it was not
vainglorious or egotistic; the documents marched along by themselves, calling out their message
in turn. V. blew hot and cold on the idea of their publication. Mainly he feared legal action
were he to reprint letters several of which had come to him deviously. Of these Deg could not
feel sure, but he argued that persons in a public controversy in which their reputations were at
stake might publish private correspondence. A menacing letter from Professor Fred Whipple to the
Macmillan Company might be published, because it injured and defamed the author and was
associated with letters of the same type from other academicians. His publishers, Doubleday,
were unsure, said V.

In fact the volumes were not published until after his death. By then the whole Macmillan
archive of those years had been given to the New York Public Library and Warner Sizemore, who
knew the case as well as anyone alive, located them there, with all the papers that had been so
guarded for a few years. When Leroy Ellenberger reviewed them in 1983, he noted especially
Brett's account of the final interview with Velikovsky when the President of Macmillan informed
Velikovsky that Worlds in Collision could no longer be tolerated on the Macmillan list, but had
to be transferred out, and luckily Doubleday was ready to assume the risk. When asked how the
two versions of the meeting compared, Velikovsky's and Brett's, Ellenberger, who was by then
most sensitive to contradictions in the Velikovsky story, granted that substantially they
agreed, save that V had understandably portrayed himself as less shaken and more in command of
the situation than Brett had viewed him to be.

The materials that V. showed Deg were a sociologist's wishful dream. Deg decided immediately to
publish in the American Behavioral Scientist the story of science vs. scientism, as he put it.
He carried home the manuscripts and Worlds in Collision, which Velikovsky carefully autographed,
a little touch that Deg was unused to; books were books: he was never into first editions or
autographed copies, and in those days had to be reminded by his publishers that a page was
reserved for a dedication if he wished to use it.

The journalistic papers he hurried through and put aside. They would give an example here and
another there. Some readers no doubt would be astonished at the behavior of their sacred
scientists, but the case was mere basic social psychology. The scientists and their coterie of
publicists were behaving very much as might be expected in the face of disturbing theories, like
politicians, like administrators, bishops, and all other elites of organized networks.

He decided to take upon himself the most difficult task, the theoretical analysis of the system
that exuded injustice normally. The historical section would go to Stecchini and deal with
scientific precedents to V.'s catastrophism, an approach quite new to the discussions of a
decade earlier, and one which Stecchini, using the principle of contradictions, executed
beautifully, calling up Whiston, Boulanger, La Place and Kugler as unexpected witnesses on
behalf of the defendant. The straight history of the affair went to Ralph Juergens, who had been
introduced to Deg by V. as a mechanical engineer, much interested in electrical theory, who had
moved his family down from Ohio in order to be near to where V. was working; he was now a
scientific editor working in New York for McGraw Hill.

Juergens had published nothing; he knew the facts, however; he was a careful worker, Deg was
quick to note; he worked very hard; he held V.'s confidence (not easy to achieve) and won Deg's
sympathy and respect. No one else could have done the job without a year's study; even then it
would have had to be a historian of science, who would risk his career if he accepted the
challenge of the facts, or a publicist, such as Eric Larrabee, who would have produced a recital
much like Ralph's but probably too late for publication. As a matter of fact, his name came up
and V. reported that he had been under contract for years with Doubleday to do a book on the
controversy. No sooner had Deg's ABS decided to publish the story than V. got in touch with
Larrabee and prevailed upon him to sell the idea of an article to Harper's Magazine, which
Larrabee did, by virtue of an old connection there, and so wrote a piece that actually appeared
several weeks before the special issue of the ABS.

After examining the files on the case, Deg turned to reading Worlds in Collision, telling
himself that it might be wrong, harmful, mythical, distorted, and incompetent; still his
intuition was prompted by all that he had learned thus far: V. could not do a bad job on
anything. So he found the book was none of these things, and was not surprised. Then he worried
and never ceased to worry that his taking up the cause of V. came about because he thought V. to
be correct in his theories rather than because his rights were violated.

Worlds in Collision is a book in two parts, one on the Venus catastrophes, the second on the
Mars catastrophes. These conform to two sets of events that are claimed to have befallen the
world in the years around 1450 and 700 B. C., about seven hundred years apart. The planet Venus,
argued Velikovsky, began its career as a comet that probably exploded from the giant planet
Jupiter sometime, whether a few years or thousands of years before its disastrous encounters
with Earth. (V. never used B. C. preferring BCE, "Before the Common Era" or a simple negative
[as -1450], begrudging the calendar of world history to the Christians, which Deg agreed to in
principle but thought was only quibbling, given the huge contortions history has suffered.
Better he thought to settle on the year 2000 as the present, use B. P. back from this date, thus
to give us some standardization for a generation or so, or perhaps to settle upon 1919, the year
when the first association of the nations of all the world was formed, the League of Nations).

Flaming Venus passed with its huge cometary tail close by the Earth occasioning general disaster
by flood, fire, pestilence, electric shock, and fallouts of various materials, and incited a
horrendous fear that affected all areas of culture everywhere down to the present day. Mankind
lived virtually in a Venusian world for seven centuries, for other near passes occurred at 52-
year intervals, until the comet disturbed Mars, sent Mars to molest the Earth and Moon, and
brought a Martian period that endured for rather less than a century. All of this had severe and
prolonged after-affects geologically, biologically, and culturally.

V. endeavored to be exact, allowing the series of Mars incidents to occur between the years -776
and -687 on the basis of legends and historical-archaeological evidence from around the
Mediterranean and wherever else in the world it cropped up. For example, an incident of the year
-776 would be the founding of the Olympic Games, those sacred manifestations of aggressive
competitive sport that brought the Greek communities together and were said to have been founded
by Hercules, who has been identified by several scholars with the god Mars or Ares; an instance
of the year -687 would be the destruction by natural disaster of the army of the Assyrian
emperor Sennacherib while besieging Jerusalem.

Thus the bare plot. Its importance derives from the shock it gave to conventional natural
science and history, its extension of the use of legendary materials to reconstruct history, and
the excitement it caused among many people eager to escape the toils of modern science.

The most disturbing claim of Worlds in Collision was that the planet Venus as a comet approached
and devastated Earth. Several excellent writers, as I shall explain later, had claimed that
comets had devastated the Earth, and mathematical exercises on the putative effects of comets in
passages and collisions with Earth are conventionally acceptable. Not so planets, that are
believed to be fully and nicely bound to their present orbits. The sequence of thoughts occurred
to V: first, the Egyptian, accepted chronology is wrong and Moses preceded Akhnaton; next, at
the time of Exodus, there was heavy natural turbulence; third, the turbulence was incited from
the skies, and took numerous forms well recounted in legend and sacred scriptures; finally,
evidence came in rapidly from all parts of the world to support the idea that the planet Venus
was involved as prime cause. A mosaic of legends from the Near East, Greece, Italy, China, and
the Americas could be fashioned, and enough geological evidence might be assembled to tolerate
the suppositions of the legends.

V. was not as rooted in Newtonian and Darwinian prejudices as the typical Anglo-American
scholar. He could also contemplate ancient evidence without contempt. (A psychiatrist might
recall, "Ah yes, he loved and respected his father Simon who worked long for the revival of
Israel.") V. knew also that natural laws must rest upon evidence, not dogma; if evidence
contradicts the laws, the laws must change. The immensity of the topic; the difficulties in
finding and handling the data; the roundabout way in which the books were published; and many
other intervening and confusing variables concealed the essentially proper progression of V.'s
mind, which behaved in ways both psychologically understandable and logically proper. (Often,
private motives lead men scientifically astray; here, as sometimes happens, V.'s private motives
led him along the path to significant scientific theses and discoveries.)

To Deg's view, from the beginning, the ethical duty of science was clear. Confronted with V.'s
claims, the scientist should weigh the evidence, first, for the chronology, second for the
Exodus disasters, third for the exoterrestrial involvement, and finally for the identity of the
forces. In each case, there is, then, a probability, low or high, of validity. Actually the only
policy problem for science here is how much additional scientific energies should be directed at
the intriguing hypotheses. This implies the possibility of proving (disproving) them; and the
efforts required to raise the probabilities of valid answers to a respectable level.

In American politics and law, case after case had imprinted upon all concerned the notion of a
right to due process of law and to certain basic freedoms as distinct from the desirability or
correctness of a position.

There is a religious right, when forbidden by one's religion, to not salute the national flag;
there is a right to not confess to a criminal act. And so on.

Scientific behavior is not so clearly mannered. It is not governed by the coercive physical
force that gives more distinct form to the organs of the state. Also a general belief in
individualism among scientists, amounting to a kind of philosophical anarchism, makes each
scientist both judge and executor of his beliefs. Deg was enough of a philosopher and
practitioner of science to perceive a widespread belief, that a truth exists upon a subject and
that no consideration needs be given untruth or antitruth. There was, on the other hand, the
reputable principle that all scientific positions are basically hypothetical; nothing is proven
now and forever. And there was even the principle, espoused by many contemporaries, that there
are as many scientific truths as may be useful in solving a practical problem; in other words,
never mind the principle: perform the operation, and the principle, if the operation is
successful, will come trailing after.

But the vulgar and predominant belief is a belief in truth and antitruth, especially when
dealing with outsiders, and V., by this view, deserved no more than he received, there being
numbers of established truths violated by his assertions. He should have banked his receipts and
joined the outcaste company of the von Danikens.

However, according to the other views, all of which merge in this regard, nothing that V could
possibly say should deprive him of a hearing, save that he should present his views in a format
suitable for passing judgment upon them. Deg had to make up his mind whether the basic offering
was appropriate for judgment and whether a hearing was provided. Still he could not but feel
that the organization of science would fall apart if no advantage were given to the accepted
"truth," just as the state would become defenseless if everyone refused to serve in the armed
forces on constitutional grounds. What happens ordinarily, he observed often, is that the more
"obviously untrue" a proposition with its proof appear to be, the less due process of law is
used and needed in dealing with it. We have to reconcile ourselves to the "miscarriage of
justice", at least in science and probably in every area of conflict, the "Bill of Rights"
notwithstanding. If for no other reason, the burden of treating every statement with all the
respect due and owing to the best and most correct-seeming statements would be impossible for
the economy of science to bear.

In return, Deg told himself, we can ask for some minimal formatting of a case prior to
processing it through the reception system of science. This, it appeared to him, V. had done,
and much more, and some scientists had nevertheless pilloried him and ruined his chances of
obtaining scientific respectability -- not affirmative agreement, but just simple honest respect
for a remarkable job.

V. had approached the altars of science with the assiduous ritual of Aaron before the Holies of
Holies. And, when, like the drunken sons of Aaron, his books were struck by the Lord's Fire, he
was stunned. "What sacrilege have I committed?" he asked himself repeatedly. And the answer,
from all sides, if not from heaven, was "None." It is true that he had won literary fame and
supported his family meanwhile, a rare success among non-academic writers in America. So what?
Have the rich no right to complain? Who else can send the steak back to the kitchen?

The scene was familiar and the opportunity presented: the establishments of academia had
offended a man who was a fighter and had his evidence in hand. Something rare and good in the
history of science might be achieved. With the contaminants of politics and religion absent from
the mixture, and the publishers acting as catalysts, it was as clean a case of pure science in
action as one might ever hope to come upon.

The work on the special Velikovsky issue of the American Behavioral Scientist had been mostly
done when Deg addressed a letter to his Advisory Board explaining Velikovsky's position and
justifying a special issue in support of him.


March 8, 1963

To: ABS Advisory Board

Subject: Notes on several current matters

I. We plan to devote a major portion of our June issue [actually it came out in September] to a
topic called: "The Politics of Science: The Velikovsky Case." Immanuel Velikovsky, as you
probably know, is a highly controversial figure whose book Worlds in Collision incited the wrath
of a number of astronomers and geologists twelve years ago. Several other works dealt with
similar themes of prehistoric catastrophe, social upheavals, and the origins of myth. Another
book, somewhat distinct, is Oedipus and Akhnaton. I believe him to be a brilliant theorist and
am not persuaded that his criticisms of various astronomical principles are as wrong as Shapley
and others have made them out to be. The recent Venus probe has brought some surprising
information in accord with his views, for example. However, our main interest in the topic lies
in its relation to numbers 3, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14, and 16 of the ABS program. A basic question
is the canons which science uses to appraise work that is offered. As we move into the
Velikovsky case, we observe that both the normal and the peculiar features of the criticism of
this work throw much light on the workings of the scientific establishment. Additionally the
evidence of boycott of a publisher in the case leads one into the question of the relation of
scientists to freedom of the press. The proposed would include first a history
of the Velikovsky case, a comparison of the case with various episodes in the history of science
by Stecchini, a content analysis of the reviews of Velikovsky's book, an article by Velikovsky
reciting ten important instances in which his theorizing led him to correct or at least now
respectable statements about natural events (this one to give a flavor of the substance of the
case), and an appraisal of the operations of the scientific establishment. We have abundant
material. We lack funds, as usual, for the kind of content analysis and investigation that
should be engaged in. If any of you can find a few dollars to lend to this enterprise, it will
be helpful in improving the product (especially in the reliability of coding the book reviews,
and increasing the number sampled from 100 up to 500)...

The "good will and advice" were there: as for the money, the Board knew Deg was bluffing: the
magazine would continue, one way or another.

Also, to attack frontally an array of scientists, Deg thought to assemble a special committee of
notables that would protect his flanks. He sent the manuscript of the ABS issue to his friends
Harold D. Lasswell, Hadley Cantril, and Luther Evans, all three well-known, distinguished and
innovative social scientists. He also contacted. at Velikovsky's suggestion, Salvador de
Madariaga, Moses Hadas, Horace Kallen, Harold Latham, R. H. Hillenkoetter, and Philip
Wittenberg. Madariaga and Hillenkoetter admired V. 's work: Hadas respected the learning
evidenced in it: Kallen was a grand liberal educator who had run interference for V. when V. was
trying to obtain a reading from Harlow Shapley; Latham had shepherded Worlds in Collision
through Macmillan; and Wittenberg was an expert on libel law. Deg also invited Harry H. Hess,
Chairman of the Geology Department a Princeton, who had given V. a forum, and was helpful on
several later occasions; V. counted him as a friend; Deg had met him and found him simpatico and
every inch what an Admiral in the U. S. Navy (Reserve) should be. He was a top leader in the
wartime and post-war revolution in oceanography. Hess replied by hand:

June 4, 1963, Washington. D. C.

Dear Editor de Grazia :

The manuscripts you sent me reached me at particularly bad time: Ph. D. exams, department
budget construction, a request to appear before a committee of congress and finally orders to
two weeks of active duty in the Navy starting yesterday. I have spent two days reading the
material and trying to analyze my own thoughts.

I can't urge you to publish it. Velikovsky is a friend of mine. You will reopen old wounds and
create more antagonism against him, though at the same time you will support his position and
bring out the injustices. I am not sure that this is a net gain.

Why were scientists outraged by Velikovsky's books? This is the question I have been asking
myself because I too felt a sense of outrage even though I have a kindly feeling towards him as
a friend. The reasons given by Stecchini are plausible and perhaps true with respect to some
scientists.

The real reason is something much more fundamental -- at least the reason why I rebel is, and I
am a fairly good guinea pig example of an ordinary scientist.

I haven't time to write the essay that might be written to explain the phenomenon correctly.
Velikovsky is partly to blame because of the way he handles his data. This is no excuse for most
of those who criticize him. Nor is it an excuse for the manner in which they have treated him.

Thank you for sending me the manuscripts. I wish I could do more for you than I have.

Sincerely, H. H. Hess

Deg was not surprised nor did he feel Hess's refusal at all unworthy. Hess was not the Admiral
Nelson to violate Admiralty orders and take his fleet into battle: still, as Deg remarked to me,
we already had an admiral (referring to Admiral Hillenkoetter), we certainly could have used a
geologist on the team. Years later, Deg was able to persuade Hess to join the Board of Trustees
of a foundation for studies of catastrophe.

A problem of concern to me was that, in the years following, there was no evident opposition to
V., whether as to his treatment or his ideas, carried in the ABS files and the later book, The
Velikovsky Affair, and I badgered Deg on this point repeatedly. He puts up a kind of general
defense that has some merit: "Under the circumstances, we did what we could to excite an
opposition. We had no money to conduct research. Everyone was unpaid and working at other things
for a living. The issue on V. was itself only one of ten issues to appear that year, each on
different topics. Mainly the expressions of disagreement were directed at the substance of V.'s
theories, which were, strictly speaking, irrelevant to the discussion. Juergens went farther in
explaining these and defending them than I would have gone. It was like pulling teeth to get a
scientist to enter upon the politics and sociology or even the methodology of the case. One
received simply arguments on the stability of the solar system and the unreliability of legends
and ancient history." Deg talked on, as the tape spun on its roll: I wrote Otto Neugebauer, a
hostile critic of V. and renowned expert on Babylonian astronomy, but he did not reply for a
long time, for years. In fact, I met with Harold Lasswell, who was a psychologist, political
scientist and professor of Law at Yale: he was favorable to the issue, which he read, but
concerned that the bridge he perceived as building between the natural and human scientists
might be damaged. (There was then the well-publicized thesis of C. P. Snow, physicist and
novelist, who decried the existence of these two uncommunicative worlds.) I visited Freeman
Dyson, the mathematician, who was at the institute for Advanced Studies and had been President
of the Federation of American Scientists, of which I was member, and which was agitating

against the "Cold War." Dyson was lukewarm about the matter: he had been approached by V. some
time before, and had no desire to enter the lists; furthermore he found the scenario of V.'s
work unacceptable. There was none, it seemed, on the first call for debate, and very few ever,
who were ready to defend what had happened, as there was none ready to defend V.'s substantive
views on exoterrestrially-produced disasters. Worse, there was hardly a notable scientist of the
Establishment of physics, geology, astronomy who was willing publicly to acknowledge the
legitimacy of the discussion. I approached Tom Kuhn, a neighbor, who was beginning to win fame
as a historian of science. He shied away.

I will say more. You have been presenting my analogy of this case with cases in the law and
courts. Actually, this is only one side of the coin. Just as the law and courts are utterly
inadequate to their tasks when a society is failing, so too in science the reception system is
inadequate when the institutions and politics of science are failing to begin with. That is,
unless you have a liberal, open-minded republic of science, you'll have too many cases of
injustice in the reception system. I spent some time developing the problem of the institutions
that are needed in science as in politics to back up a proper reception system, but no one of
competence has come around to discuss the subject, which is as critical today as it was then.
Criminality in science, if I may use the word, or misbehavior, is common throughout the sciences
and ultimately its origins dissolve into the background of an illiberal, non-pragmatic,
materialistically competitive, and philosophically ignorant environment where scientists are
bred. I felt that Deg's tone was becoming strident. I still doubted that he had exhausted the
possibilities of a debate, and later on I will tell of other forensic episodes. He might have
talked to Dr. Normal Newell, of the New York Natural History Museum; Ted McNulty, one of his
aides and squash-playing friends had learned that Newell had something to say; he might at least
have tried to speak to the king-pin Harlow Shapely, who was old but still feisty: he might have
approached George Brett, President of Macmillan, to corroborate that he had "dumped" V. and
explain why.

Further, Deg might well have been more rigid, and might have excluded all substantive comment of
V.'s theories, admittedly to the point of losing some of the excitement of his story. It is true
however, that copies of the issue were sent to potential opponents among natural scientists,
inviting and expecting comment. There were none. Nor did the thousands of normal readers produce
from among their number calls or letters of protest.

Nor, with one or two exceptions, did any evidence appear for decades that would affect the
statements made on the affair by the three authors. In May of 1983, Leroy Ellenberger, told me
that he had found at least one bit of evidence in the Macmillan files giving scientists reason
to attack Macmillan for advertising the book as work in science. A regular catalogue of
Macmillan books in science carried Worlds in Collision as a possible supplementary reading in
general courses. This was a trifle, to be sure, but a red cloth is no trifle to a goaded bull.

Still the annoying question once more arises: why should not the book have been advertised as a
contribution to science, even if it were ultimately to go into oblivion with most other books
that tried to make contributions to science? so again I prodded Deg on the matter and this time
got what amounted to a lecture.

Formal law has the strongest means to avoid consideration of the merits of a case in judging
whether the case properly belongs in a certain court and has been properly heard in that court.
It insists that the accused be given his day in court, with defense lawyer, an unprejudiced jury
in most cases, and a full account of the testimony against him and the right to confront his
accusers. Formal law of course often falls short of its expectations.

Formal science has roughly similar rules for judging every work coming before it. The book is
the defendant, you might say. It should be penalized, that is, dismissed, reproached, vilified,
sentenced to non-reading and non-propagation only after it has had its day in court. And, it
should come up for a parole hearing almost on demand. This too, often does not happen. Anybody
but V would have taken his lumps --I would -- and cry all the way to the bank.

When the law or science does not live up to its rules, then one appeals to a higher court or
authority that created the institution in the first place. In the matter of a book, intelligent
readers form themselves into a kind of court of consensus on the matter. That is actually what
happened in the Velikovsky Affair, but still the court refused to remand the case for trial to
the numerous special fields. The closest thing to this was the AAAS panel a decade after my book
and two decades after the events.

Now when the court or scientific establishment finds the defendant 'crazy' or 'delinquent' or
'fraudulent' or 'concealing the truth' or 'non-co-operative', but there is still evidence that
the court or science is wrong, then the higher court -- that is, those institutions sponsoring
the establishment, including the reading public, may call the lower court to order, reprimand
it, force the remand for a re-hearing, or transfer the case to another jurisdiction.

In order to face down the court or science, the higher court or critics must look as far as
necessary into the facts of the case to determine whether the defendant is indeed frivolous,
delinquent, fraudulent, concealing the truth or non-cooperative. For these purposes, some degree
of substantive worthiness of the defendant must be present to justify the intervention. This was
indeed the situation here; the content and presentation of the theories were therefore
legitimately at issue and part of the presentation of his full legal case. We therefore had to
judge the defendant in a sense on his merits and let him speak briefly on his own behalf.

Scientists are understandably annoyed by ungovernable antics and criticism, none more than us
political scientists, who must suffer the most abusive, crazy and unscientific ideas and
behavior every day in the newspapers, in legislative halls, and in political meetings, indeed
wherever politics and public opinion generate, even at the dinner-table. They still must operate
a clean shop, a decent court, which in the end serves best themselves...

He had more to say, but this is more than enough for now.















COSMIC HERETICS: Part 1 :

by Alfred de Grazia


CHAPTER THREE


CHEERS AND HISSES

Deg found himself losing status in the eyes of his children, who had through their earlier
years seen and heard much of important personages, partly because all of them went through a
rebellious adolescence during years when he was respectful, helpful, and obviously orienting
his thoughts toward V., so that they found a weakness in their father -- his rare complaisance
-- and could, through being critical and slightly disdainful of V., get at him twice, directly
in himself and indirectly through rejection of V. It was not, as it had been put from time to
time at home, that he gave too much of his crowded time to his venerable friend. Indeed, the
children could have done well in their troubled group life at school by carrying the banner of
Velikovsky (and their father) for V. could easily be fit (no one knowing his character) into
the mold of anti-authoritarian ideas and leadership exceedingly popular among those in that
era, town, and age group.

On a summer day in 1963 Deg ushered his family of eight persons aboard the U. S. ocean liner
"Atlantic" bound for Lisbon, Naples and Genoa. The boat was a slow last effort of the
collapsing merchant marine but, he thought, just as several years earlier they had crossed the
American continent on a railroad train from California to Chicago, they ought to have the
experience of an ocean voyage. He then returned to Princeton and moved the family's possessions
and his office from Queenston Place to Linden Lane, from a large old house to a small old
house, aided by daughter Jessica's lovesick young boyfriend. His magazine was left in the
custody of Ted Gurr. Then he flew to Lisbon, joined his family on the boat, and all sailed for
Italy.

Deg made final corrections to the ABS Velikovsky issue at Marjorie Ferguson's villa in Marina
di Massa, fuming at his four boys on the beach across the street who, instead of swimming out
to sea like little Shelleys, had transferred with insouciance from the pinball machines of
Princeton to soccer machines in Italy. "Dear Ted," he wrote,

You will be pleased to note that I have incorporated most of the suggested changes... I could
not accept the idea that the political network paragraphs were irrelevant and unnecessary.(
This referred to intimations that the furious attacks against Velikovsky were prompted in part
by frustrations of Shapley and other scientists at being attacked for "red" affiliations by Joe
McCarthy and his during these years.)

I felt forced to deal with them and did all I could to make them objective. What is 'innuendo',
after all, is a question of motive. There is no innuendo here therefore. If a trace of poison
is found in a deceased's blood, do you ban its reporting on grounds that it constitutes an
innuendo? Every generalization of science implies a stereotype, to take another case. Must we
then never generalize?

Later, Norman Storer and others picked up the theme, which social psychologists might best
appreciate, most historians of science being too narrowly educated for such subtleties, or too
constrained to deal with them.

By the way, Lucca Cavazzo [an Italian supporter of the ABS] and wife had a baby. He was dining
with me just before it happened. He calls his Federico Julio, two emperors yet! [Ted had begun
his family.]

Now the special issue of September 1963 appeared and before long was reprinted. The response
was strong, but within the ABS orbit was almost entirely of social scientists and humanists.
Prompted by free copies and alerted by word of mouth, natural scientists nevertheless played
deaf and dumb, and so did those dependent upon them directly.

In the files of Deg no new voice from a natural scientist comes forth amidst the many letters
of a type to warm the cockles of an editor's heart. The scientists simply stooped low to avoid
the flying bullets and returned the silent message, "Science is truth; truth is one; who defies
the truth is no scientist; whatever happens to him he deserves." A few ducked because they had
no recourse and feared the collective or public opinion of science, perhaps retaliation. It was
a small step, which the sociologically untrained scientific mind can easily take, from
witnessing a fellow supporting the case of Velikovsky to disdaining him erroneously for
supporting his theories. Some would have been just normally lazy. Dr. Robert Jastrow, Director
of the Institute for Space Studies, wrote Deg on October 20, 1980: "I had, of course, read your
earlier very fine pieces on Velikovsky and his theories and had drawn on them in preparing my
own article." But maybe this was later.

The New York Times ignored the American Behavioral Scientist and did not review the book when
it later appeared. A brave letter came from an editor of the Christian Science Monitor (This
newspaper, you may appreciate, is one of the world's finest, and has a disproportionate
scientific audience.) "May I say," wrote G. Wiley Mitchell to Deg, on December 12, 1966, "that
I have read your book through, consider it a real contribution and am very regretful that
neither my efforts, nor those of some of my colleagues who agree with me, have been successful
in getting my paper to publish a review. The Velikovsky smearers have been effective! (Mind
you, I am not at all sure I endorse his theories in toto. But I think his method is sound and
his theories are certainly no weaker than others that gain a hearing simply because they come
with the right 'credentials. ')"

An attorney at NASA (and I must point out that he was Dan, the son of David Arons, a Gimbel
Bros. executive and an acquaintance of V.) wrote happily to his father that he had "received a
call from Dr. Newell [head of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration] this morning
bright and early who told him that

.... he had read the articles in the American Behavioral Scientist which I sent him and was
'aghast at the inquisition' to which the Velikovsky books have been submitted.

He said he had noted some of the comments made back in the 50's but these articles place them
all in a pattern. He particularly noted a remark of Fred Whipple to the effect that scientists
ought to send back the postage paid postcards to publishers who use them to advertise such
books as Velikovsky's. Dr. Newell thought this was very 'vindictive' and 'uncalled-for. ' While
Velikovsky 'might be wrong' he is entitled to 'dispassionate review and criticism. ' Dr. Newell
said that he had already discussed this matter with some of the 'leading lights' at NASA
including Arnold Frutkin, Director of International Programs. He requested that he be permitted
to keep the copy he has and be provided with additional copies.

I wouldn't be surprised if someone here makes a statement on Velikovsky in the near future....

But of course, there were no actions taken. Involve NASA in such a demonstration? Impossible!

There was another case, which V. pinned his hopes upon for a time, pathetically, a President of
the grand University of Southern California, Murphy by name, who had indirectly voiced sympathy
for the Velikovsky problem and V. had barged in to suggest that he appoint a commission of
inquiry. The response: polite, and routinely cordial; but no interest, the matter being out of
bonds. No University was going to dirty its hands with the nitty-gritty of scientific
conflicts. If V. had been more of a sociologist, he could draw the appropriate parallels with
the Catholic Church at the time of Galileo, reluctantly drawn to support his enemies, a case V.
knew well -- up to a point.

There came Peter Tompkins to Princeton and Jill and Deg had him to lunch, along with their
neighbor, Thomas Kuhn. Peter had published the story of his wartime escapade in German-occupied
Rome, a feat which Deg, a few miles away at the time, thought to do but had not done, and Peter
had written The Eunuch and the Virgin, which Stecchini had shown to V. and which he had
rejected, even though Tompkins could throw light on two points of importance: the sexual
derivations from cosmic disaster (which V. had recognized) and the descent of great
bureaucratic institutions from the same obsessional terror (which Deg but not V. was attending
to). His Secrets of the Great Pyramid was ultimately to achieve fame. Tom Kuhn's book on
scientific revolutions was beginning to gather kudos for himself as a historian of science. Deg
had footnoted it in his study of the reception system, for old time's sake, since the book
hadn't come to hand until the manuscript was ready to print, and praised it in the ABS. Deg had
wondered why so little attention was paid to the materials of politics and sociology on
revolutions. When the ABS was publishing its Velikovsky Issue, Kuhn was publishing an essay on
the function of dogma in scientific research, in a book edited by A. C. Crombie; there he
argued that science is and must be dogmatic and the present balance between dogmatism and open-
mindedness appeared to be a healthy one.

Kuhn and Tompkins got into a bristling argument over parascience. They were such formidable-
looking men, especially at the moment. Deg felt embarrassed, as their host. Neither had the
energy to spare for Dr. V. Tompkins was rebuffed because of V.'s heavy anxiety over associating
with the scientific fringe, especially if sex reared its head. Tom volunteered no support, not
then, not later. The presence of the great Velikovsky archive went unnoticed by him, too. Deg
thought, well, Kuhn is in the grip of the Princetonian academia and is an historian of science,
a field of nitpickers, excepting a few like Kuhn, ignorant of the springs of human ingenuity,
clumsy handmaidens of the technical scientists.

Deg could see continually in science the ghosts of politics concealed by their shrouds. One of
his old-time acquaintances was Don Price, an epiphenomenal career man of the public service,
who launched from the pioneering Public Administration Clearing House alongside the University
of Chicago to Washington, to the headship of the John F. Kennedy Center at Harvard, to the
Presidency of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Deg wrote him concerning
the Velikovsky affair, seeking moral support. The answer: bland, perfectly unobjectionable,
priceless.

Not having gotten his support for the report of 1963, Deg wrote Price again in 1966 asking him
to intervene to get a communication of V. into Science. He repeated the pledge and passed the
buck. Thus, on December 22, 1966, with "a very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year" Price
writes:

I am glad of course to have the opportunity to read it and will forward it immediately to the
Editor of Science. It is the general policy of the Officers and Board of Directors of AAAS not
to interfere with the editorial judgment of the Editor and his editorial advisers. Since I
believe that the Editor should be aware of your opinion, and that of Mr. Wigner, I am sending a
copy of your letter as well as the note itself on to Dr. Abelson, and I am sure that they will
be useful to him.

For many years, Deg had preached that science could be regarded as a branch of administration
and administration, the huge corpus of civilized routines, as the outward expression of human
habits, largely unconscious, and therefore excusably termed obsessions.

Journal, Undated, Spring 1963


Science, and all that goes by the name in discourse and actions is almost entirely a process
of administering deductions in the name of an ideology. [Actually, this is a paraphrase of what
Deg had written for the Administrative Science Quarterly a decade earlier. I am trying to
exclude from this book whatever he has printed elsewhere, as I promised him, but I am like the
oaf who quit his job grading potatoes because all the choices between big and little made his
head hurt: at times I find such distinctions imperceptible.]

On December 9, 1966, not long after the publication of the Velikovsky Affair in book form, Dr.
Douglas Shanklin delivered an address on child-bed fever at the College of Medicine, University
of Florida, applying Deg's model of the reception system to J. P. Semmelweis and Oliver Wendell
Holmes. They had independently proposed infection as the source of the often fatal puerperal
fever, and are famous therefore. But Charles White of Manchester, England, had insisted upon
absolute cleanliness in the lying-in hospital in 1773 and Alexander Gordon of Aberdeen,
Scotland, stated the theory of infection in 1795. Holmes was an illustrious poet before he
published in 1843 his theory of infection as the source of the fever that killed so many women
in the hospitals of the nineteenth century; he did not hold an academic position at the time,
but later became Professor of Anatomy and Physiology at the Harvard Medical School. The
dogmatic opposition persisted until the science of bacteriology of the next generation
overwhelmed it. Holmes died at 85, highly regarded.

Semmelweis was a Hungarian Jew practicing medicine at the Maternity Department of the Vienna
General Hospital when, in 1847, he introduced the practice of washing hands with chlorinated
water before examining women in labor. Although the results were a five-fold decrease in the
mortality rate, he was attacked and forced out of his position, and took a new post in his
native Hungary. There he published a massive book on the etiology, concept, and prophylaxis of
childbed fever (1861). Four years later he cut himself during a post-mortem examination, became
infected, was mentally deranged, and died soon after, at 47 years.

Holmes' essay was well-written and without first-hand experience. Semmelweis' work was
intimidating, ponderously written and he was fully experienced. Holmes republished his own
essay a dozen years after its first publication in a medical journal, declaring: "When, by the
permission of providence, I held up to the professional public the damnable facts connected
with the conveyance of poison from one young mother's chamber to another, for doing which
humble office I desire to be thankful that I have lived, though nothing else should ever come
to my life, I had to hear the sneers of those whose position I had assailed, and, as I believe
have at last demolished, so that nothing but the ghosts of dead women stir among the ruins."

Semmelweis was persecuted for his heresy. Shanklin writes of Semmelweis' tragedy:

A few people acted with bold imagination and foresight, accepting the data at its face value
and effectively saving many lives... the overwhelming majority dealt either from a power base
or a dogmatic base, steeped in the irrational. The net effect for an interval was described in
the indeterminacy model. Truth was accepted here and rejected there and by gradual exchange
assimilation was finally achieved. Additional proofs with the evolution of a new technique
wrote the final chapter of the saga of Semmelweis.

It took about a century from White's obsessive insistence upon cleanliness in Manchester's
lying-in wards to consensus about a matter that should have been simple enough to grasp, if one
recalled that peasants used salt, alcohol, and herbs on wounds and they isolated persons
associated with plague by the most cruel means. That the use of hospitals for parturition
increased and that the doctors and their students increased their post-mortem dissections in
this environment escalated the puerperal fever mortality rate. These two "advances" confused
the issue, just as "advances" in agriculture, particularly in the U. S. A., have caused
devastation of the soil, water resource depletion, and new chemical diseases. In the middle of
advances, regressions are minimized or even denied scornfully. Obviously the scientific process
is largely understandable by sociological and psychological analysis.

Deg did not enjoy any illusion that there would be a direct rational line from publicizing V.'s
poor reception in the sciences to the acceptance of his views and their incorporation into
science. For one thing, he felt certain that if V.'s ideas, or anyone else's including his own,
would succeed, they had to be first disassembled, torn to shreds, and then reassembled by
thousands of people from the nearly unrecognizable shreds. Only much later might some
historians recognize the many truths and even the valid general theories in their work.

Nonetheless, the exposition of such large ideas and the controversy over them would perform the
first major task of any revolution, namely the refocusing of attention and the conditioning of
the minds of scientists and teachers to the new frame of thought. In these very days of the
1960's, the leaders of the movement for women's liberation were stressing "consciousness-
raising;" many blacks were doing the same by stressing "negritude" (as the French blacks called
it) and accusing pro-black liberal whites, "their best friends," of necessarily being racially
prejudiced; radical students caught on also to the effectiveness of "irrational," often
destructive, behavior as a way of getting the attention of the civil and educational
authorities.

Adverse publicity is a shock to the generally sheltered scientists and effectively alters their
perceptions. The demoralization of a supreme power such as the scientific establishment with
its credo and foci can occur by the exposure of weaknesses among a few leaders and heroes and
proceed with the underlying economic forces that limit rewards and positions; demoralization
then moves to the rank-and-file individuals who pay less respect, work less hard, ask more
money and benefits, and pay attention to supernatural or heretical interests. In a democracy,
the withdrawal of any substantial amount of public support for the ideas and position of any
institution, including science, results in some demoralization. A perfectly normal remark, if
publicized, can invite latent opposition to take form. When the renowned astronomer and public
scientist par excellence, Harlow Shapley, declared "If Dr. Velikovsky is right, the rest of us
are crazy," what would appear to be a humorous truism set up, when publicized, a rallying point
for all who were even slightly concerned about this or that fallacy of science; what many
scientists believed to be only an absurd contrast gave to many a premonition that, yes, all
scientists are crazy.

Although Deg believed that he had substantially accounted for the scientific behavior witnessed
in the Velikovsky case, one of the most common questions asked of him in discussions and at
lectures over the following years was "Why did the scientists make such a fuss?" It did not
seem to matter that often the people assembled had come because they already knew the answer.
There would, of course, always be on hand for analysis new cases of idiotic name-calling and
denigration of V., but the causes agitating the scientists remained essentially the same:
dogmatism (fueled by the need for respect), expressions of power (agitated by personal
ambitions and feelings of insufficient influence), indeterminacy (the frustrated wish to know,
and the denial of confusion and uncertainty) and rationalism (narrowly defined, and therefore
inadequate against ideas of quantavolution, which seem so easy to refute and dismiss but turn
out to be remarkably rich and resilient).

Exposing the mental and social operations of science produced an effect almost entirely
favorable. Some addressed Deg for bringing justice to V. Others praised him for introducing the
issue of justice into the scientific process. Some others commented upon the novelty of the
approach. Mentions of unusual courage were frequent. Social scientists recognized the phenomena
of establishment defensiveness and crowd behavior; they expressed little surprise. The letters
of surprise came from persons who had undergone a conversion experience; they professed
humiliation and disenchantment because of scientific conduct. Several urged that Deg turn his
attention to cases which they believed to be similar. Deg objected, when I thought to print
some of the encomia that his magazine (1963) and book (1966) evoked, saying that rehearing old
praise can be bittersweet, to editors as to the aged of stage and screen. To most it is a bore,
old or new. Blurbs are the medium of exchange between producer, salesman, and customer. If it
is necessary, if it's never been printed, OK, let it be brief.

So this is brief -- but it's important, because it shows that the message was intelligible, and
got through in the larger intellectual world. A comparison may be pertinent: it was widely
believed that scientists took up their pens en masse to castigate Macmillan Company when it
published Worlds in Collision. In 1983, when Leroy Ellenberger delved into the appropriate
files he found only twenty-one of such letters.

The favorable correspondence received by Deg and the ABS in 1963 and 1966 exceeded the
unfavorable mail received by Macmillan Company in what the Company regarded as a massive
assault upon its integrity and its ability to do business with scientists. The gutless behavior
of well-intentioned institutions is proverbial; Senator Joe McCarthy and a few assistants
reduced the mammoth State Department and other agencies of the Federal Government to terrorized
submission around the same time.

Some figures in the forefront of scientific method in the social sciences, then or later,
responded to the issue forcibly, a "most interesting" from Herbert Simon; "used to very good
teaching purposes" from Bernard Barber; "both fascinating... and important... a splendid
account," from Hadley Cantril; "beautifully makes the point about the psychology of
scientists... grateful" from James C. Davies, a "signal service" from Arthur S. Miller; "a
superb example of the sociology of knowledge," from Wendell Bell; "sobering and helpful," from
Renato Tagiuri; "an outstanding contribution on so vital an issue... not only the matter of
methodology but also one of political toleration and scientific craftsmanship" from Ralph M.
Goldman; "fascinating... excellent..." from Wayne A. R. Leys; "splendid... outstanding...
personal congratulations" from George A. Lundberg; and a grumpy reassessment by Stuart Chase,
"I can see your point." Sociologist George Lundberg's letter to Deg pointed to a different type
of reception system problem in science, one in which he had once been personally involved:

The question has a great many aspects. In the first place, there is the problem all editors
face in discriminating between work of a crackpot and the work of a genius. As has often been
pointed out, they are hard to distinguish, especially on the more advanced levels. A very
different problem (not involved in the Velikovsky case) faces the conscientious editor when he
gets a paper the validity of which he does not question, but which, if published, will in the
editor's opinion give aid and comfort to a group hostile to a viewpoint which the editor
personally shares, on grounds reflecting the most creditable public spirit.

Lundberg also noted, "It appears that Velikovsky's ideas have been widely circulated in spite
of the hostility of the Establishment... Is it possible that the enormous growth in
communication technology has made it practically impossible to suppress new ideas for long?"

Stuart Dodd wrote from the University of Washington:

I think you have done a magnificent job of l'affaire Velikovsky in the September ABS. The
care with which you worked up and presented the complete case in the three articles, with
excellent refereeing throughout, was a historic achievement in challenging and improving
methodology in the Behavioral Sciences. I particularly admire the way you did not go into the
controversy of the correctness of Velikovsky's theories, leaving that to the specialists
concerned. Your editorial statement of the issues involving the mores of both the physical
scientists and the social scientists as scientists in accepting and sifting new scientific work
is a skillfully done job.

On the humanities side Mose Hadas, Horace Kallen, William T. Couch, Jacques Barzun, William
Sloane and August Heckscher wrote Deg supportively. Medicine, social work, psychiatry, and law
were among the fields of applied science reporting interest and conveying congratulations.
Several ABS readers arranged meetings for Dr. V. at their campuses. Articles based on the ABS
issue originated in Italy, England, Australia, and elsewhere during the 1960's. Reviews of the
book when it appeared two years later were favorable; however, no scientific journal dealing
with the natural sciences reviewed it. Ultimately, the book was republished in England, and
translated and published by Bertelsman-Goldman in Germany.

Deg introduced the second, English Edition of the Velikovsky Affair in 1977. Brain Moore, the
librarian of Hartlepool and a cosmic heretic, reviewed the work in the Society for
Interdisciplinary Studies Review, III: 2 (1978), 38. Crediting the book "a 'classic' in its
field" with "the renaissance of scholarly interest in Velikovsky" he quoted its preface:

We dedicate this book to people who are concerned about the ways in which scientists behave
and how science develops. It deals especially with the freedoms that scientists grant or
withhold from one another. The book is also for people who are interested in new theories of
cosmogony -- the causes of the skies, the earth, and humankind as we see them. It is, finally,
a book for people who are fascinated by human conflict, in this case a struggle among some of
the most educated, elevated, and civilized characters of our times.

The area to which the ABS addressed itself was apparently much in need of attention.
Sociologist Lundberg thought "that the AAAS, not to mention individual scientists and groups,
must now prepare a detailed answer," and he added, as did others, various matters of
investigation in the reception system of science. David Wallace wrote happily, "I hope you get
sued."

The American Political Science Review, which had carried negative reviews of, or ignored, Deg's
iconoclastic or deceptively simple works in political science sprang to attention with the
Velikovsky Affair. John Orbell opined that "it represents a most significant contribution to
the sociology of science." He applauded Deg's most valuable chapter on the scientific reception
system and concluded: "Behavioral scientists might be expected this time to have been on the
side of the angels; they were, after all, nearly alone among scientists in not having some
fundamental notions challenged by Velikovsky." Stecchini wrote to Deg, then in Italy, on Oct.
2, 1963: "There has just appeared a manifesto by [Robert Maynard] Hutchins and others of his
coterie on Science, Scientists, and Politics. It says in general what the ABS has said, but it
does not give any evidence. Hutchins begins by saying that in his experience the scientists are
the most unscrupulous and power-motivated members of the academic community. The concluding
paper by Lynn White, Jr. [historian of science] declares that scientists do not understand
philosophical issues and often have philosophical prejudices."

One sponsor of this manifesto was Harrison Brown, a renowned scientist whose reviews of V.'s
books were madly mediocre, which goes to say something of the significance of works of the
Hutchins kind that do not name names, and makes recommendations that are not specific. Deg
liked and admired Hutchins, even when strongly critical of him, ever since he had attended a
seminar of that handsome, brave, relatively intellectual, self-contained, and slightly phony
cavalier, then President of the University of Chicago.

There came shortly afterwards to Deg another letter from Albert Schenkman, Publisher of
Cambridge, Mass., breaking a lance against the ABS. Ted Gurr, minding the ABS, wished to
publish it and Deg replied "Dear Ted: It is cruel of you to hound me across the Big Pond with
Mr. Schenkman's letter with a request that I reply. He is in a state of awful confusion. Print
it if you will, with or without my comments," and he suggested that Gurr put the comments
alongside the appropriate paragraphs of the letter. Gurr did not print the comments.

Philip Converse, who at this writing is President of the American Political Science
Association, on Oct. 9, 1963 congratulated Deg on "a superb document." Unlike most, he had
followed the case from its inception in the early 1950's. Unlike most, too, he directed his
thoughts to measures of policy and control.

... In accordance with the principle of open public challenge and rebuttal, why not publicly
invite those of the principals on the other side (certainly Shapley, Gaposhkin, Harrison Brown,
perhaps Abelson, etc.) who are still active to respond to this issue in an ensuing number? I
assume they would be willing actually to read the whole issue before writing rejoinders. I
trust such an invitation could be handled without devolving into a Counter-Inquisition. That
is, the profound ignorance in some coupled with the arrogance of success, has had material
consequences for the development of the behavioral sciences, and I am sure leaves many social
scientists in a counter-inquisitional frame of mind. On the other hand, it is we who purport to
understand the psychology of the inquisition, and we contend among other things that they are
unlikely to. I think it is fair game to make the basic points and make them vigorously, while a
classic case is still fresh. Yet if our claimed perspective on such matters has any merit at
all, it should both permit us and require us to handle the matter with some noblesse oblige,
out of respect for the gross differences between the two camps in comprehended information
concerning these social and psychological processes. This is true not only because of the
negative consequences of the unfettered inquisition spirit, but also because of our beliefs
that the problems are principally system-level ones, not good-guys and bad-guys, and ones
moreover that social scientists have not to date resolved operationally themselves. So a
personal vote for increased discussion and allocation of resources toward remedy, but not the
pillory or the witch hunt.

Deg at Florence was sent a copy of the New York Times of August 16, 1963 about "the first
definitive list of books assembled for the White House Library," John F. Kennedy being
President and Jacqueline, his wife, being interested in such matters as the White House decor
and French poetry. Professor James Babb, librarian of Yale University, directed the task.
"Those on the arduous project included the best brains of the Library of Congress, the editor
of the Adams and Jefferson papers, members of the White House Fine Arts Advisory Committee and
a host of distinguished scholars, librarians, publishers and experts in many fields throughout
the nation." Deg's book, Public and Republic, was on the list, his father said, and in response
to a plea from the allegedly poverty-stricken White House for donations, his father had sent in
the autographed copy Deg had given him years before.

Deg examined the list and wrote a brief essay about it. In his usual way, he managed to scold
everybody, the pretentiousness of the scheme, the great works left out, the silly books
entered, the illiteracy of Presidents, and the antiquated view of the methodology of politics
and history evidenced by the list. Most pertinent here are his remarks on the treatment of
science in this super-list:

Nor do we understand why the natural sciences are excluded. Certainly there is room for some
principal articles and books. If readability is the criterion, they are as likely to be read as
several hundred other works in the collection. Besides the originals, there should be present
at least Sarton, Conant, Whitehead, and Santillana. It is as important that the mythical
President who reads should read science as that he should read "Little Women."

This is probably another aspect of the escapism which shuns the future. The immense and fertile
American planning community is scarcely heeded. The best predictions and estimates of what can
be done in the natural sciences in the next century are absent. The best proposals for the
control of war are not available. If indeed the President were to read randomly in this
collection, we should fear for the nation.

The tools with which an active presidential mind might work are not dominant here.

The incident displays Deg as something of a misanthrope, but what meaning has this word -- a
hater of one's fellow humans or, like Le Misanthrope of Moliere's drama, an idealist and severe
critic of others? It is clear that he was the latter; he had the two tell-tale signs of this
Misanthrope: he was a harsh judge of himself, subjecting himself to daily Augustinian
interrogations of his activities, his use of time, his ideas, his conduct towards others, his
intellectual and logical rigor, and his failures. Second, he had an inflated hope for others:
for educating the uneducable, giving to the undeserving, organizing the unorganizable, loving
the unlovable, bringing peace to the world; worse, he could see good in everyone: his
opponents, madmen, silly women, gangsters, wicked politicians. Even at the moment of judging
harshly, he was sympathizing secretly. One reason why he was attracted to V. was V.'s simple
unidimensional moral quality: there were enemies and friends; the friend of your enemy is your
enemy; the enemy of your enemy is your friend; the friend of your friend is your friend. The
fourth category -- the enemy of your friend is your enemy was not so well accepted by V., or to
most others who went so far as to accept the first three propositions. So it is not all simple,
but nothing is, and all generalizations are false to a degree.

Let us move to Deg's Journal.

Princeton, April 7, 1966
I was abruptly pulled out of the relaxation of homecoming when I visited Velikovsky. He was
haranguing me about Livio's misspelling of the Pharaoh's name and I was sipping tea and
listening respectfully but comfortably and even amusedly when the telephone rang and he
answered it. I could hear him asking who it was and then "jail," and "marijuana," and "most
regrettable," and "I am in full agreement," but then "I am not the man for you. I have here
with me Professor de Grazia, Professor Alfred De Grazia," and "Let me have him speak with
you... He is better qualified to deal with this subject."

He lumbered in and explained that a gentleman on the phone wished to have a Dr. Timothy Leary
introduced. This Dr. Leary had been sentenced to thirty years in prison for possessing
marijuana. He was a psychologist... I began to recall Leary... Harvard... experiments with
LSD... and reluctantly but with some interest I picked up the receiver and received an
invitation to come to Town Hall on Tuesday (this was Monday) at 8 p. m. and introduce Dr. Leary
to the audience. The caller, Mr. Bogart, stated that under the circumstances of the sentencing,
it would be helpful if Dr. Leary were not to go 'cold' on stage but be preceded by some
supportive words. I replied that I might do so but wished to look into the matter and call him
back the same afternoon. I hung up and V. said, "You should do it, Alfred, it is a very good
and useful thing to do." I felt that I should probably do it, but did not finally decide until
I had read a little of the background of the case and an article of alarmist nature in Life
magazine regarding LSD.

Sizemore joined us at V. 's and we examined some of the long-sought-for Macmillan
correspondence on V. 's case. Miraculously, after it had appeared first that Macmillan would
never let us see what they had in their files from the days of the crisis over the publication
of Worlds in Collision, and then later they said that they had destroyed the files, Sizemore
learned that the files had actually gone with many other files over to the New York Public
Library for some future literary historian. Well, history had already begun. Sizemore requested
the materials and they were brought up for him. He was not supposed to remove them, but he did
so temporarily, reproduced them by Xerox, and returned them immediately. So now we might read
the full texts of the letters of the scientists Shapley, McLaughlin and the rest to Macmillan,
the notes of Mr. Brett of Macmillan agitating the question of whether or not to ditch V. 's
book, and related letters and papers. We were now in position to back up what some people
regarded as exaggerated statements concerning the dispute with actual quotations corroborating
our charges.

The matter of introducing Leary bothered me a bit. V. and Jill both spoke of my acceptance as
an act of courage. So did Eddie [Deg's brother] when I called him that evening for information.
So also several others in the next day or two. I feel uneasy when people say I am generous,
kind, understanding or courageous. Partly I doubt that I am any of these things. Or if I think
I am, it is upon occasions when nobody in the world notices; but then when I act normally and
naturally, it seems to me, as in the case of Dr. Leary, I am explicitly informed of my virtues.
I have long been convinced intellectually of the absolute lack of coordination between good
deeds and rewards but their lack of coincidence in practice never ceases to bother me and
unsettle me. I don't know how to put it: it seems that I do praiseworthy things in quiet,
boldly, but when a public approves my conduct, far from plunging forward even more
enthusiastically, I tend to pull up a bit and examine my conduct: am I being rash; what am I
doing that is extraordinary? I almost never find that I am fully in accord with the applause.

Eddie told me on the telephone from Washington that Leary's case had several legal
possibilities, that it was worth trying in court. He urged me to talk to Allen Ginsberg about
Leary, since he recalled Ginsberg having an interest in the matter. He then spoke with A. G., I
believe, the next morning, for G. phoned me at my office, speaking unexpectedly in a smooth,
organized way, and we arranged to meet at the Faculty Club at 3: 45 that afternoon for the
first time.

At the appointed time, having speedily dispatched a batch of phone calls, letters, papers, and
other miscellany from the piles of homecoming mail, I was at the Faculty Club and Ginsberg came
in soon thereafter. The apparition is nothing to dismiss, especially if it occurs in the
framework of the old Federal architecture and furnishings of Washington Square North. He was
more completely uncouth than I thought possible. Full grown hair and beard flying in every
direction, disheveled attire of ditch, barn, and beach. He said Peter was parking the car and
would be in, so we began to talk while we waited and after twenty minutes Peter came in with
his tam, long red braids, and grimy gym suit and tennis shoes, bringing along also his brother.
By then Allen and I had come to terms and he could introduce Peter's brother nonchalantly as
"Julius, Peter's brother. We've taken him out of the insane asylum where he's been for thirteen
years. He's become our ward." Peter said, "Sit here, Julius!" and Julius staring far far out of
this world, sat straight and mechanical on a chair and said nothing nor scarcely moved a muscle
for the hour or more that we talked thereafter.

The trio was spectacularly disgusting. Several professors and the manager poked their heads
inquiringly our way and I gave them a polite "hello!" My own feeling was of warmth and
fondness. They were completely reversed characters. All the evil in them was in their
appearance, while inwardly they revealed a beauty and kindness that was holy. They are in the
great tradition of the blessed spirits -- the hermits who live in caves and on poles, the
beggars of St. Francis, Ginsberg is an man of surpassing intelligence, aside from all else, and
Peter a kind of saintly inquirer. They are not more celibates, or even better-than-ordinary
men. They stand on the other side of Evil, having passed through it or flown over it.

I invited them to the bar downstairs for a drink, but they took me instead to their party,
where they were tardy. Present when we arrived was the hostess, Miss Beach, daughter of the
first publisher of Joyce, a Frenchman who has just translated Ferlinghetti, a Solomon who had
just been freed from nine years in a mental hospital (this must be Allen's great early friend)
and a pretty young man who looks like Edgar Allen Poe and publishes Fuck you: a Magazine of the
Arts.

I stayed for a while, then left despite their invitation to dinner, because I had to put down
some words for my Introduction. I signed into the Stanford hotel for the night, scribbled
hastily for half an hour and then walked to Town Hall (taking a cab the last couple of blocks,
since I turned E rather than W) and arrived a little late to spend time with Leary before the
address. It was as well for he was busy with the press and TV until the moment he had to
appear. He welcomed me and we went on stage to a house three-fourths filled. A young crowd, I
observed. My introduction went off well, and Leary's small strange eyes lit up warmly when I
finished and he shook my hand cordially. He rambled on nicely for over an hour under painful
white lights. They bothered me more than him but he had indicated he wished me to sit on stage
alongside the rostrum and I complied. (Now I must see what mode of exploitation there will be
of the films that were made. If I am on display I shall want to be sure of the context and
qualifications.)

Leary's message was simple and harmless. He spoke of the levels of consciousness and asserted
that the deepest was provoked by LSD. He argued that the knowledge one gained thereby was to
the good (automatically, I suppose, as the naturalist fallacy has it that all fact and truth is
good and wreaks good, no matter the context or the controls). It wasn't much. Leary has been
the patient amicus adolescensis of boys and girls seeking self-awareness and thrills of
sensation, and is adulated for this and for his troubles and for his pursuit of a vague set of
psychological and theological ideas that hover in the experiences of drug-taking.

I bid him goodnight afterwards, ate a poor solitary meal at a late diner, and slept well,

Princeton, October 6, 1966 Bad headache. Hot flashes, apparent heart palpitations after lunch.

Query: alcohol? Alcohol plus fine crop of my garden mushrooms "coprinus" for dinner last
evening? barometric pressures possibly related to hurricane Inez? something more functionally
severe? Poor mood, anyhow, Louise S --- our house guest again. A beautiful woman, so well
turned out, and 52 years old. She had a torrid affair with a young Greek and spent weeks with
him on a primitive island in the Aegean this summer.

Walked with Franny [their shepherd dog] along the streets in the balmy night air. Stopped by
Velikovsky to give him an article on "Magnetic Pressures" that describes the newest successes
in building up tremendous magnetic charges. What artifice can do, nature may have done and may
do. Hence V. 's theories about the possible role of electromagnetic charges in cosmic events
and catastrophes may be supported or considered in new light.

He insisted I stay and despite my headache, we talked for nearly two hours. He had me read his
latest correspondence and advise him on letters to Sullivan of the NYT and others. We spoke of
his archives and I repeated my thoughts about a foundation to take over his home and archives.
He is very anxious about his many remaining tasks. Fifteen they were, he said. I said "I have
fifteen not counting you as a project." He joked about the peasant pushing the old ass and
saying, in response to a remark of a by-stander: "Between us we are 100 years old."

Deg's Journal, Princeton, October 9, 1966 It is as difficult to make a little change as a big
change in politics. Or is it? I sometimes think the former and usually act upon it. But I am a
radical by temper and I resent being involved in little changes when bigger ones are needed.

I wonder: can it be that in the measurement NOT of the difficulty of change, but whether the
changes brought are big or little, that the conservatism of a society should be determined?

Deg's Journal, Princeton, October 9, 1966, 11 P. M. At 9 am Edward de G. calls and we discuss
his problems in finishing "Congressional Liaison." At 10 V. calls and tells me we should
publish his Brown University speech and the accompanying talks of his critics, together with
the Neugebauer reviews and correspondence, as a book. I agree, but he takes a half-hour to
unload his early morning thoughts upon me. I should charge the old psychoanalyst a
psychiatrist's fee (professional discount, of course). At the end he says "I feel better now.
We have this straightened out. Now I will go back to the miserable German translation of my
book." I feel compassionate. At every turn of the road, a further obstacle to communicating
one's ideas arises -- when nothing else, there will always be the damnable errors of a typist,
a translator, or an editor. Deg's Journal, Princeton, 1967 The afternoon of Sunday, December
17, Jill and I bicycled down the hill to the Velikovsky house for a tea party, with Francesca,
our German Shepherd dog, loping along nicely beside us. When we arrived she insisted upon
coming in, or rather, behaved in such a confused fashion that we finally brought her in with
us, and she finally discovered her place under the grand piano, where she had lain on prior
occasions. Present were the Ralph Juergens, Dr. Kogan, Vielikovsky's son-in-law and a Professor
and Research Scientist from Israel, with whom I had met on his previous trips to the United
States. So were the Bigelows, he from the Institute for Advanced Study and she a psychologist.
I had not met them before although Velikovsky spoke of Bigelow from time to time. He is one of
the few natural scientists who has lent sympathy to Velikovsky in recent years. A newly met
acquaintance of Velikovsky, Spelman Waxman, was in the company with his wife. He is retired now
from the Center for Antibiotics Research, that he had established at Rutgers University on the
basis of the returns from his discovery of certain antibiotics, especially streptomyocin, for
which he had received the Nobel Prize some years ago. The Waxmans had scarcely heard of
Velikovsky. I had only vaguely recollected them as well. The Juergens didn't know the others.
The Bigelows did not either, so all in all, except for Velikovsky, who has a great memory for
everybody and everything, it was a typical gathering of specialized intellectuals who had heard
little or nothing of one another despite the feeling that some of those present had that they
might have met or that they were worthy of being known to others. Jill later told me that Mrs.
Waxman seemed offended when Jill did not recognize her name, and of course Mrs. Waxman and Dr.
Waxman were probably surprised when I asked him how he spelled it later on when he was asking
me to send him a copy of "The Velikovsky Affair" which I of course felt that he should have
known about, and I am far too aware of the networks of acquaintanceship in The Great Society to
expect anybody to know me before meeting, unless they come from certain circles the existence
of which I am well aware of. Under the circumstances, it is easy to see why there is so much
trouble in gathering together a public opinion among scientists except at the most superficial
level of the top associations and those who agitate among them and in the mass media, denoted
by prizes and the like.

I learned about Kogan's work in desalinization of sea water. He is now constructing a model in
Israel that is supposed to be a great improvement over existing distillation types that require
much expensive copper alloy tubing. His method is a kind of open channel way that cuts down a
considerable proportion of cost of the installation that comes from tubing. He has also worked
in physics and astronomy. He is a large man, wall-eyed, pleasant and highly intelligent,
persuaded, I believe, of the validity of Velikovsky's general theory. We discussed the force
fields that could have been operative during the encounter of Venus and Earth about 1500 B. C.
He explained in answer to my questioning that it might be possible to set up a model to
duplicate the forces involved, but it would be a very costly affair. Natural forces are not
easy to set up in a natural state. He felt that the force of electromagnetism exerted presently
among the planetary bodies and the sun might be enormously modified because its cube principle
follows gravitational force very quickly and provides a very different relationship between the
two bodies. Hence, one cannot say that the force between Earth and Venus would be negligible at
all. Furthermore, we could venture a number of different positions, charges, currents, axial
coordinates and the like that would determine a very wide range of possible forces between
Earth and Venus during the period in question. And of course the present slow retrograde motion
of Venus does not at all indicate what might have been the position and rotation of Venus at
the time of the encounter. Unless someone comes up with a brilliant scheme, it will be
difficult to reconstruct the historical incident with details more specific than those rather
general ones provided already by Velikovsky. (However, I feel that there is some possibility
that we might be able to use a more intensive and exhaustive scrutiny of ancient documents to
discover somewhat more details about the motions of the heavenly bodies during the encounter
period.)

Dr. Waxman is an old Russian Jew of about the same age as Velikovsky, and they were able to
recall passing by one another at different points in their early wandering lives. Dr. Waxman
began to recollect his experiences in the years following his discovery of antibiotics and his
naming of the field. I asked especially, "How long would you say it was from the time you made
your discovery until the time you finally had a full research institute set up and operative
with the people you wanted?" He replied, after much clarification of the question, partly
because he, like other natural scientists, do not think in sociological process terms, that ten
years was the period from the time that he made his discovery until the pharmaceutical industry
purchased rights to use them, to the payment of royalties back to the University, to the voting
by the Trustees of a new Center for Antibiotic Research at Rutgers to be set up by Dr. Waxman,
to the construction of the building and then the hiring of a first group of deliberately
temporary people who were space occupiers to prevent other ill-housed faculty of the University
from taking over Waxman's facilities before he had a chance to bring in the permanent first-
rate men that he was seeking. Finally, at the end of ten years the cycle concluded. I commented
that this was a very short cycle of this type. It had to do with the nature of the discovery,
of the fact that a market was present, and a few unique factors, including, of course, the
shrewdness of Dr. Waxman himself throughout the total operation. A much more thorough study of
this experience would be very worthwhile from the standpoint of the history of science and the
sociology of science, as well as comparable studies of other experiences.

The tea itself was only a small part of a rather elaborate Russian type of menu that Elisheva
Velikovsky provided --sweet pickled herring, cheeses, hams, several kinds of cake, and the
company enjoyed itself at table, Franny having lodged herself below the table and under the
feet of everyone, somewhat to the embarrassment of Jill who was never really embarrassed about
this sort of thing but thought that poor Elisheva had enough to do without concerning herself
with the physical presence of a large bitch. Numerous stories were recounted.. Velikovsky told
of the legend of Solomon in which was apparently involved a bit of radium that had been picked
up somewhere and was carried in a lead box and was used from time to time for performing
miracles, and finally after generations was exhausted. I thought the story showed very well the
terrific power of Velikovsky's mind in looking at stories and seeing beyond the simple words
facts at an entirely different level. He is unquestionably a great detective.

Juergens caught me aside as we were leaving the table and the dining room to show me a long
letter he had just received from John Lear, the Science Editor of the Saturday Review. In this
letter, Lear was defending himself against Juergens' assertion in his essay on the history of
the Velikovsky controversy that Lear and Stuart McClintock of Collier's Magazine had attempted
to go beyond Velikovsky's wishes in jazzing up and popularizing Worlds in Collision, something
that we have felt contributed to the original hostility to the Velikovsky book on the part of
the scientists. Nothing in my experience would make me surprised at a popular magazine's
handling of a scientific issue. It is almost impossible, given the rules of journalism, to do
justice by science. Among many other reasons, the journals themselves are unequipped to handle
distinctions between fact statements and scandalous exaggerations. However, in this letter,
Lear again said that he had a most difficult time in working with Velikovsky; he disputes that
there was ever any intention of serializing the book itself instead of condensing it (something
that Velikovsky himself later confirmed and said that he had misremembered this fact when he
looked up his agreement), and went on at great length quoting copiously from a letter written
by McClintock to him a few months before McClintock's death last year, in which McClintock gave
the most harrowing account of an evening spent at Velikovsky's home when he and Lear and later
he alone, after Lear went out to wait for him, had tried to escape the wrath of Velikovsky and
to appease him and at the same time to try to present an article that they thought would be
printed by the magazine. In fact, McClintock accused Velikovsky at one point in his ranting and
raving of bringing out a gun from the cabinet, putting it on the table and saying "Let this
settle the matter right now." McClintock wrote, if Lear is correct in having such a letter,
that he McClintock left the place shaking and with an eruption of the ulcers that he had
thought once cured and after a year felt poorly as a result of the meeting. I laughed rather
grimly when I heard the story. Of course one would have to check the reliability of both Lear
and McClintock in respect to the incident at which Mrs. Velikovsky was supposed to be present.
But again I would not put it past Velikovsky. I could see that a man coming out of a dozen
years of every day in the stacks all day long and with his whole life work and magnificent set
of theories at stake, and with all the driving power and determination that was required for
that effort, being confronted by what had to be a shallow, glancing misrepresentation of what
he was trying to say, and considering also the enormous domineering quality of Velikovsky and
of how he wants to control every single thing that has to do with himself, he would be most
intemperate, disagreeable and could even have pulled out the pistol. Juergens wondered whether
he should show the letter to Velikovsky or Mrs. Velikovsky. I said hold it another day or two
until I could look at it more thoroughly, and then we went into further conversation with the
group, the Waxmans having departed and Jill having gone onto the subject of forming a
foundation for the study of some of the theories in which Velikovsky was interested. He would
like me to organize it. I am thinking strongly of it but I would like a much more clear
definition of our respective roles.

I arranged to see Juergens several days later and did on Thursday afternoon. Then I read
through the letter again, we joked about it some more, and I said to Juergens that I saw no
reason why it should not be shown to Velikovsky. I believed it worked out all right because the
next day Velikovsky called me on another pretext and raised the subject again just to hear my
response. He didn't mind my treating it in a jocular way. And he certainly did not express the
right amount of indignation, I thought, at the fact that I appeared to believe the story. But
he denied it and said that he had never owned a pistol since he had one many years ago in
Russia or was it Israel. He weakened my belief in the letter a little, but it would seem hard
for McClintock to make up the story completely, so specific was it. He also claimed that Lear
was not there at all during the meeting.

Juergens and I then discussed the foundation, and he agreed completely with me that prior to
the establishment of the foundation it should be determined that it would carry a full range of
objective studies of the many types of problems in numerous disciplines that we had come upon
in the course of the Velikovsky experience. Furthermore, he agreed that we should ask for the
rights to almost all of the Velikovsky archive because it is from his voluminous notes and the
total collection of commentary that we could fashion many a first-rate hypothesis for our
colleagues to research, both in the history of science and the substantive areas of concern. I
am now drafting such a letter to Velikovsky explaining the conditions under which we would have
to work. It is impossible to be in any dependent position with respect to Velikovsky and get
out any kind of regular journal, or series of publications, or systematic argument in
opposition to his theories. I could not work otherwise; I would find, as would everyone else
concerned with the foundation and its publications, that he would gobble up all of our time
whether it was necessary or not in the affairs of the foundation and we would be able to do
nothing with our lives otherwise. The pretext I referred to above that Velikovsky called me
about had to do with Professor Neugebauer. Neugebauer had apparently accused me of "dishonesty"
in some letter to Delaplaine, a science writer, because I did not print or acknowledge a letter
that he had written me (the ABS) in 1963. But I don't recall having received such a letter
until 1965, at which time, O. N., probably feeling threatened by an imminent visit of
Velikovsky to Brown University, N's own school, sent me an explanation of why he had
distributed "only one hundred" copies of his review of Velikovsky's book containing a serious
error that would make Velikovsky appear foolish or treacherous with facts.

Every month of the decades of 60's and 70's there would be an alarm raised to rally to V.'s
cause, and the volunteer firemen would rush to the scene. For persistent devotion to duty over
the whole period Warner Sizemore gets the prize. He was out of Georgia originally, became a
Presbyterian minister, studied for his doctorate at Temple University. He never completed his
dissertation, which he might have written ten times over if he had not given so much time to
Velikovsky. Sizemore was an artist as well, a modest painter who would not stretch himself to
create. He devised, too, a method of reproducing in wood a painting, whether classical or
banal, and sold his productions at fairs in shopping centers and fairgrounds.

I must not give the impression that V. would not help his supporters. When it was sage to do
so, and would not compromise himself, he would write letters; since almost always the cosmic
heretics needed letters that would recommend them to academic foes of V. and cover up their
friendliness to V., there were not many of such letters. In Sizemore's case, V. guaranteed a
mortgage on a house in Trenton, so that Sizemore and his family might settle down. They did and
found their life-paths successfully.

The interventions of Sizemore on V.'s behalf were to be numbered in the hundreds. A minister of
the many, he became a minister of the one. Hardly a week would go by without some assistance.
He gave counsel, wrote letters to the media, made phone calls, solicited support, attended
every related public assembly, taped miles of discussions and lectures, gave his own funds to
publish the magazine Kronos, kept hostilities to a minimum, and maintained a good-natured
concern through thick and thin and down the years. He became Professor of Philosophy and
Theology at Glassboro State College and persuaded the authorities to authorize a Velikovsky
Center, which began to collect items of interest and which served as a background screen for
Kronos magazine. There was little gain here except the prestige of an academic address. V.
never did consign a copy of his archive to the "Center."

Friends like Sizemore come mostly in fairy tales and epic poetry. V. took him for granted, as
indeed he took everyone for granted who did not hold some prestigious place or manage a power
center. He bequeathed Sizemore nothing -- nor anything to anyone else except his wife, and then
by descent through her to his family. It is continuously remarkable how gratitude in life,
where it exists, is typically decapitated in the performance of a last testament. It was
disgraceful, after having taken up so much time over decades talking about making his archives
available and helping others carry on his work, that V. did nothing to that effect nor did his
wife and daughters, and in fact his books and materials and funds were held more tightly than
ever after his death. I have already said that V. undervalued what he received from others and
overvalued what he gave them. Lewis Greenberg, to take another case, had for a decade edited
Kronos without compensation (unless his profligate telephoning were to be counted as such) and
could only wrench a few articles out of V. and his heiresses. Very late, Jan Sammer, the
family's assistant, helped to pry loose some pieces. As we shall see, Mankind in Amnesia is not
much as a book, but would have appeared gracefully and appropriately as articles in Kronos.

Meanwhile Kronos was weakened by its top-heavy reliance upon Velikovsky's case. When the
magazine was very young, Deg had proposed, in a fateful meeting of several cosmic heretics in a
Chinese restaurant of Philadelphia, that the magazine "go public." It should define its mission
in general terms and seek a wider audience. Greenberg, whose paranoiac outlook he was the first
to confess, felt threatened and drew back. Deg, who should have pursued his aim more gently and
privately, let it drop, and hardly had personal contact with Greenberg in the years that
followed.

But this is true, that V. would have been outraged if any of his circle, and certainly Kronos,
would have essayed to count him as only a leading figure among cosmic heretics, other than as
their raison d'etre. Those who thought such "evils" were evicted, like the Talbotts, or dropped
out, like Stecchini and Bill Mullen. Only Deg, I must say, pushed over the years for an opening
up to the world, and only once did what seemed like an awful break occur, which lasted for a
couple of days. Then the British began to skirmish, and opened up frontally with the Glasgow
revisionism; Deg began circulating his own manuscripts and coining doubly heretical terms like
"revolutionary primevalogy;" and ultimately Kronos began to carry non-Velikovskian material and
theory.

Withal Deg could note with interest how in published articles of Kronos and the British Review
and wherever else a piece might appear, the writer would be sure to interject a mention or
quotation from V. in the first paragraphs, as over the years, in American political science
journals, one felt he must refer to the latest book of the "hit parade," one year being the
year to cite V. O. Key on political parties, next year David Truman on political processes,
then Robert Dahl on democratic theory, and so on, or, in a more stable setting, the communist
scientific writers who seem hardly able to put a pen to paper without promptly keying in a
reference to Marx or Engels, no matter what the subject and "the state of the art;" and the
Chinese for a while with Mao, and so on. The issue was not "giving credit where credit is due"
but of political-social game-playing. When a man writes much, he must ultimately mention
everything from sex to the weather, and every phrase can become Biblical in its marvelous
"perceptiveness" and "prophecy."

Deg was not of course alone in detecting this in-gathering effect of fame, as I discerned in
reading the Journal of Andr‚ Gide for 4 February, 1922:

Freud. Freudianism... For the last ten years, or fifteen, I have been indulging in it without
knowing it. Many an idea of mine, taken singly and set forth or developed at length in a thick
book, would have made a great hit -- if only it were the only child of my brain. I cannot
supply the initial outlay and the upkeep for each one of them nor even for any one in
particular.

"Here is something that, I fear, will bring grist to your mill," Riviere said to me the other
day, speaking of Freud's little book on sexual development. I should say!

It would be impossible to carry in any interesting manner an account of Deg's interventions on
V.'s behalf, just as it would be to list Sizemore's multitude of favors. Instances would
include: setting up with John Bell a meeting for V. to address at New York University (Mar. 1,
1968); offering to the President of the Franklin Institute of Philadelphia (Feb. 20, 1967) to
take the platform with V., if it was the presentation of "another side" that was truly wanted;
dealing with publishers (Dell, Feb 27, 1968, Simon and Schuster, et al..) to publish more of
V.'s rebuttals of the "establishment;" writing letters to the Editor of Newsweek (May 29, 1968)
and to other media directors; appearing on radio discussions; helping to arrange television
programs; addressing a "Social Order in Science Study Group" at the George Washington
University (Jan. 18, 1965), meanwhile conducting general research in the field and carrying on
another complicated life.

On occasion (rare because his obduracy was known) intimates remonstrated with Deg for spending
too much energy upon V. 's problems. His attitude was typical: give me a better cause in the
intellectual world, a more worthwhile victim; a better archive; most victims are dull, or
psychotic, or trivial... "Think of your own interests," they would say. But that only confused
Deg. He didn't feel actually that he was giving V. so much. His "own interests" were for
affection, good food, good company, sex, beauty, travel, and there seemed a good supply of all
these to be had. As for "other people's interests," he would gladly save the world and did make
a couple of literary stabs in that direction, nor was there any world movement worthwhile; he
tried to save higher education by starting a school. He jumped into the Vietnam vortex but
could do little. He took initiatives to advance his field of learning by inventing a
computerized information retrieval system. Other things as well, such as a stint to help erase
anti-semitic elements in the Catholic rite, offers to reorganize his New York University
department, etc. It was not so easy, I conclude, for him to have found a better cause. Recall
it was the "richness" of V.'s materials that attracted Deg, and allowed the science of
sociology and the history of science to progress.

Let me dip into his journal to see what was up otherwise. On March 8, 1968 is an entry that
combines food, presidential politics, Vietnam, economic development, the arts, and religion:

Lunched 1-3 pm with Rod Rockefeller at "Pireaus, My Love," rolled lamb and stuffed flounder in
a second floor saloon lined with portholes. Decided:

1) We might set up a company to study possibilities of large-scale condominium conversions of
slum properties. I'll form a committee.

2) It would be well to set up a committee of ten for Nelson R. for President among scholars and
from that I might send a larger mailing to the 15,000 political scientists of the country, and
then all the other fields.

3) IBEC would be interested in VN if United Fruit could come along and develop the economic
output of a new city. [Deg was pushing to create a new city in Vietnam.] We'll see what Julian
Turner [U. S. Army Colonel, formerly logistics chief in Vietnam] has to say next week when he
comes from Fort Lewis.

4) The fine arts corporation and antique properties holding corporation can be gotten to
whenever the means and times are right.

5) We'll try to get the National Council of Churches to do a practical and strong job of
handling its 3-year program on the social responsibilities of corporations.

I scarcely need say that none of this succeeded, but perhaps it goes to show how Greek cuisine
can help to vent hopeful dreams. Every now and then the two men would lunch together and
concoct schemes that didn't seem to go far beyond the lunch table. Deg stopped seeing Rod
without saying anything because when the big crunch descended with the school in Switzerland,
Rod gave a mere $100 to the cause. They were used to dividing their lunch bills; this Swiss
fare was too exotic for Rod to share.

The same night, he was writing a poem on the train:

How many Fridays we thanked for not being Mondays, wish we life away so. Draw back all those
weeks, dear breath, into the fresh lungs of youth and fill them with the best of life, skimmed
of complications, Humpty Dumpty splatted where he fell and tra la la la for him.

Just a dog lying in the sun Waters creeping up a beach A long walk to nowhere An enthusiastic
argument A book on the wide harmless world. No riotous shocks and jolts but sweet time, soft
time fall stilly, pass gently around our retracements drink long and cool wet and stretch these
cords from Monday to Friday. Will the little god to rest and give the big one a chance to work.

Some of the life he was leading in these years is reflected in the following letter from Naxos
to Dr. Zvi Rix of Jerusalem, dated July 19, 1976:

Dear Dr. Rix: Greetings! I hope my letter finds you well -- and not too impatient with your
friends and colleagues of the field of revolutionary primevalogy. I have settled down in Naxos
for a few weeks (until August 15), after visits in London, Amsterdam, Delft, Dusseldorf,
Dornach (the Rudolf Steiner Center), Athens, and Thera Santorini. On the 15th of August, I go
to Athens, the Dordogne (to spend two weeks around the caves and digs), Nice for the IX
International Congress of the Union of Pre-and Proto-Historical Sciences, and then probably
straight back to NYC and Princeton. I have been carrying your letter of April 2 (terrible!)
with me for months. Let me "respond" to it.

1) As I have said, you only need a) to be able to come and b) to find out whether I am here, to
come to Naxos as my guest any time.

2) If you ask him, Sizemore will probably duplicate for you a set of the Glassboro papers,
which I see are beginning to appear in Kronos.

3) Did I send you the "Jupiter and Saturn" piece? No! I have searched my folders here and,
alas, I must have given the copy I had carried with me for you to somebody in the English group
(I become generous and present-oriented under the influence of good company and whiskey). I
will send it to you when I return; it is only a brief piece with a well-phrased hypothetical
formula.

4) Did your piece not appear or is it not promised for publication in Kronos? (I have no copy
of the Birthday Symposium myself.)

5) Your "psycho-politics" was gratefully received and read by my seminar at NYU.

6) I wish it were as easy (cf. your compliment re my article on Michelson's Moonshine) to set
up our own elaborated time frame and scheme for myth analysis as it is to knock down those set
up by others.

7) The model for the new Holocene that I set up views it as an age of the "Unsettling of Heaven
and Birth of Man," the age of catastrophes, using Greco-Roman terminology: Urania, 14,000-
11,500 (BP 2000 AD); Lunia, 11,500-8000; Saturnia, 8000-5700; Jovea, 5700-4400; Mercuria 4400-
3450; Venusia, 3450-2750; Martia, 2750-1600; Solaria, 1600-0. The greatest catastrophes
occurred with the birth of the Moon from the Pacific Ocean ca 11500 for much crust was lost as
the larger element of outer planets (Uranus-Neptune, etc. possibly) passed closely and the
water canopies fell cataclysmically. The scheme appears too radical at first sight, but in
hundreds of pages of working back and forth logically and with the scraps of available
evidence, it seems to hold together. I propose it in order that we may begin to fit in all of
the scattered pieces of myth, evolution, paleontology, behavior. Whenever the exposition is
ready I shall send it to you.

7a) as for the dynamics of the birth of Homo Sapiens Schizotypicalis, I have at least a
pamphlet nearing reproduction on the subject and will send you that too. I shall try to find H.
Gunkel's book; thank you. 8) I do have access to the sourcebooks that Corliss is publishing on
ancient riddles and reports. I agree with you that St. Brendan-Quetzalcoatl follows a universal
pattern; the ultimate problem is to fix the first age (Urania?) of the practice of these rites
and to show how they emerged from the brain (double-brain?) of the new homo sapiens
schizotypicalis cum geo-celestial terrors.

In the sourcebooks that you mention (Corliss') did you remark upon the vitrified Scottish
forts? I am going into this matter now. This seems to be lightning, and on a grand scale, i. e.
the protracted withdrawal or rush of charge from the Earth via the most convenient modes of
exit towards an accumulated and approaching extraterrestrial charge (opposite). Hypothesis: at
a certain point in time (Mercuria?), thousands of points of Earth were mobilized to discharge
electricity (cf. my article on Troy IIg, which might be synchronized with the vitrification
found in many places). Query: does the Tower of Babel case belong here? Did the languages of
man disperse in shocked amnesiac behavior? Do the ziggurats and pyramids evidence Vitrification
or an intent to facilitate (ex post facto) future current-flows? (Troy IIg is in pyramid-
building times.) Note Mercurial qualities? When did Hermes flourish as a god? (under overall
aegis of Zeus, perhaps). If people on an eminence feel current starting to flow, they get out
before the heavy scorching from the heavier flow occurs. Are there vitrified eminences and
walls, mid-3rd millennium, in the ruins of your area ? Perhaps, and even probably, this
phenomenon, like quakes, flood fire, whirlwinds, occurs whenever a major extra-terrestrial
approach or major planet disruption occurs.

A young Dutch geologist, Poul Andriessen, is here in Naxos drawing samples for 40K-40A tests,
that he performs himself. We've spent many hours discussing the validity of the technique.
There are serious questions that he admits, although he defends the results of his other
radiochronometries. It is all so difficult, a seemingly endless set of important problems
concerning which one must make up his mind.

But enough for now. The sea is too rough for swimming -- or at least it is not inviting, so I
shall drive my motorcycle into town and see what the tavernas are offering by way of food and
company.

With best wishes, I remain, sincerely, Alfred de Grazia
Then years later, he lies in Stylida with a broken leg (the motorcycle, of course):

June 7, 1978

Foot swollen and aching this morning. Big discussion with A. M. as to cause of this "relapse."
she saying my walking upon it caused it, I saying that it may be the normal effects of
stressing the foot in order to get the cartilage, foot bones, muscles, tendons articulating
properly. I confess, though, to a certain worry from the beginning of the case: that everything
inside was thoroughly disarranged, apart from the broken bones, and may be difficult to reorder
functionally. But, too, I took a long swim and that, plus walking, has markedly tightened the
muscles of the calf. Wouldn't the stretch pain the tendons?

Reading in Velikovsky's Peoples of the Sea to recheck whether he had separated sufficiently the
Egyptians' "Peoples of the Sea" from those "Peoples" alleged to be destructive elsewhere at the
same time, I find that he has not and I should one day pursue the idea that "Peoples" fiction
served to cover up the Martian catastrophes of the 8th and 7th century, 3-400 years before the
time of which Velikovsky writes.

But the force of his arguments makes me yearn to circularize a brief questionnaire among all
Egyptologists asking whether they have read the book and whether the hypothesis of Ramses III
being of the 4th century is at all useful or defensible. I believe that the results would be
scandalous.

Stylida evening 17 June 1978 A Swede dropped in unexpectedly. His friend is interested in
buying into my land. He stayed a few minutes and left. Ami rode into town with him and brought
back food and mail and news. Then we swam. I continued to hack my way with a hand ax down the
bluff and back up again, as I had begun the other day. It was easier, the footholes more
prominent. I slung a rope around the bush and dangled it down to steady me on the crawl up.

There were 30 pieces of mail of which 2 were for Ami, one rejecting "nicely" her second novel
(really the fourth she has written) and the other from a journalist who compares her in a
review with Anais Nin. I received a rejection of my elaborate request for a grant from the
National Endowment for the Humanities; for various reasons, I don't mind this. It's already an
article or two on the "Ballroom of the Unconscious." [It is carried in The Burning of Troy.] I
wanted the money to live on and to employ Ami who knows the literature so well, supposing that
other means of subsistence don't come in.

Of the force that moves this varied activity through the years, there is more than a hint in a
note of Deg's Journal, undated but apparently of 1973, the more interesting in view of the
massive narcissism that has been ascribed to V.

Ten years ago I was induced by L. Stecchini to gaze upon the writings of I. V., catalyzed by an
accidental reading of Oedipus and Akhnaton. This led up many different paths of philosophy and
science, which I would not have had the courage or confidence to undertake, if I had not been a
victim of the magnificent arrogance of R. M. Hutchins whose New Plan and own spirit of it had
pervaded the University of Chicago with an idea that man, even in this age of specialization
and seemingly endless data banks, could and must master a survey of all knowledge to be
educated. This happened twenty-four years beforehand.

But this would not have been enough if there had not been sixteen years before a narcissistic
bending of my character in infancy and childhood, a fierce desire to keep the world in all its
forms within me (to own the world) and a fierce competitiveness toward all others to enter it
upon my own terms.













COSMIC HERETICS: Part 1 :

by Alfred de Grazia


CHAPTER FOUR


A PROPER RESPECT FOR AUTHORITY

In the summer of 1971, Deg led a party of 300 persons, with many camp followers, up the Swiss
Alps to found a college and V. came later to teach. It did not take V. long to perceive that Deg
was continually in danger of falling victim to a human landslide that Deg's own explosive force
had set into motion. When it came to V.'s turn to speak to the representative assembly, a
beautiful contrivance of Deg which, like the French revolutionary assembly of 1789, had gone
wild, V. called up Freud's Totem and Taboo and gravely admonished the respectful group of the
danger that lay in killing their father. Deg felt embarrassed while dutifully thanking V. for
his remarks, for he was a staunch republican who had always disbelieved in patriarchal
leadership systems and because many of the college crowd would be all the more delighted if they
could rid themselves of their father as well as a leader, killing two birds with one stone.

"I, an octogenarian," said V., "stride with the young of mind. There is no cult of Velikovsky:
there is only the cult of scientific and historical truth. The youths sense this, and the
rebellion against the pseudoscience taught from the cathedrals of the universities is not for
away."

V. to Princeton Graduate Forum (Oct. 18, 1972): "Nineteen years ago I called the young... to
look for new vistas, not to be afraid of calumny and name-calling. Today I repeat my call; it's
a new generation. I call you to cross the barriers between sciences... My work is not finished
... It is in your hands. It is up to you to decide if you wish to repeat what the authorities
told you or to become authorities yourselves --to grow and to be non-conformists and to take
abuse and to be exonerated some day. So be courageous and don't be afraid." If V. had been given
a son, he would have wanted him to be like the astronomer, Carl Sagan, but of course, in
agreement with his ideas. Being what he was and the times being what they were, he was probably
lucky to have no son. Rare these days is the child who adopts the father's views or even defends
him. When V. and Sagan were appearing on the same platform at a AAAS meeting in San Francisco, V
invited Sagan to his room, and there sought, if not to persuade him of his ideas, to influence
and neutralize him, perhaps in a way to hypnotize him. Sagan only redoubled his criticisms as a
result; the attempt to make a son of him back-fired. Sagan regularly lectured against Velikovsky
in his classes and published repeatedly his essay that was said to finish him off.

Still Sagan could invest himself with V.'s claims, and probably (though he would not meet with
me to talk about such matters) he was convinced that the father was well dead and gone and was
terrified at the feeling that V. now wished to be patriarch to him. Interviewed by Richard Baker
on BBC 4 (radio) "Start the Week," 30 March 1983, he was asked, along with other guests, "the
moment in your life that you've been most pleased about?" Sagan talked of the, "delightful
moments" when his predictions about planets were borne out by space vehicles on the spot.
Pressed for a "particular discovery," he replied "Well, the discovery that the surface of Venus
is extremely hot, about 380 deg-C, [Actually it is much higher] and produced by a massive
atmosphere Greenhouse Effect that keeps the heat in..." The second is a dubious theory, not at
all original with him.

That he could claim the first can most charitably be regarded as a slip of the tongue, such as
Sigmund Freud describes; inadvertent and often embarrassing utterances, they are usually
prompted by a strong suppressed desire of the speaker to make a point otherwise prohibited by
rules, morals, or truth. Sagan, one might surmise, let the claim slip out as an expression of
general megalomania, but the particular claim, out of all those he might have thought of,
strikes at V.'s well-established claim of predicting the high heat of Venus. There is here a
hint of psychological pressure working to take for his own specifically the property of the
father. V. was fixated on authority, the higher the better: he sought out acquaintances and
enemies on high levels. But he did not gather intelligent up-coming young people until late in
life; he has written a book on his conversations with Einstein, yet he would never have dreamed
of writing a book of his immensely richer conversations with Juergens about electricity and
Stecchini on ancient languages and the history of science. Why? Because they were unknown. His
idea of arrival was naive. The great ones would recognize him on the basis of his books. The
young would come along, following what their teachers say. Until late in life, he had no idea of
the striking fact of intellectual history, that most geniuses and heretics start out young.

At any given moment in time, Harvard University is likely to have a couple of pets of the
communists. It's a gimcrack impeccability. Harlow Shapely was one of these -- and, of course, a
great deal more, too much more, member and officer of dozens of scientific associations,
Director of the Lowell observatory, and more still. In poking about, Deg discovered that he had
even once invoked exoterrestrial forces to explain terrestrial phenomena.

Well, V. had thought, a man so broad in his interests and tastes would welcome a helping hand to
apply legends to astronomy. V. was anticommunist and had been so since the earliest successes of
the Russian Bolshevist movement had not gone so far as to efface anti-semitism in Russia. The
authoritarian aspects of communism, or statism in general, did not faze him. Principles of
government were foreign to him, a sharp contrast to Deg, who was continuously seeking better
designs for human institutions. To V., governments and men were bad or good. The Soviet leaders
were bad because they acted badly. Nor should persons be forgiven evil because of the pressure
of circumstances. How he would love to live quite without compromises!

The only dispute in connection with Deg's article on "The Reception System of Science" of the
ABS issue occurred over his mentioning V.'s "respect for authority." Deg told him of the
expression, "the Cabots speak only to the Lodges and the Lodges speak only to God." His response
was not to reform, but to try more of it: he writes Deg a few months later that he knows that he
is speaking like a Cabot but would Deg support him in his efforts to bring the prestigious
figure of Lord Bertrand Russell over to his side?

V. was on a collision course with himself. He practiced on Aristotle, Newton and Darwin,
numerous 19th century writers and then on current authorities, but impersonally and only with
the slightest irony, in a situation calling for broad sarcasm.

He thought of himself as an authority but did not realize that he was undermining present
authorities and that they would react as authorities invariably do, by putting him down. But,
then, he was a poor sociologist. Like many a psychoanalyst (and most scientists for that matter)
he barely realized that the field existed.

He was flabbergasted when his Worlds in Collision was attacked so vigorously and then each
succeeding book was treated the same, dismissed, or ignored. It was all the more shocking
because Worlds was a best-seller, which brought popular authority into play as well. Here both
V. and many of his followers showed themselves unwitting victims of the market place in ideas.
They did not suspect success. Deg whose life had begun early to forge a chain of successes, had
contempt for success. The concatenation of any man's successes was but a motley cluster of
medals on the breast of the generalissimo of a banana republic. V. was unhappy with the support
he received. It seemed that he would get agreement and aid from exactly those sources that he
did not himself respect while being rebuffed by those who should flock to his banner. One had to
be an anti-authoritarian to support him, but such were rarely to be found in physics, biology,
astronomy and geology. Passive anti-authoritarians, yes, often erupting in personal
eccentricity. Anthropology - but he knew little besides Freud's work on anthropology. Psychology
-- again the psychoanalytic approach, not tight empirical psychology.

So he got support from people who usually were just plain folks, intelligent (and therefore I
say rare) readers, and a great many confused believers, or at least people who V. at bottom
thought had no right to pass judgment on him. Like Moses, V spent a lot of private time
disliking his People. Like the barons of the Magna Carta, he wanted judgment by his peers,
meaning not the worthy or those not yet ennobled, but "the peers of the realm."

Perhaps Oedipus and Akhnaton should have been entitled "The Oedipus Complex Unmasked," or "The
Jews were First with God," V. enjoyed thinking about title and slogans. Deg and he would spent
some off-track moments in such half-serious play. V.'s titles were exceptionally effective:
Worlds in Collision, Ages in Chaos, Earth in Upheaval, and so were most of the titles of
sections of his works: thus in Oedipus and Akhnaton there were "The Sphinx," "The Seven-Gated
Thebes and the Hundred-Gated Thebes," "A Stranger on the Throne," "King living in Truth," "The
King's Mother and Wife," and so on.

When Deg, six years after they had met, presented him with The Torrid Love Affair of Moon and
Mars, he had to have explained to him the Hollywood Americanism of "Torrid Love Affair" and
liked the double entendre with the heat of a cosmic encounter, but then eventually preferred The
Disastrous Love Affair of Moon and Mars, which denoted, if not heat, a cosmic event and
catastrophe.

Later on, still, he could let himself like Chaos and Creation, and even Homo Schizo, but would
not let himself contemplate Moses and His Electric God, but this was part of another matter, his
taboo of Moses.

"You will damage me with this book." he declared solemnly to Deg, Since Deg made no reference to
V.'s idea of Moses in God's Fire, which V. had not seen anyhow, and since V. had damaged the
reputation of thousands of scholars "in the line of duty," he must have been gripped by an
illusion that referred to an entirely personal problem of his own in regard to Moses. What could
it have been?

Martin Sieff, a Belfast Anglo-Irish-Jewish journalist and historian --one of the cosmic heretics
-- spoke out in 1981 about the taboo: "The role of Moses is strangely muted in Worlds in
Collision. Moses is mentioned only in connection with the voice of Yahweh at the flaming bush
and the trumpet blasts of Sinai." Further, "in Ages in Chaos, one major figure who is obvious in
his absence from the same historical canvas, is that same Moses."

Again significantly, the ideas behind -- not up front -- in Oedipus and Akhnaton were
instrumental in the creation of works. V. admitted, "This study carried me into the larger field
of Egyptian history and to the concept of Ages in Chaos, a reconstruction of 1200 years of
ancient history... More than eighteen years passed from the conception of the work and the first
draft of its re-writing and preparation for the printer."

Moses was taboo to V., a subject to be turned from and skirted around, except to show that Moses
came before Akhnaton and that Freud was fearful yet adulatory of Moses. Even while railing
against Freud's problem with his father, V. may have seen himself as Moses and son of Moses,
down the line of succession that began with Joshua. "Velikovsky," said Livio to Deg, as they
walked down the street after their first meeting with him, "will be the only man who can play
Moses when they make a movie of his book." And he guffawed in his basso profondo.

We have, that is, two plots in Oedipus and Akhnaton. One is the classic scientific method and
detective work. The other is the intensely private psychic world of a man whose biological
father was a strong and beloved figure, Simon, and whose intellectual father, Freud, had
weaknesses that must be exposed, offenses against his people for wishing to abandon them for the
gentile world and for taking away and making an Egyptian of their common ancestor, Moses.

Before coming to America, V. had, in one of his few published articles, reanalyzed the dreams of
Freud that were available and concluded that Freud was torn by a desire to assimilate to the
gentile world. V. would have none of this. While Freud would make the Jews into gentiles, V
would make the gentiles into Jews.

Here I would quote Martin Sieff who is talking about V.'s article "The Dreams Freud Dreamed"
(1941).


Velikovsky was now using the psychoanalytic weapon his intellectual father had forged against
his own creator, against Freud himself... Velikovsky went further. The initial aim of his
research finally to emerge over twenty years later as Oedipus and Akhnaton, was to kill the
Freudian father dragon in its lair. Akhnaton, the first monotheist in history, stood revealed as
Oedipus. Freud's arch-saint turns out also to be his arch-sinner... Velikovsky dedicated Ages in
Chaos to his physical father, but sought to erase the name of Freud, his intellectual father,
with his Oedipus and Akhnaton.

At the same time, V. could not go to great lengths in redeeming Moses, the father, without
incurring the danger of displaying that he himself felt the strength and mission of Moses, and
that he resembled Michelangelo's "Moses" more than the other son Freud did, who went to Rome to
worship the statue. Worse yet, he, too, like Freud, would have to dispossess Moses if he wrote
about him, for how could a psychoanalyst have perceived Moses except as a hallucinator and
manipulator of crowds? And then what of Yahweh? Au revoir, Adonis.

That V. was not Moses, did not pretend to be, and even denied it by refusing the question of
"Who was Moses?" are not superfluous remarks. To many of his readers and followers he was a
Moses of modern science and history. To himself he was one who had all that Moses possessed
except the opportunity. Deg tended to agree and he had studied many men, but he was not the most
devout of followers. Aside from possessing his own conceits, he did not like Moses' theocracy,
nor his ambitions, nor his ruthlessness, nor his religious deception even if it was founded upon
self-deception.

V. differed from his secret idol by more than he himself realized and Deg liked him better for
it. If a friend, like Mel Tumin, professor of sociology at Princeton University, would say to
him, as he did on the train to New York one time, I can't stand him, he's an arrogant, egomaniac
bastard, Deg would grin tolerantly and say: "I understand what you mean, but he's not all that
bad, and where do you find such minds?"

Come to think of it, this was more or less what Einstein said to an antagonist, Bernard Cohen,
when asked about Velikovsky. Referring to Worlds in Collision, he laughed and said, "It's crazy,
but it's not bad." V. could be riled up invariably by the mention of this story, and he explains
carefully in Stargazers and Gravediggers how it was wrongly told and was used to destroy his
precious relationship with Einstein, and what he conceived to be Einstein's true view and mood,
and I agree with him, and so does Deg.

In this connection, a private note that Deg made in May of 1972 may be offered for what it is
worth:

I have been present on numerous occasions when V. was under pressure to be intellectually and
politically dishonest. I would say he passed practically all of these tests with flying colors.
The rare exceptions have practically all to do with pretending to have supporters among the
authorities who did not support him so strongly. Explain. When you compare his conduct with that
of scientists who had no reason to be unscrupulous, because they were already entrenched or in
process of achieving established rank, he stands out like a rose from a manure pile.

Because his manner and figure were impressive and imperative, V. seems to have encouraged
subconsciously the awesome stupidity of attacks upon himself. Opponents became reckless out of
threat, losing their capacity to reason precisely at the moment when they were being called upon
to be reasonable. This is a behavioral pattern that I take pride in having newly discovered,
because Deg nor anyone else to my knowledge has ever mentioned it. Let me give an example:

In Ages in Chaos, V. took away five centuries that did not belong to Egyptian history, whereas
in Peoples of the Sea V. took away three centuries that did belong to Egypt, at least according
to Deg, who was siding with the "Glasgow Revisionists." One could not follow this important
development from a reading of the great newspapers or the scholarly journals. The New York Times
did carry a review of the latter work, antagonistic as expected, but quite irrelevant to the
issue. Arthur Isenberg, an Israeli writer, addressed a reproach to the Times editor, containing
inter alia a neat statistical reprimand for Thomsen's snide remark about V. 's supposed
overdoing of "the first person perpendicular."

17 July 1977

The Editor, New York Times Book Review Section The New York Times 229 West 43rd street New
York, N. Y. 10036 (U. S. A.)

To the Editor: In his reply to his critics, Dietrick Thomsen is ever more unconvincing then in
his (highly!) original review of Dr. Velikovsky's "Peoples of the Sea". He begins by
patronizingly awarding unsolicited certificates to some of those who take Velikovsky's book more
seriously than he does: They are "fine and intelligent people, and they raise cogent points"
which --alas! -- "lack of space" prevents Thomsen from refuting. Next, he concedes that "in many
points" Velikovsky "may be correct", an acknowledgment which he repeats (in spite of space
limitations) a paragraph later. But then he dilutes the concession by means of a peculiar
definition of science as a "set of mind" which, he implies, Velikovsky does not exhibit. His
major objection it seems, is to the tone of Velikovsky's book --as if scientific theories should
be judged by connoisseurs of tone and style to determine their adequacy.

Tone apart, he faults Velikovsky for overdoing the use of the pronoun "I" (the "first person
perpendicular" as Thomsen quaintly calls it.). This prompted a little research on my own part,
with the following results:

No. of Times I is used in 100 Author Short Title consecutive pages

Darwin Origin of Species 153
Hoyle Nature of the Universe 116
Einstein Relativity 60
Eddington New Pathways in Science 191
Tinbergen Herring Gull's World 161
Von Frisch Bees, Their Vision, etc. 132
Velikovsky Peoples of the Sea 8

(total "I" count for the entire book, xvi-261 page: 32)
(My counting was done hurriedly: the actual figures are likely to be somewhat larger in all
cases: Thomsen is welcome to a recount.)

A grand egotist like V. rarely lets his third person slip uncontrolled into the first person,
whatever the provocation. In fact, he slips into the third person, as V. sometimes did, talking
of himself as "Velikovsky."

Later on, Thomsen, the reviewer, defended himself in a letter to Clark Whelton. He was furious
at the impossible task set for him by the Times, and for bizarre editorial cuts.

What I have tried to express here is that somehow the figure of V made people lose their senses
and self-control; rages collected and rushed about like the winds when released from the bag of
Aeolus.

V. moved to Princeton from Upper Manhattan in 1952; Deg moved there from Stanford, California,
in 1957. Five blocks apart, it took five years to meet, a block a year, so to speak. Deg was
deeply involved in New York City and travelled sometimes to Washington. V. spent these years in
secluded study, with his wife and his daughter's family for company, his wife's musical ensemble
to listen to, several meetings with Harry H. Hess, and some conversations with Albert Einstein.
He did not attend conventions, or review other people's books; he did not join the network of
science, but then how could he? There was no science of neo-catastrophism. He might have joined
associations of ancient history, anthropology, philosophy and history of science, though; he did
not, wisely, for he was interested in a peculiar combination, unrecognizable, except in its bits
and pieces, in conventional programs of the associations. He was a special case; he would have
it no other way; he wanted to sit above all of them and receive their respect. But the ideas of
an authority and heretic may be contradictory. To be a heretic is to be opposed to established
authority. If V. could not be an authority, he would be a heretic. His true heroes were top
authorities; his professed heroes were heretics. There were three of these, he would say to Deg.

One was Diego Pirez, also known as Schlmo Molcho. A second was Giordano Bruno. A third was
Miguel Serveto (or Michael Servetus). Deg's heroes were many; he was more polytheistic, so to
speak, or even antireligious. They ranged from Jesus of Nazareth to Benjamin Franklin. They
would include in the Church-dominated Middle Ages William of Occam, for he was an empiricist,
nominalist, anti-Aristotelian libertarian who believed that words signified only real things and
events, who taught also that reason could only arrive at valid comment when talking of the real
world, not the divine, which only faith could attain (thus non-religious matters were freed from
church control). Occam's principle, Occam's Razor, prefers to cope with problem using the fewest
possible functions and terms, so therefore Deg would feel that his simple quantavolutionary
model, Solaria Binaria to begin with, and all that spewed therefrom, was in the great tradition
of the Razor.

But William was beset by the authorities, convicted of heresy, and so fled to the safety of the
Emperor's jurisdiction. His influence carried down the years, and of course all who were tinged
with his notions felt the hostility of authority, such as the Sorbonne Professor Jean Buridan
who around 1358 was drowned (not burned) and was celebrated by the allegory of "Buridan's Ass,"
that starved to death because it could not decide which of two bundles of wheat to eat; the same
Buridan, too, revived in the song of the student-brigand-poet FranHois Villon, who in turn
should have been "sanctified" as heretical hero by the student radicals of the 1960's, but was
somehow overlooked.

But Deg found heroes wherever he had gone throughout life, in India, Turkey, Italy, England,
Hawaii and so on -- never mind the war heroes who were glosses on the immense rainbow of heroes
--and heroines, because he found that heroism came more naturally and frequently to women.
Whenever one studies leadership -- the movement of events, whether political or intellectual,
one must first carefully dissever fame from achievement. He wrote about heroes in one of his
poems, contained in Passage of the Year, the poetry which he published in 1967, where he said

... I shall never
never understand
why famous names are worshipped
and writers wear their pens to nubbins on them.
When they are nothing
while the great ones bump
our elbows and disappear in the crowd.
"Wait!" "Hold on!"
I call after them
and they don't even turn around.
They are vanished, they are dust.
No cast of bronze contains them.

One of Deg's unsung heroes would have been the man whose name I forget (naturally), the English
amateur of eoliths whose protests, if harkened to rather than ridiculed, would have made the
Piltdown hoax impossible. But I would not detract one whit from V.'s heroes.

Schlmo Molcho was a Kabbalist and pseudo-messiah, a Catholic convert who reverted to Judaism.
Around 1529 he began to believe he was the Messiah, and Pope Clement VII granted him protection.
In 1531 he was denounced, tried and condemned to burn; he was saved by the Pope and another man
burned in his place. He began to counsel the Emperor Charles V but was denounced and burned at
the stake in 1532 after refusing to recant and reconvert to Christianity.

Miguel Serveto (Michael Servetus) was a true Renaissance figure who discovered the pulmonary
circulation system, was the originator of the science of comparative geography, and was a
defender of free thought and free speech. He intimated that Christ was only human, and in his
writings on Christianity preserved nothing that was merely traditional and dogmatic. Arrested in
Vienne, France, and condemned for heresy, he escaped but strangely entered Geneva, heading for
Italy, and was caught. All the Swiss protestant cantons were consulted and returned a
recommendation that he be punished for blasphemy. Calvin, however, hated him and insisted that
he be burned at the stake for heresy, for he refused to retract his dislocation of the elements
of the Trinity, his argument against the validity of infant baptism, and his denial of original
sin. He died on October 27, 1553.

Giordano Bruno began his career as Dominican philosopher but was accused of heresy. He managed
to teach at universities of several nations and wrote copiously in metaphysics, with excursions
into satire and poetry. Finally, after fifteen years of work and wandering, he came into Venice,
where he was seized, convicted of heresy, sent to Rome, and, after prolonged imprisonment,
burned at the stake in 1600. Intensely anti-dogmatic, he propounded the infinity of worlds, the
pantheism of matter, and the relativity of man's position in the universe.

V. seems to have put the cart before the horse: one did not need to be burned at the stake to be
a heretic or a hero. And a great many heretics of history escaped the fate intended for them.
Often there are ages where heretics are ignored and tolerated, as in North America and Western
Europe, when practically all forms of dissent, even against the heads of state and the forms of
government, except when expressed as deadly terrorism, escape severe physical sanctions. The
relativity of values and practices in the "advanced" democracies of today is such that almost no
definition of heresy is operative.

Notably, V.'s heretical heroes were long dead. He said once, in criticizing the magazine Pens‚e
and a foundation that were working to help him, and speaking to Milton, Rose, and Wolfe, that he
did not "wish, well, to carry the banners for all heretics." Waiting as he was for designation
to the top rank of authorities, he meant to be wary of association with any contemporary
heretic.

Deg only half listened to V.'s litany of his heroes' lives and virtues. V. would never say what
really fascinated him in the human characters of these men. His was hardly the depth analysis
that one might expect from a psychoanalyst. Indeed -- and this must seem exceedingly strange to
those who did not know him -- he almost never analyzed public figures of even those who were in
controversy with him. He accepted them, as if they were rational creatures and their justness or
unjustness was simply a matter of fact. So it was almost always Deg who was suggesting and
proposing motivations and characteristics while V. seemed to regard his opponents (and friends)
as unidimensional, almost as automatons.

In this way, and others, V.'s mind and character were Mosaic and Old Testament. He did not even
consider himself a member of the British Society for Interdisciplinary Studies, founded to
pursue work very much along his lines. Nor did he regard his tamer organ, Kronos magazine, as
part of himself. He consented to lecture at Deg's college in the Valaisan Alps of Switzerland
one summer, but he would not go and return with the chartered aircraft carrying students and
faculty, so that Deg had to authorize expensive tickets by way of Swissair. (But possibly it was
not out of snobbery or comfort, but rather that the airline was Germany's Lufthansa.)

He was absolutely unwilling to give anyone the slightest authority over himself. He never worked
for anyone; he could barely tolerate cooperating with anyone. He had a striking inability to
identify with people. He did not like to be compared with anyone alive and once exploded
publicly in cutting anger when Professor Warwick, in an attempt at a supportive speech, not only
seemed to make light of his claims to discovery, but dared to compare his own treatment as a
doctoral student by V.'s foes of the Harvard Astronomy faculty with V.'s treatment by the same
people.

This continual insistence upon treating any offensive or belittling gesture towards himself as a
major event, a casus belli, was the facade of his immense egocentrism, perhaps of the very
narcissism which, in psychoanalytic practice, he claimed, must be the first region of the
unconscious to be plumbed. Again one thinks of Moses, who looked upon all opposing thoughts and
practices as actions against Yahweh. But V. never called in God as lawgiver, witness, judge, or
executioner. He was all of these, or all of these except the last, which he left to his
supporters, and was so in the name of the rational authority of the system of science, an
abstract authority, not people so much as principles, not realistic principles, but ideal
principles. He expected nothing less than ideal justice.

The kind of offenses that were committed against him were commonplace in science, as in every
other field of human activity. But none dared tell him so for if such were proclaimed, the game
would be up and all the cosmic heretics of the Velikovsky camp would have to strike camp and
retire. Friends left him from time to time, tiring of the game. Even if one brought up an
equally nasty case, he would become suspicious that his own demand-level might be threatened.
This is certainly narcissistic behavior.

Often V. would protest that he had never behaved ad hominem towards his critics. How could they
be so personal, aggressive and vile? He said that they were incorrect, wrong, and at worst,
uniformitarian in their thinking. Hardly the invective of a mighty warrior -- which he was.

But there was many another to do this job for him, and no strong or foolish critic ever escaped
the lash of letters and articles from his supporters. This would be done at his urging or with
his blessing. They were usually appropriate, to the point, deserved -- but excessive. None could
recall an instance when V. pulled back the reins on his steeds. He usually was playing out the
reins, and slapping them; many could recall instances when V. felt that a case being made on his
behalf was not forceful enough.

But why did V. maintain personally so proper a language and bearing towards scientists and
publicists who were terming him a charlatan, a crackpot, a novice, and more? Partly, it was
strategy: to be above the battle, to be insulted without descending to their level of
retaliation. He was also restrained by his ultimate conservatism with regard to authority.
Authorities might, unfairly, unjustly, without provocation, drag him through the mire, but he
could not let himself do the same to them. He could unleash his minions to do so, however, and
they did.

This is an achievement of a great leader -- to be above the battle and yet direct it, to not
lose one's dignity in a thicket of passionate verbiage, to be excommunicated and martyred
without descending to the level of his opponents. At Lethbridge University, in the prairie of
the oil-rich province of Alberta, Canada, a conference on V.'s ideas was held in 1974 and Deg
flew in for the event. There turned up a local professor, a German named Muller, who came down
heavily upon V. in the local newspaper, and V. was outraged. He turned to his largest artillery
piece to blast Muller. He would not appear at the next meeting. "You can do it," he said to Deg
as he lay sulking in his tent like Achilles, "no one else is strong enough." So Deg departed
from the hotel room where V. and Elisheva rested, and, when the appropriate moment came, took
the floor, Muller at the rostrum, and denounced the newspaper article and impugned Muller's
general competence. Deg was not especially happy at becoming a petty hero. Muller was
unlikeable, true enough, and had the temerity to imply that V. was converting ethnic pride into
an historical reconstruction, the type of remark that Germans had been scrupulously and
correctly leaving non-Germans to make since World War II. Yet, when it appeared that Muller was
excessively disliked, and on his way to becoming a whipping-boy, Deg felt sorry for the person,
a feeling that returned a couple of years later when the same Muller was murdered by a jealous
colleague on a matter of adultery.

I doubt that Deg bothered to tell V. half the horror-stories he knew of recent academic and
publishing crimes, let alone the sixteenth century heretics. In one case -- it happened to be
his own -- Deg went off to World War II as a co-author and came back to find the book, half of
it his composition, published under a single name, this not his own. "Well I'll be damned!" he
said, when sent a copy of the book, and was soon busy with other matters, nor was his friendship
with his co-author more than temporarily bruised.

More annoying, Deg believed, was a case when his Politics for Better or Worse was published in
1973. Three young women instructors from different universities did a study of textbooks on

American politics to prove how demeaning were their authors toward women, how indifferent, how
ignorant. Then, at the last minute, Deg's book appeared on the market, was snatched up and
thrown into the bonfire in an appendix to the report that they caused to be distributed widely
at the national convention of the American Political Science Association. That is, they
flagrantly lied about, distorted, ignored or did not read the book which, had they known, he had
deliberately planned and executed as a radical exposure of the situation of women and of the
need for reforms leading to sexual equality. When he composed an indignant letter to the
culprits, weeks after the damage was done, he showed it to his learned daughters, Victoria and
Jessica. Their advice: don't get so excited, Daddy! ( How willing are children to sacrifice
their parents!) He wrote a note of gentle chiding and that was the last heard of the matter; not
one of the three responded. I wonder whether he should have introduced a thunderous denunciatory
resolution on the floor of the Convention. After all, his book might have sold tens of thousands
more of copies had it been properly contrasted with other textbooks.

V. could never understand that the crime against him was not horrendous nor uncommon. It was
remarkable in the evidence being so clear and the subject being in principle so important. It
was especially remarkable because he was his own biographer. Every slip of paper -- every insult
and complaint -- was treasured. Since he succeeded in finding a great audience, in publishing
his other works without difficulty, and in attracting to his areas of interest several dozen
excellent scholars (a most rare achievement for even the most famous and successful scientists)
he might just as well have been amused, scornful, and satisfied. Albert Einstein actually wrote
him just this, after reading an account of the insulting opposition to his work: "I would be
happy if you, too, could enjoy the whole episode from its humorous side."

That was asking too much, especially from V. For him only the respectful conversion of heads of
science would suffice. He respected authority and power: therefore only authority could
legitimately crown him. Crowds were fine, because they were pleasing in themselves but always,
too, they were used by him as a measure, such as of the pressure that his views must be exerting
on the experts and unbelievers. Crowds were not authoritative in themselves.

Deg often hinted, remonstrated, and harangued: "You must not pin your hopes on conversion of the
leaders," and would list the reasons why the leader would not budge, the "sunk costs" of their
lives, the unavailability of heavy sanctions against their retaining conventional views, etc.
and sometimes Deg would say: "Tell me if there is a single reason why an establishment leader
should side with you on any controversial point of yours. What's in it for him?" V. would rather
not answer. He realized that he could not say. "Because I am right," although that is what he
would have liked to say. This would betray narcissism.

For over thirty years, V. suffered this situation, in which he was inextricably trapped. Not in
full awareness, not as a strategy --because they could not be fully acknowledged as such -- he
adapted in several way to the implacability of the scholars.

He claimed the understanding and sympathy of the young; uncorrupted by old ideas, they would see
his ideas without prejudice or jealousy. Becoming a champion of youth did not come easily to
him, but it was an acceptable line of public argument, a stereotype of the culture. He was never
an active advocate of the young, certainly not during the critical years of student rebellions.

He diagnosed the problem of the established authorities as "collective amnesia." Again, this
argument came later. Deg does not recall V. having advanced it when in 1963 they had long
conversations on the motivations of his opponents, but the argument is prominent in Mankind in
Amnesia, posthumously published. As we shall see, the concept itself falls into doubt when it is
used without specific valid tests to label or unlabel the behavior of persons or groups.

He watched for, sought to encounter, and carefully tended any maverick from the respectable herd
of scientists. When he learned that an Australian astrophysicist, Bailey, had announced
calculations showing the sun to carry an immense electrical charge, V. corresponded with him,
and hosted him on a visit to Princeton; Bailey received acclaim from the heretic circle that he
could not receive from the scientific world. V. corresponded with and visited Claude Schaeffer
in Europe when he came to read Schaeffer's Stratigraphie Compar‚e, but, as in the case of
Bailey, there was a warmth of shared sentiments without noticeable movements of these men to the
Velikovsky camp. Trainor, Michelson, Santillana, Hadas, Kallen, M. Cook, Sagan, Einstein, Dyson,
Bigelow, Hess, Kaufman, and others were approached, responded in greater or lesser extent and
sympathy, then withdrew to their proper spheres.

Robert H. Pfeiffer, Harvard Semitic Scholar, appears to have accepted V.'s Ages in Chaos,
without carrying out substantial work that his approval might logically have entailed. There was
also in the seventies the category of scholars who were outside of academia, or young, or still
unfulfilled who had, like Deg, entered the full stream of V.'s work, men like Ransom, Milton,
Juergens, Cardona, Sieff, Greenberg, Dave Talbott, Reade, Crew, Rose, James, Lowery, and Gammon.
C. J. Ransom was, V. confided to several supporters, "for a while the only physicist who saw
something in my work and followed it."

The ideal supporter, to V.'s mind, would have been a fully accepting astronomer of renown, who
could announce the success of an indisputable test of a near-encounter of Venus and Earth 3500
years ago. Astrophysicist Robert Bass made an effective sally in the seventies. When two British
astronomers, Clube and Napier, entered wholesale upon V.'s terrain with a model of recent
cometary encounters, they hardly mentioned him. Yet they possessed foreknowledge of his work and
they could have used it legitimately as a foil, contrasting his planetary theory with their own
cometary theory, and accepting openly much of his historical and legendary reconstruction in
place of their own, which was weak. Once more we have an authority problem: though expecting a
spanking, they hoped to avoid a trouncing. They received two spankings, one conventional, the
other heretical; are two spanks less than one trounce?

Actually, when one goes to the heart of the matter, Deg was the only scholar of considerable
previous reputation who accepted most of Velikovsky's work in the natural and historical
sciences, absorbed it, and carried on with it. Most friendly or tolerant scholars of established
reputation acted like a trapeze artist who pauses for a moment on his swing to watch an
especially neat trick being executed by a tightrope walker in the next ring of the circus.













COSMIC HERETICS: Part 1 :

by Alfred de Grazia


CHAPTER FIVE


THE BRITISH CONNECTION

For many years Velikovsky's books had been popular in Britain but his supporters were out of
touch. Recalling the early days. Librarian Brian Moore wrote:

The popular science writers occupy an important place in the communications system which
links the scientist and the public, and they have played a major role in propagating the
unfavorable image of Velikovsky. Having been officially declared a heretic by the scientific
Inquisition, Velikovsky has been handed over to the secular arm of the scientific popularisers
for public torment. Some readers may think this an extravagant metaphor, but any objective
examination of the available evidence on the "Affair" will lead to this conclusion. My own
interest in Velikovsky stemmed in part from the hysterical scientific reaction to his ideas --
a reaction unique in this century when books proposing unorthodox ideas swarm, are ignored and
sink without a trace.

I am led once more to remark upon how vulnerable the public opponents of quantavolution,
particularly of Velikovsky, are made by their arrogant certainty. A full generation of
repetitive experiences has hardly affected their effrontery nor hence mitigated their
discomfiture.

I would point out a feature of the ridicule not elsewhere commented upon. The scientific
community will have its jokes: enough to say "Velikovsky" in a group of scientists and there
would arise that ineffable combination of good humor, snarls, titters, knowing glances, and
intellectual nudging that tie people together, like mention of a joke would other groups:
"Remember the story of Pat and Mike at the wake?" (laughter in the tavern) or "They're
reprinting the Bible in a plain wrapper for the Alabama schools," (giggles), or "Did you see
where Ronald Reagan has gotten the Nobel Peace Prize?" (laughter and snarls). There is comfort,
mutual solace, malice, subconscious fear, a bonding of spirits in possessing a few names to
which phrases and epithets can acceptably be applied.

In these times Deg visited England without knowing Brian Moore or the many others who came
together ultimately and with whom he later associated happily. He would visit old friends from
the Eighth Army of World War II like Rayburn Heycock of the BBC or of politics, like Michael
Fraser, and go about his business. In London on June 16, 1968, he is writing in his journal:

Russell Square is green in the cool of morning and the fountain may be heard to play now that
Sunday has stopped the motors. Four small boys have come out early to play a frightening game
with the taxicabs. They run out in front of them just as the signal light is about to turn
green. They put their faith in accurate timing of machines, just as their elders.

Last night I dreamed that Velikovsky died, and was much disturbed. I wept. I felt there was
terrible loss. He died suddenly, as an old man will. I confessed that I knew nothing, that I
could reconstruct nothing of his work. Just bits and pieces that meant nothing.

It must have come from my walk through the British Museum yesterday afternoon. I read so many
inscriptions, all flatly against his ideas of dates. One bore the suspicious rendering

that I have remarked before -- "Pharaoh 'A' name borne both by 'Q' in the 12th century and 'R'
of the sixth century." The same man with the centuries so wrong?

I searched for Greeks and Assyrians with horned helmets to correspond with those of the
'Peoples of the Sea' whom Velikovsky places with the fourth century Greeks and noticed several
features on statues and vases. Braids that look like horns, short plumes (?); Athena of
Pergamon with two horned projections towards the front of her helmet (baby wings out of a
crown?)

The airplane ride from N. Y. had seemed short to me. Nothing had been fully solved by departure
time -- I left several highly important matters in the hands of other -- collecting my debt

from Simulmatics, the merger of our company PIT with "3is", the contract for my American
government textbooks, the fate on the exhibition to El Arish (permission for which has been
denied by Israel), John's case at court conveniently and perhaps forever postponed and summer
itinerary awry, my contract with Simon and Schuster for both "Republic in

Crisis" and "Velikovsky and his Critics" pending -- but in all cases the formula of the
execution is assigned to someone. [Little did he know, alas, that all would proceed according
to Murphy's Law: "If anything can go wrong, it will."]

The early 1970's witnessed the founding in England of the Society for Interdisciplinary Studies
(SIS), conceived by a gang of four, and on a Halloween night. The first issue of their Review,
later to be attractively printed, was in mimeography and, at that, barely readable, but its
contents were of excellent quality. The founders, and those who signed up, many of them
American, settled into a flexible oligarchy. The dominant members have been, on the whole,
Brian Moore, Malcolm Lowery, Peter James, Harold Tresman, Martin Sieff, Euan McKie, Ralph
Amelan, Geoffrey Gammon, John J. Bimson, Eric Crew, Hyam Maccoby, Michael Reade, Bernard
Newgrosh, and Bernard Prescott, with possibly others, but obviously enough in number to forbid
an easy sociometric diagram of the networks of cross-influencing, not to mention the
differentiation between those who were primarily organizers and those who were intellectual
contributors. With two exceptions, they never met or heard Velikovsky in person, although his
work inspired their organization: by contrast, all of the involved Americans knew him
personally.

The Constitution of the Society adopted in 1978 declared as its principal objectives:

(a) to promote a multi-disciplinary approach to scientific and scholarly problems and in
particular to promote the active consideration by scientists, scholars, and students of
alternatives to the theory of uniformity in astronomy and earth history:

(b) to promote a better understanding of the nature of the earth, the solar system and human
history, through the combined use of historical and contemporary evidence of all kinds, and to
encourage a continuous reassessment of the validity of the basic assumptions of the discipline
concerned by testing these against evidence;

(c) to promote better co-operation between workers in specialized fields of learning in the
belief that isolated study is sterile;

(d) to foster research among scientists and scholars towards achieving these aims.

It was not at all the American condition, where years before, following only upon occasional
bulletins that supporters of V. issued in the 1960's, there came Pens‚e, a production of the
young Talbott brothers, Stephen and David, whose enthusiasm for his work crystallized into a
conversion of their small magazine on human rights into a forum on the Velikovsky Affair, at
least for ten issues. Stephen Talbott was a brilliant editor and organizer, bent upon opening
the world to quantavolutionary ideas, but also to criticism of them. After spectacular
successes, Pens‚e collapsed under a load of debt and overwork. As it was ending, it promised to
broaden its interests beyond Velikovsky and to discuss ideas irreconcilable with his.

V. would have no part of this, and several of his Eastern supporters -- with Lewis Greenberg
and Warner Sizemore leading -- issued the first number of Kronos. Kronos became editorially the
child of Lewis Greenberg, a young art historian of the faculty of Moore College of Art in
Philadelphia. He recruited a group of convinced supporters of V. who contributed articles and
evaluations, and who, being the closest to a prestigious academic group that he could put
together, he should have called "Board of Advisors," but whom he called "Staff," and he set up
grades of Senior Editors, Associate Editors, Contributing Editors, and Staff, hoping to build a
respectable latticework of authority such as is conventional among scientific journals.

Financing, production, and management fell to Warner Sizemore, who, by virtue of his faculty
status at Glassboro State College, was enabled to establish an academic connection for the
journal, a public relations device of no small value for a new review with a disreputable and
controversial perspective in science. Kronos remained essentially and in many details under
V.'s thumb until his death, performing very much the function of Imago for Freud.

This is not to say that the directors of Kronos were uncritical; in the very first issue, Zvi
Rix ventured ominously upon weak points in an article upon the origins of anti-semitism and the
Ankh. They simply had to acknowledge V.'s power, his help, his thesaurus of notes and
materials, even on occasion his financial aid, and above all --what men such as Stecchini,
Motz, Jastrow, Sagan, Hadas, Gordon, and Deg, especially, had in their own way to bow to -- his
well-nigh complete erudition and orderly mental inventory on the matters at issue.

Early in 1976, Deg appeared at the British Library Association in London to speak to the
Society; first contact between the Americans and British was made. About a hundred persons were
present and Deg talked informally but to good effect on subjects both sociological and
quantavolutionary. Questions from the floor were numerous and only a sense of decorum brought
the meeting to close. Afterwards the ringleaders adjourned to an English approximation of a
caf‚ and carried on a conversation for hours.

The high competence of the British group was manifest; if they were strongest and at "state of
the art" level in history, they evidenced also in abundance the imprecisely defined general
background in the sciences and humanities which is so necessary in facing up to questions
excited from all quarters of knowledge when exoterrestrial encounters are at issue.

I wish that I might now introduce some of the many letters that the heretics exchanged over the
years: they would display the interweaving of ideas, the reportage, the delicate personal
relations, and the ramified research and life activities that inevitably and essentially occur
in an intellectual movement. Even a single instance -- a letter from Deg to Malcolm Lowery --
may lend the flavor of it all.


Naxos, July 16, 1976


Dear Malcolm:
Thank you so much for your letter and the transcript. It was excellent work and my best
compliment is to edit it immediately and return it to you. So here it is. I probably have been
imprudent in letting everything stand, as you hoped I might. But it is fair. I think, and
fairness is one up on prudence. I have made a number of technical corrections, clarified words,
and introduced a euphemism or two. I understand that you intend to split the presentation and
leave the operation to your discretion... Your article on Kugler was most intriguing. Have you
sent Stecchini a copy? (...) The material is rich and your commentaries and presentations of
the source matter referred to by Kugler valuable. I would expect the whole, amplified even to
the extent of a complete translation, would constitute a welcome book. Perhaps one for Kronos
Press... Was the Atlantis item really August '61, as you write? I'd like to see it: perhaps you
can confirm the citation next time around. The Tuareg are a mysterious people, you know, of
undefined race and origins. The Fabrizio Mori reports, if locatable, would be more valuable...
You do bring up surprises re Velikovsky. No, I've only heard of original work he's done in
electroencephalography, that he may have been the first to propound it. What you quote is
fascinating. It does relate to the suppression of instincts, of which I make much in the
transition from hominid to man... It gives us time to think, but heightens general anxiety at
not being able to respond. My general theory of the subject is being prepared for limited
distribution prior to the long haul on publishing the book, so I shall hope to send you a copy.
Meanwhile, I would suppose you could readily do the translation yourself. Rix has a lot of
trouble with English. (I try not to distinguish 'lower' from 'higher' species. In my present
lonely spot, I am compelled to admit the many superiorities of the ants)... I haven't received
the T. L. S. review of Velikovsky Reconsidered. I've gone through Temple's work on Sirius
hurriedly. He moves into his theme backwards -- first the Africans, then the Egyptians, then
spacemen. Dr. V. in his "Chronology and Astronomy" found Sirius (Sothis) a yardstick for
measuring the Venus-cycle. The one item (well-known) of the tribal recognition of the invisible
star goes along with other ancient knowledge of the skies that was lost and recently recaptured
by telescope (cf. my brief article -- Did I leave a copy with you? -- on the rings of Saturn
and bonds of Jupiter). Better eyes, magnifying atmosphere, closer proximity, ancient
telescopes? -- we'll have to make up our minds in the light of a total well-developed theory of
Revolutionary Primevalogy... I wish that we had transcripts of the many additional hours that
we spent in discussion. Which leads me to say how much I enjoyed the whole of my visit with you
all. I'm due to fly back in haste...

So went the messages, back and forth and around. In the States, Deg worked closely now with
Earl Milton of Lethbridge, Canada on Solaria Binaria. He saw Sizemore regularly in Princeton.
He visited with Velikovsky. Most of the American network communications in these days funneled
into Greenberg, with whom Deg had only an annual telephone conversation but about whom he
received information from Sizemore. Kronos magazine sponsored two meetings at a Motel in the
Princeton area; Sizemore exhausted himself to pull them off successfully. One was before V.
died in November, 1979, the second later on, and Elisheva dropped in upon it.

Deg missed both meeting for being abroad. The second was unexciting, save for wrangling between
Greenberg and Whelton. So far as I can understand the causes, there were none of substance.
Clark Whelton spoke up in general criticism of the proceedings as lackluster and Lewis
Greenberg tore into him from the Chair with ad personam indignation which was incomprehensible
unless, as I was told, "You know Lew..." Few friendly heretics -- never mind the unfriendly
larger participation -- had no occasion over the years to receive his uncomplimentary remarks
and the consoling words from others, "You know Lew..."

Greenberg's correspondence with the British was equally a mixture of rationality, abuse, and
threats, and since he never would fly, he did not appear in England and only Peter James had a
pleasant encounter with him. But that was once. When Greenberg invited James to become of the
"Staff" of Kronos, Peter accepted. He was almost bumped from it when he wrote an early piece of
criticism of V. and V., in a fit of anger, told Sizemore and Greenberg that they had to get rid
of him or else he would withdraw his support from Kronos. Then, according to Sizemore, V.
reconsidered, recalling no doubt his own reputation as a champion of freedom of speech and
press, and called up to withdraw his demand. Nevertheless, not too long afterwards, what V. had
wished came about, when Greenberg and James quarreled and James resigned, as will be explained
later.

In the Spring of 1980 Deg reappeared in London to address the Society. By this time his agenda
was full of friends of catastrophist persuasion. The Velikovsky Affair had appeared in a
British edition in paperback with a new preface. Earl Milton was coming in from Alberta,
Canada, to speak, after which, with his wife Joan and his little son Davin, he was to join up
with Deg for a heavy workout on Solaria Binaria at the Island of Naxos on the Aegean Sea.

On Deg's list of telephone numbers in London for the occasion we find Peter James, his primary
host, informant, and contact man, a slender scintillating young and blonde man who seemed to be
everywhere and into everything in London, who lived on vegetables and beer in a collectivity,
and who had surpassed intellectually the university degree he was arranging to pick up. He
supplied Deg and Ami with an apartment, perfect in every regard save its price and lack of
telephone, of which the latter was the more serious. Hotel prices were prohibitive. Food was
expensive and as always bad, except in the oriental and European restaurants.

Luckily down the street was the Baeck Hebrew center, school and library, tended over by Hyam
Maccoby who took to reading Deg's Moses manuscript while Deg stuck heavy coins in unending
numbers into the hallway telephone. For, on the aforesaid phone list were all those he wished
he might see: Geoffrey Gammon, Malcolm Lowery, Brian Moore, Peter Warlow, Harold Tresman, John
Bimson, Martin Sieff, Eric Crew, Robert Temple, Fred Freeman, Redmond Mullin. Rayburn Heycock,
Margaret Willes, Nick Austin, and Cloe and Mike Fraser. There were thereupon added in a
confused network the names and numbers of all the people who were contacted in order to contact
others and the temporary, supplementary, changed disconnected and "try-him-at" numbers.

And on his "to-do" list for the two week were to write his paper for delivery to the Society,
to have his novel Ronald's Norm typed up and copied, to read the latest exchanges on Solaria
Binaria and discuss them with Milton, to discuss with Sphere Books the Velikovsky Affair and
his manuscripts (the same with Margaret Willes of Sidgwick and Jackson), to discuss
"Aphrodite's true identity" with James and explain the ideas of an Encyclopedia and the
possibility of a Quantavolution Institute, to open a bank account at Barclay's, to edit finally
and send Chaos and Creation to the Indian printers, to visit the headquarters of Amnesty
International, to visit the Temples in the countryside to see how their garden was growing and
where Robert's mind was in the aftermath of his book on the Sirius Mystery, to write his son
Chris in Rotterdam and send him some money, to meet Fred Freeman of Liverpool whose ideas on
independent welfare action and tax reforms were simpatico. And much more, but of course, much
was not done, bogged down in conflicts of time and logistical difficulties like the telephone
and vainly-searched-for typist.

When his plane took off from London, he entered some lines in his journal, captioned

Failures of a trip to England -- England in the Spring -- "Oh, to be in England when... "A book
yet to be published jests at my ability to concoct surprising numbers. Here are more [on time
expenditures]:

Trying to find a good place to eat 12.5%
Discussing the food and service 12.0%
Writing the talk that should have been written beforehand 23.9%
Futile Communications with Publishers 4.0%
Walks and visits: external sociability 29.0%
Management and commuting 10.5%
Eyeball-to-eyeball discussion about quantavolution 5.6%
Listen to other perform and performing 8.0%
All others 9.4%
114.9%

Adds to over 100% because of doing more than one thing at one time, e. g. "No, I think we
passed the restaurant; that was a good piece you did with O'Geoghan," or "Carter's foray into
Iran was foredoomed; why did Dayton [author of a magnificent book on ancient ceramics and
minerals] waste so much time decrying the mentality of archaeologists?" Now what more would I
have wanted to do? Talk to Bimson re opinion of natural disasters at Megiddo Dolby re ice ages
Moore re poetry Lowery re linguistics Sieff re... James re... etc. etc.

I am diverging and must return and repeat: the British and their magazine were more of a free
association and farther removed from V.'s hulking figure. Hence it would be more likely that
opposition should arise successfully there. First it happened when Euam Mackie, a proverbial
tall dour Scot, a Glasgow Museum curator and co-founder of SIS, began to place monuments that
were seemingly oriented to the present directions of the compass, such as Stonehenge, in the
period before the Venusian catastrophe of around -1450 BC when the Earth was said by the V.
scenario to have changed its axis of rotation and orbit, hence its orientations and its
calendar. Further, when Deg appeared in England in 1976 and presented his thesis of "the
Disastrous Love Affair of Moon and Mars," he found that the English view, led by Peter James,
rejected his, and V. 's, and Robert Graves' identification of Homer's Aphrodite with Moon,
insisting that the goddess stood for the planet Venus, not Moon. James published more
criticism, and Deg was given to understand that he had been worsted -- Rix, Cardona, Gordon and
others espoused the James thesis and Deg was driven back to the stack shelves. V. said to Deg
that he had more material for the defense somewhere in his files, but he never produced it.

But then the heavy onslaught came with the long-awaited publication of Peoples of the Sea and
Ramses II and His Times. After intimating dissent for some time, the British now mobilized at a
conference in Glasgow in April, 1978, and delivered a set of papers that confirmed V.'s worst
fears. The British -- or let me say, the historical fraction of the SIS elite -- while
affirming their support of V.'s reconstruction of Egyptian (and hence total Mediterranean and
Near East) chronology until the end of the 18th Dynasty said in effect "Stop! Disposing of 500
years is enough." The rest of the Egyptian historical sequence is in respectable order: Ramses
III was not 4th century, he was also moved back to the 8 th Century. The Hittites did have
their Empire before the Chaldeans and were not a side-show or a double for them. The end result
was to cut V.'s immense loaf in half and to reassure him that "Half a loaf is better than none
at all."

One might see the pattern emerging. By 1983, when Brian Moore had been elected President and
Peter James Editor, much more emphatically than in 1978, might it be said that the "essential
purpose" of the Society was "to promote active consideration by scientist, scholars and
students, of alternatives to the theory of uniformity in astronomy and Earth history." This
could only mean the general approach of revolutionary primevalogy and quantavolution. The lines
of advance would move outward from Velikovsky but SIS would deny that it "is committed to any
specific catastrophic theory." The Review would not become involved ad hominem and in
emotionally charged wrangling but "will concentrate on the real issues at stake, as for example
the occurrence of exoterrestrial catastrophes and the reconstruction of ancient chronology."
The "SIS Review offers the broadest spectrum of opinion and the most objective approach..."

By this time, however, signs of a wider movement were also emanating from its elder, Kronos,
triennially printed in America, and the younger Catastrophism and Ancient History, a biennial
magazine founded and published by Marvin Luckerman at Los Angles, California.

There was still no broad monthly of the type of Science 83 (an AAAS publication) which Deg had
been advocating on both sides of the ocean. He would have liked to see a published magazine
"Quanta" and an Encyclopedia of Quantavolution and Catastrophe, so he caused to be sent around
to hundreds of persons interested in the field a circular describing the projects as follows:

PLEASE GIVE US YOUR VALUED OPINIONS ON TWO QUESTIONS.

Project I. Quanta. A monthly magazine, large format dedicated to presenting to a wider public
all current news and developments in the sciences and the humanities related to the theory of
quantavolution: the theory that the major sources of change in the history of the world, both
in the natural sciences (all fields) and in the humanities (all fields) and including human
nature and behavior, have come from sudden, high-powered, and large-scale events.

It is an idea with a rich past, of famous writers, but, of writers whose works have long
submerged beneath the conventional tides of uniformitarian, evolutionary, and gradualist
thought. We must pull out and bring forward into contemporary review the greatest of these
ancient, medieval and early modern writings from all over the world, ranging through legend,
through religion, through literature, through science, in all their diversity and format, so
that once again they become part of our civilized heritage. Simultaneously, we must select,
from the enormous volume of indifferent but carefully prepared scientific and humanistic work
that is oblivious to the quantavolutionary idea, the remarkable findings, the nuggets, the
truths and reality that are buried there.

Finally. Quanta should publish the best of the new generation of writers who are ready to
tackle and overthrow old images of science and philosophy, the old idols of though, and to
discover in the world of nature and life, including human conduct and behavior, the validity of
the quantavolutionary vision of the world. Quanta will preach and practice objectivity.

We are presently in most disorderly state of publishing, whether of books or magazines. In this
confusion of the age, there must be a place for a modest but forthright publication, and that
is what Quanta seeks to be, that publishes for a certain critical mass of readers the facts,
theories and news about a general and liberal approach to the phenomena of geology, psychology,
astronomy, biology, and other science.

Project 2. The Encyclopedia of Quantavolution. A person who is interested in the
quantavolutionary modes of change in natural and life history is often frustrated when he
searches for information about a writer, a river, an animal, a myth, a phenomenon, a period of
time, a place, an excavation, a planet, a concept, or a philosophy; indeed, just about anything
that one looks up becomes a source of frustration. Why? Because practically every subject
treated in conventional reference books has been passed through two centuries of suppression of
the quantavolutionary, of the sudden, intense jumps that have been responsible for the largest
proportion of change in the universe.

What has been written has not been referred to and has been actively lost. Begin with the
letter "alpha", go to "Aaron", and proceed; every article has a missing slant, a missing
theory, absent evidence. But so much is left out, and so many useless things are included for
the quantavolutionary scholar, student, active reader, whatever the realm of inquiry, that
there is a pressing need for a new encyclopedia, so new indeed that one has to go back to the
Encyclopedia of Diderot in the Eighteen Century to conceive of such an innovation and advance
in the history of science and the humanities.

The present tight capital situation is not favorable to investments in publishing projects.
Orthodox foundation channels are clearly closed. Nevertheless, given that the shortage of
financial aid has not impeded thought and progress in quantavolution, the initiative and
participation of scores of competent scholars in all fields of learning can be counted on to
carry the project along. A cooperative organization, headed by an international editorial
committee, can produce alphabetically a series of fascicles that would in three years range
from A to Z. Then the total product would be bound in cloth and paper for public sale. During
the interim, individuals, libraries and institutions would subscribe to the fascicles to
provide operating capital, receiving in the end a sizable discount on the final Encyclopedia,
which would cost at present prices about $90.00.

The returns were not encouraging. It appeared that the costs of finding a sufficient market for
the magazine and encyclopedia would exceed the costs of production. That is, if a quarter of a
million dollars were to be spent in development and first publication, not counting contributed
and compensated time, at least that much money would be required to carry the message through
the dense thicket of mass book and magazine advertising. The competition among the National
Geographic magazine, Science 83, Discovery, Museum, Geo, Science Digest, the Smithsonian
Magazine, and other journals was so severe, their struggle for survival and expansion so
costly, that a small voice, no matter how sharply contrasting, would be overwhelmed. The
situation of an encyclopedia could be different. Here Deg discussed with Jeremiah Kaplan, an
acquaintance of some 35 years and Chairman of the Board of Macmillan Company, a possible
participation of Macmillan. Kaplan had put through the great International Encyclopedia of the
Social Sciences and was now directing the preparation of an Encyclopedia of Religion. The
question of the controversial nature of the Encyclopedia arose not directly but indirectly.
With Charley Smith, the appropriate Macmillan editor, they put together a scenario, a typical
setting for the use of the Encyclopedia.

A high school girl walks into her school library and asks the Librarian where she can find
material for a short theme on evolution. The librarian advises her to consult the Britannica
and the Encyclopedia of Quantavolution and Catastrophe. The "Ev" volume of the first is being
used by another student, so the girl studies the article on "Evolution" in the new
Encyclopedia, writes her paper, gets a failing grade from her teacher, complains, embroils the
librarian, and the librarian is told by the science teacher never to refer anyone to that book
again.

The librarians, it is concluded, want or must buy encyclopedias that provide "unbiased"
conventional articles in the name of prominent authorities; there is only one truth in science.
Deg thanks his host for the fine lunch and walks out whistling upon windy Third Avenue thinking
"Macmillan has changed since 1950. The customers now exercise precensorship." He did not, of
course, agree, and could offer other scenarios -- but what was the use?

The great one-world society was a handicap for the movement. Creative workers were spread
around the world. Far from each other, their communications were poor, and relatively
expensive, given that at least half of them had disposable incomes at the official U. S. A.
poverty boundary; few were well-to-do. Deg made Peter James an offer of a subsistence and "pie
in the sky" if he would collaborate, but James was working and studying in a combination of a
job and studies designed to extract a higher degree from the University of London. Deg talked
also to Martin Sieff, who from time to time, like most Northern Irish, wondered whether he
should move out before he was blown out by a bomb. On May 18, 1981, he was writing to Sieff at
the "Belfast Telegraph":

Dear Martin, I do regret that I cannot plot some position for you that would enable you to
carry on your valuable work in quantavolution and history, both social and natural. We have, I
believe, the phenomenon of an emergent new general paradigm for science and philosophy, and you
should be on hand as parent and midwife (the parthenogenetic simile is not amiss in ancient
age-breaking and age-making, as you know).

We need to publish many books. We need a magazine building upon the extant ones -- Quanta, I
call it. We need an Encyclopedia of Quantavolution. We need an information storage and
retrieval system that is set for quick production and dissemination of old and new materials.
When done, our progress will be rapid, and we will generate a much larger supporting group from
scientists, public, and science reporters. I cannot be blamed if I see you highly productive
and influential in this state of affairs. Your journalistic experience adds to your potential.

Besides yourself are the others and I feel strongly sympathetic, too, towards James, Lowery,
and a dozen more.

But visions without resources may be blameworthy. The great research centers are situated where
costs of living are high and life complicated -- New York, Princeton, Washington, London,
Paris, Israel, Amsterdam, the hope for large donors or, these times, a university that would
accept a new institute in its budget, much less one such as ours in spirit. I tried indeed with
the University of Maryland, New York University, and elsewhere; the answer, even when friendly,
is "Bring in your own funds." Velikovsky's resources went into a family shop, supporting
additionally Jan [Sammer] and Richard [Heinberg] for the time being, whence all products carry
the brand name "made by Velikovsky." What Elisheva is doing is wonderful. Greenberg is
hopelessly guarded in his Kronos den. None, however, can say it is the beginning and end of
quantavolution in science, history and philosophy. So what can be done? We are frustrated. My
own income is cut deliberately to the subsistence level in order to pursue my studies,
precisely at the time in life when I could be enjoying the highest earnings. But if not
Quantavolution, then Kalos, the World Order movement, would occupy me ungainfully. Only a
bonanza of some type, whose chance is perhaps one in ten, would let us set up some type of
communal operation or institute on Quantavolution. A five year lease on an appropriate property
near a good library; subsistence for perhaps eight persons, about $20,000 for materials,
expenses, and initial publications: we are approaching $100,000 a year of minimal costs.
Sources of funds: grants, donations, side earnings, correspondence courses, conferences,
publications. Should you have any ideas, I would be eager to receive them. Meanwhile I shall
brood and watch, like a demiurge, grasp at whatever creativity I can, and pounce upon any
larger opportunity...

On Dec. 21, 1981, as it seems that Sieff may be enticed onto Yankee territory, Deg writes
again:

Dear Martin: There is small occasion for cheering you on to these shores, except for my wish
that you might come and succeed and be nearby. Several major dailies have folded up recently.
The New York Daily News is on the block. There is a new market for papers and talents in
suburbia around the land, catering to shopping centers and a semi-literate public. Magazines
are plentiful, unprofitable and short-lived. The economy is in a recession, whose end I do not
see because it is shrouded in an apparently bottomless pit of world and domestic problems into
which politics refuses even to peer much less descend. Book publishing, too, is floundering in
the muck. Great talents, such as your own, are of little advantage; mediocrity, with unflagging
snuffling in all corners, would stand you better. I don't doubt that you'll get along; that
you'll be at home with your dreams, I doubt.

With all this, ought I to say, also, that the teaching field is in poor shape? The lower
schools are emptying and entering into their biggest crisis since the dawn of free schooling.
College and university budgets are all in poor shape. There are scores of applicants for every
small opening. That still does not mean that very fine candidates are being hired for the few
jobs available. Back to coda: you may find something, but you won't like it very much. May I
suggest this: If you come, come to stay; choose the spot where you want to live beyond all
other; once there take on any kind of work to make ends meet and begin the aforesaid snuffling
around; sooner or later, you'll find something better than most, which will give you a little
freedom and cash. If you don't have friends to begin with, you'll find them everywhere at about
the same level of intercourse. No matter whether Tampa or San Francisco, not any more. If we
had the kind of society we wished for, I wouldn't need to write this letter because there would
be a community of persons digging our sort of interest and you would make your way here
naturally, and there would be a place for you without saying. The University of Chicago was
that sort of area in the 1930's; almost everyone was a genius or considered himself such, and
most were broke, and most were into what they thought might be the new world.

Here in Trenton, I'm isolated in a way. I have to go long distances to see people and they to
see me. My little old house bears no resemblance to the fine and spacious house I once had in
Princeton. The Princeton libraries are only twenty-minutes drive from here, but you cannot
afford the car and gasoline, were you to crowd in with us. We'll probably be leaving for Greece
in March for several months, so there is a possibility of arranging for you to stay here while
we're gone. But I can see no advantage to this, since you'll be having to travel by train or by
car to wherever you might be needing to go to seek a position, or to get together with people.
No, it would make no sense to stay here unless I were here and then only for so long as a
couple of days for an exchange of views. Even for this, I'd try to find some friend around here
who could accommodate you comfortably while we visit together. I'll give you all the names I
can think of, with all the compliments to accompany them, anywhere in the country you may wish
to go. I'm not optimistic about this procedure, but I'll be glad to oblige. Do you remember how
costly it is to travel? And wherever you go, the way Americans live in their far-flung warrens,
you'll not be where you want to be even for the moment. The distances are an enemy, especially
for the poor. How, by the way, do you expect to get a job without a work visa? I think you have
to find an employer who will make a special request before coming. Or else, come, find a job,
return and be called back. Isn't that the way it works, unless you come as an independent
writer without a wage or salary paid you here. If I had even a little money to pay expenses, I
would invite you here to join in preparing the Encyclopedia of Quantavolution, a project that I
think would move our cause forward greatly and sooner or later pay off financially. My idea
would be to provide alphabetic fascicles every month or two until the job would be complete,
financing the venture largely from subscriptions to these (with a large discount on the
ultimate bound volumes), do it all in 2000 pages, all fields, half written by five editors (e.
g. besides myself and you, say Brian, Bimson, Milton, Lowery and other good colleagues who
might want to come aboard) and half by about 100 other contributors, taking three years in all,
appearing in three volumes in 2,000,000 words and selling at a low $89. I think Princeton would
be a good place to center it, but I wonder about Cambridge, Eng. (with occasional editorial
conferences in Naxos.) I would readily contemplate a move to Cambridge if there were a few
enthusiastic souls about and a minimal cooperation by the Cambridge Library authorities.
Couldn't we lease an old house big enough to barrack visitors for a reasonably small sum for
three years and have a go at it? The production should be done in-house on a word-processing
system that would provide print-out for the fascicles during the whole creative period and then
feed floppy discs to the automatic typesetter for the final production of the bound volumes. We
would attach a newsletter, perhaps the Newsletter of "Workshop," to the fascicles and when the
Encyclopedia comes out continue the publication of a wide-public magazine Quanta.

I was going into Manhattan today, but am glad that I changed my mind and could therefore get
this letter off to you, among other things. Holidays don't turn me on; I make my own, as often
as possible. Concluding, let me not give the impression that I have ceased to think about what
you might do and where, but give me feedback and encouragement and I'll do better next time.

Cordially yours, Alfred

Martin Sieff came like a whirlwind, and came again not much later, a short, dark counterpart of
Peter James, a comic book buff, friendly and grateful, darting brown eyes through heavy
glasses, missing nothing, spewing out accounts of college days at Oxford, the dire internal
politics of Israel, the latest bombing of his Belfast newspaper, the psychology of Velikovsky,
the girls of Long Island-Belfast-Jerusalem, the personalities of the cosmic heretics of
Britain, the confusion of the British Society for Interdisciplinary Studies (" Nothing at all
like the big way you do things here, no support..." "What do you mean? We are disaster-
stricken. Out of touch, nasty little arguments and all of that..." "Not really, I thought that
was us!" "Not so, I thought that was us!")

Martin wants to see Clark Whelton and he and Deg hear of Clark's longing for an Association
where we can all get together on a regular basis. Alas, Clark is assistant to Mayor Koch, on
24-hour alert; he is writing a novel; he is going through the trauma of kids readying for
college. How, when, with what means and who? Everyone looks blank and slightly pained. But the
outer world must have something in mind when they speak of the "underground" the "well-
organized tactics" of the catastrophists, the invariable sharp attacks greeting an offensive
remark about Velikovsky or against short chronology or for exoterrestrial eternal peace, as,
for instance the London Times Literary Supplement of 26 June 1967 murmuring about "a powerful
force in the underground of academe."

Not long afterwards, dodging about the streets of Belfast (he has spent most of his thirty
years in two civil emergencies, of Belfast and of Israel), Martin rifles a letter to Clark
Whelton at the Mayor's Office in New York, expressing fear of the collapse of the Society for
Interdisciplinary Studies journal.

Belfast, 9 August 1983 (...)

"There is only one solution that I can see -- the appointment of an Editor-in-Chief with full
authority over production, and over all SIS copy -- both Workshop and Review, able to appoint
and fire editorial staff at his discretion, responsible for deadlines, and responsible himself
directly to the SIS Chairman, creating a workable Publisher-Editor relationship. Should you
succeed in launching a U. S. version of the Society, this is the only way to get the thing
done. Government by committee is a wash out. As long as Lowery was on form it served as a
useful camouflage for him to operate under, while he actually put out a high quality product.
But once he pulled out, the wholes cumbersome system of referees and editorial committee
responsible in its turn to Council, another committee under a mini-Lowery in its turn, just
fell apart. Peter James is an outstanding scholar. But he doesn't know the meaning of the word
"deadline". Brian Moore put an immense amount of effort into the Review's production -- and had
nothing to show for it at the end of the day...

There was of course no money to pay an Editor. Sieff feared a collapse of the Society, and
could only pray that its membership would be patient with the leadership a little longer. [In a
letter to Deg later on he expresses surprise that the phoenix is arising from its ashes.]

And then horror of horrors, Martin announces re-re-revisionism of ancient Egyptian chronology:
I am becoming convinced that everything that happened in the Exodus and in the crisis of the
Ipuwer Papyrus may well have been at the end of the Old Kingdom. At this point Deg's mental
vision shutters down like a toad's eyelids. When the revolution comes, nothing is spared, and
then it feeds upon itself. No, you don't, Martin! That's too much!

Here is how Sieff declared the consensus again to Whelton: "Ages in Chaos, Vol. I still stands.
Minor corrections and improvements, yes" -- but the Hyksos are the Amalekites; El Amarna
tablets fall in the time of the prophet Elisha; Queen Hatshepsut of Egypt is the Queen of
Sheba; Thutmose III is biblical Shishak. "To which I will add the correlation -- Ramses III in
Jeroboam II's time; Merneptah kicked out by Azru = Uzziah/ Azariah; Ramses II = Late Bronze-
Iron interchange." In these words, 30 years after Ages in Chaos first appeared, Sieff is
pronouncing the validating results of thirty years' work, practically none of which was done by
anti-heretics, and which, whatever else happens, in cosmology and chronology, are sufficient to
bring the rewriting of much of ancient Egyptian, Hebrew, Syrian, Anatolian, Greek, and Roman
history. But Martin is part of "whatever else happens" and so are Peter James, David Rohl, John
Bimson, and Jim Clarke who are energetically taking V. apart and putting him together again.
The old chronology is gone but there is yet no tongue-in-groove replacement.

In April 1983, Deg and Ami, after two months in France to promote her just published novel, Le
Pigeon d'Argile, go to London from Paris and he speaks on Homo Schizo, on the gestalt of
creation that in short order makes a cultured person out of hominid. This time they have the
apartment (and telephone) of Stimson, Peter James' friend, with a monster bed embracing its
room, from which everything is reachable with levers and buttons and on which all is do-able,
apparently including dining, for there is no dining space.

There is a fine celebration after the meeting, proverbial homemade English pastry playing a
nostalgic part; drink flows freely and the survivors end up at the pub nearby. Deg meets Jill
Abery so can tell her that he admires her snippets on fossil assemblages and many other mini-
reviews of the quantavolutionary literature. Again he misses John Bimson and, too, Bernard
Newgrosh, the medical doctor who edits Workshop for the SIS.

He does a fast trip to Brian Moore's Cleveland haunts and the two of them ascend the
Observatory hill in Edinburgh to spend hours with Victor Clube and William Napier who have
published their Cosmic Serpent, which Deg had read, but they have not read Chaos and Creation
so he gives them that and they give him a reprint and all are full of talk and trying for a
common ground while sniffling about a bit doggishly. Clube and Napier call their
quantavolutionary scenario "the disintegrating comet theory." They set themselves to showing
that at great intervals of time the Solar System encounters galactic clouds of cometary
material and suffers heavy destruction from collisions. Residual comets accompany the Solar
System, and their periodic visitations, on rare occasion, end in disaster. Like many others
working on catastrophism, the two Edinburgh astronomers find themselves isolated, both because
of the extremity of their ideas and because they need much material from fields like mythology
and linguistics that they cannot grasp themselves nor command expert consultants to provide for
them. The crux of the matter is that, while both groups grant catastrophes in human times, the
Scottish astronomers want to read "comets" where the Deg-V. contingent read "planets" and they
bring out reams of calculations on Encke's Halley's and more to come, while Deg is confident by
now of Solaria Binaria and cannot wait for the book, which, if not calculation-full, is
calculation-proofed, and he feels good about some tag-wrestling matches to come, where with
much better historical reconstruction and with Milton at his side, well, we shall see, he
thought happily, as they stepped out upon the Observatory site overlooking beautifully the fine
somber city with the sea beyond, and they took their jovial leave.

Deg was pondering, wasn't this setting where Comyns Beaumont placed the world of the Bible and
was Edinburgh Jerusalem, and it was all transferred to the New Palestine after the comet
struck? Nonsense, of course -- to what lengths will not subconscious ethnocentricity lead one,
but how far and how near was Beaumont to William Blake the mystic poet and painter who
envisioned Jerusalem as England, pathetic genius, lost soul amidst the steam and soot of his
century.

Time had come to leave England for New York, but two matters had to be settled. After much
thinking and talking, Deg decided he could entrust the manuscript of Solaria Binaria, which he
had been hoarding all the while, to Rosemary Burnard of the Society for composition on the IBM
type-setting machine that the Society had scraped up the funds to buy and use for its
publications. A type-font was chosen, the format designed. Within three months all would be
done and the pasted-up camera-ready copy would be sent to Milton and Deg for final correction
and printing. Not so: July stretched to January before the job was done. Shall I stop to
explain the six months delay, Deg's fortnightly fury, the sweet, bold abstracted character of
Rosemary, the trials of the intellectual underground in Britain, speaking of how things don't
get done and finally maybe do get done in the perennial bohemia of generation after generation
of the Western World intelligentsia? Of course not. I cannot allow myself a Proustian self-
indulgence in prose. If there is a page to spare, it must go to the heroic efforts of it seemed
everybody to penetrate the U. S. Immigration Service just enough to get Ami aboard a plane to
New York.

Excepting the several millions of Indians who already were on hand, the vast majority of
individuals (and I use this term significantly) who came to the shores of the New World were
driven away from their old haunts-by the Old World authorities, by famine, by failure of one
kind or another -- and half of them came within the past century. And they are coming now, in
vast numbers, such that the system of restraints has broken down, and the question now is how
to legitimize millions of persons as Americans without setting into motion a similar advent of
millions more. At work, of course, is the U. S. Immigration and Naturalization Service which,
you must understand, is separate and distinct from the Department of State, but shares this
with the Department of State: that they live a life out of Kafka's Castle, full of resounding
laws, rules and regulations, and of textbook principles of administration.

Now, as in Kafka's books, the people most removed from the intent of the laws are bedeviled by
them. So it is that an apolitical, well-behaved French writer, who is married to an American,
unrecognized for the troublemaker he is, can have more difficulty getting in and out of the
country than anyone of the mob of persons whom the agencies are instructed and exhorted to
screen, examine, and order into various categories. So it happened, that the aforesaid French
novelist, female, law-abiding, with a stamp on her passport letting her in but stuck with a
paper not letting her out beyond a certain time, can be prevented from coming in and must begin
at the beginning -- lines, forms, physical examinations, faceless officials, and time without
apparent end.

Here then enters Professor de Grazia, professionally, fully, skeptically, ironically,
indignantly aware of what imbecility ad infinitum bureaucracies historically display, whether
in science or in travel, yet who still imagines that a minor delay in the return of his wife,
for good reason (for the good of the U. S. A., too) will not cause much of a problem, if he
addresses the Immigration Service in London properly and in good time. One week of good time
goes by, and a second week. Ordinary communications, cables, phone calls are not enough.
Interchangeable faceless beings turn on and off. The system cannot cope with the request to
reenter; a ping-pong game is set up, with the US offices on the one side and on the other side
of the Big pond reluctantly striking the ball, after resting in-between shots.

I cannot be sure of what finally happened, except that at a certain point Deg stopped acting
like a proper ordinary citizen trying go get his wife back home and began acting like a
politician and a border-runner. Ultimately are mobilized the good offices of a U. S. Minister,
a Consul, a U. S. Senator, several U. S. lawyers, and a politically prominent British Lord,
coupled with a partially blocked presumptuous entry upon a British Airways plane with the
baggage flying solo, until somehow something cracks in the system at the New York Airport, and
the message gets through to the airline that if Anne-Marie de Grazia were to be aboard a
certain plane no objection to her coming home to America would be raised by the Inspector at
the immigration counter. Nor was there.













COSMIC HERETICS: Part 2 :

by Alfred de Grazia


CHAPTER SIX


HOLOCAUST AND AMNESIA

As his last year begins, Dr Zvi Rix is writing to Deg from Rechovot, Israel. It is January 9,
1980 and he sends New Year's greetings, and hopes that they might meet before long. "I am very
cut off at the place where I am living now. This does not only concern libraries, but other
matters too..." for the mails are slow and books arrive late in the shops. He is in touch with
Christoph Marx. They travelled together to Glasgow... "He was quite obliging... So far I have
not formed a final opinion of him."

I would nominate Zvi Rix to be the hero of this chapter, but it is up to the reader to find his
own heroes in this book. Rix was a man who Velikovsky would have liked to write Mankind in
Amnesia in his place. He was a medical man, deep into psychiatry, and a refugee from Nazi
Germany. Deg knew him only through their correspondence. Deg was glad to get a description of
him from his widow, whom he met shortly afterwards at the home of Christoph Marx near Basle.
She wrote to Deg on January 23, 1981:

Dear Prof. de Grazia, My husband died very recently; as is customary for Jews, even not
practising religious commandments, we stay at home at least a week. In this time I went through
his many letters and found also yours.

I have the impression that you were very friendly and very much appreciating his work.
Therefore I write to you that I am very thankful to you. He was a very lonely man and every
encouragement was a help to him. Here he had nobody to talk to, I myself am much too obtuse to
understand half of what he was talking about and as he was also very shy he had no contacts;
besides that, his ideas were not exactly what people here would like to hear. It is a semi-
theocratic world. Ruled by a conglomeration of Zealots (...) they call themselves socialists or
rightwingers, its all the same. Our dreams went awry.

Yours very respectfully, Melitta Rix

Rix, whose scrambled writings are being kept by Christoph Marx, was hard in pursuit of evidence
that the cometary destruction of civilizations around 3500 years ago had warped the human mind
in the Near East, inciting human destructiveness, religious excesses, and sexual deviations.

Christoph Marx was a computer expert from Basle, and an amateur of Velikovsky's work and all
that it connected with. He circulated an invitation to whomever he knew to meet in Iceland, a
typical groping, logical yet mad, of cosmic heretics for a way of expressing themselves and
their message. Logical: let us assemble in Iceland between America and Europe, a
catastrophically threatened land even now, set athwart the great catastrophic Atlantic Rider;
mad: Marx was teetering on the edge of interdiction by everyone, the British, the Americans the
Europeans, Deg included, a heretic practically excommunicated from the heretics. The conference
did not materialize. Marx tried again in 1980, this in his home city, and found a few
communicants.

The minimum consensus of all people positively involved with the work of Immanuel Velikovsky
may well be characterized as an interest in the true reconstruction of mankind's genetic
history, and thus also of geologic and, in part, cosmic history... Developing

Velikovsky's psychological inceptions, the goal -- of bringing home to collective consciousness
the realistic conception of the world, as opposed by the present mania holding sway over
cultural evolution -- would include nothing less than safeguarding mankind's life on earth,
imperiled by (1) by the acute danger of self-destruction, and (2) by not attempting to prepare
against some future chaos in the solar system. However, whether some of us are attributing such
healing powers to the recognition of true history, or whether others would simply consider it
as a value in itself, does not seem all-important: both parties will equally perform a
supporting function in repelling collective irrationality and fanaticism, the worst effects of
which are mass killings through war and murder. We know that Velikovsky comprehended his own
striving for the true picture of history in this perspective...

The consensus among cosmic heretics of which Marx spoke in his announcement did not really
exist; however, it is certain that V. 's unique and original way of searching for the roots of
anti-semitism was a revelation to many thousands of people who would otherwise have not even
considered the problem or would have lived with a few, often anti-semitic, stereotypes.
Measuring such influences is impossible, but, by any standard, V. was a great Jew who disabused
the minds of many incipient anti-semites. Deg's Journal Paris, August 19, 1968


V. keeps two secrets, or doctrines half-hidden. He has expressed himself to me so often that
the "secrets" are apparent. He would perhaps deny them. I am sure of them. He does not believe
in God. He is a Hebrew, therefore Israeli, imperialist. Both doctrines, if publicized or known,
would involve him in a whole new line of controversies, would make new enemies and unwanted new
friends.

Evidence, examples: Of 1: direct statements; writings; philosophy of psychoanalysis; his theory
of "great fear" as bringing religion; belief that Jews were even in Biblical times
polytheistic.

Of 2: works of his life -- Zionism; gift of income from his property to Israel in June 67;
written works analysis; conversations; hatred of antizionism even at cost of other values (e.
g. El-Arish incident and Brandeis professor).

After a long trip following V.'s death, Deg returned to 78 Hartley Avenue( he could never
remember the house number, but would send his letters to 34 or 85 or another number, any
number, and V. was puzzled -- What significance could forgetting it have for Deg? "You can
address me just at Naxos, Greece and I get you alright at Hartley Avenue, Princeton!" "I have
gotten letters just to 'Princeton, NJ'" -- So there you are!) to see Elisheva. The parlor was
little changed. V.'s unimpressive chair stood facing the two stiff couches and the coffee table
between. Deg thought, "Should the chair be sat in, moved, replaced, bound across with a museum
belt, what?" It struck one with incompleteness, an uncertain quaver. He would slip some books
and papers upon it. Elisheva and her assistants Jan and Richard lined up with Deg on the
couches. Like a cordial committee they sat, drank tea, and reported to each other: health,
manuscripts in progress, people seen; and they passed papers and books around.

Thus went the meetings in the years thereafter. Sheva would at some point ask: "Did you see
Marx?" and Deg would say no or yes, and she would say "How can you see him when you know how
bad I feel about him," but she was curious nevertheless, while Deg tried to evade the subject
and one time she said "I will not speak to you again if you see Marx" and Deg threw his arms
around her jovially and said, I tell you what, if you don't see Greenberg, I won't see Marx,
and she was taken aback and all laughed because she had mixed feelings on that subject too and
knew that Greenberg was not his favorite among the cosmic heretics, but setting up proscription
lists in the Roman style was pointless.

It was on one of his earlier returns from abroad, in 1977, that Deg heard about Christoph Marx.
V. spoke of a visitor, almost in religious tones, who had lifted weighty burdens from his
shoulders, and would establish his rightful fame in Central Europe. He gave Deg a copy of a
well-executed chart of his reconstructed chronology of Egypt, in color, which Marx had drawn.
"Good, good," commented Deg, who was surprised, bemused, and skeptical at the same time.
"What's happened?" he asked Sizemore and others when he met them aside. They seemed confused
and uneasy.

What happened is this. A Christoph Marx had telephoned Velikovsky to pledge his allegiance to
his ideas and to offer support. There was much he could do: he could help with the translation
of V.'s books into German, working out of his more respectable (in V.'s eyes) Switzerland; he
could launch a campaign to bring the Germans to their senses, so that they would remember the
horrible Nazi past and thus cleanse themselves of the pest of comfortable oblivion, with its
eventual compulsion to repeat the past again; he could organize study circles to confront the
establishment with Velikovsky's ideas.

On April 14, 1977, V. wrote Marx, confirming in most cordial terms an invitation to visit. For
ten days, Marx settled into Princeton. Professor Lynn Rose, who V. said at various times would
be his literary executor, came down from Buffalo for some of the discussions. Marx departed on
Mayday. V. writes him: "Dear Marx: you left on Sunday, you called from home on Monday, and
today is Friday -- and very many things did happen in those few days... Earl Milton from
Lethbridge, Canada, is with us since yesterday and leaves tomorrow morning together with Alfred
de Grazia - who just now spent with us some time - and left copies of letters he wrote to Enc[
cyclopedia] Br[ itannica] and to NY Times. Sagan sent me a new book of his inscribed with all
good wishes and a day apart arrived the tape of this year's lecture on the yearly theme --
Venus and V. -- in which he indoctrinates future astronomers in their first year with derision
toward me and my work..."

Three days later V. is writing about turning over rights to the royalties from various foreign
translations to members of his family. He says he is turning over the management of worldwide
Spanish language rights to his recently acquired agents, Scott Meredith. He says "I
reconsidered and wish to suggest the following plan: your share is one eighth (12 1/ 2%); but
you retain countries not 'gifted' an additional 7 1/ 2% for work that furthers our goals -- at
our common discretion (such will be the case with Germany),..." V. writes also to Lynn Rose on
May 11 that "I let him [Marx] have broad powers to act, and have already the first report from
him. He will take over most of the European Continent for contracting my books with publishers,
and be a rather central figure in organizing groups of interdisciplinary synthesis, and in
opposition to the Establishment." He mentions other rights to be bestowed upon individuals and
adds "Christoph Marx will be in charge of these and many other activities."

On May 16, Marx replies that he will proceed as desired. He wonders whether the gifting of
"income" rather than "rights" is not the better procedure, and suggests that the literary
estate should be kept centralized and managed efficiently. His idea is of a Velikovsky
Institute, a foundation not-for-profit, with an office in Switzerland and another in America.

V. seems to be in a manic phase. He sends off sundry "Notes to my Collaborators," a newsletter
in fact. Inter alia he mentions lending Marx his unpublished manuscripts and writes that "I
gave him wide powers to represent me in academic contacts and arrange for the publication of
translations of my books"

In August, V. visited the office of Scott-Meredith Literary Agency in New York and met the head
of their foreign rights department, Mr. Vicinanza, who "showed great eagerness to represent me
on a broader basis." An offer was made to enter the greater European market. Vicinanza
estimated that $750,000.00 could be obtained in advances worldwide for Worlds in Collision in
18 months: so V. reported to Marx, adding, "Against such figures the offers made to you appear
minuscule,..."

A month later Marx reports to V. with several offers and expresses doubts (as did V.) about the
high figures. Marx would like to sign in the name of the "Velikovsky Institute." In any event,
he would like to draw upon the expected advances to begin microfilming and indexing V.'s
archives.

Then suddenly, V. telegraphs "Please don't sign agreement with Umschau. Wait my explanatory
letter. Greetings." Something has happened. There is a flurry of letters and telegram. In a
telegram, V. says that his books are being returned by the thousands due to the book Scientists
Confront Velikovsky (by Asimov, Sagan and others) and "other adverse publicity." Marx appeals
by telegram for confidence and trust, to no avail. They also talk on the telephone. Marx is
seeking to give "rational" answers to all objections, but says "I have legally signed the
agreement as your proxy within the frame of German and Swiss law. At this point I again wish to
thank you for the powers you have entrusted to me, which I consider as a wide obligation toward
you and your family."

I suspect that around this moment, Marx had been hit by the inevitable reaction to the Grand
Vision. V., always a procrastinator in decision-making, facing opposition from his family and
the lack of enthusiasm of friends such as Rose and Sizemore, could not overcome his profound
aversion to things German, including now spending resources "to help reeducate them." Marx
might as well proceed; V. would never have returned to the Great Vision; his idea of therapy
would have to be applied by others, if at all.

Marx has signed the contract on November 22; the Umschau Verlag signs on November 29. He
reports that he is putting the money in a special account in German Marks, which are moving
upwards against the dollar. He continues to report editorial activities.

Now young Jan Sammer, who has come from Canada to live and work with the Velikovsky's, writes
to Marx. Without expressing his authorization, he relates that V. is upset with the disapproved
signing, that Doubleday Company will probably insist upon 25% of the proceeds, that V. does not
favor the Velikovsky Institute idea, that Marx has "overstepped the powers that V. granted"
him, and that he could negotiate but not sign an agreement without the author's approval. Marx
is told to stay out of affairs in Holland. Marx replies both to Jan and to V., avoiding a
confrontation.

Jan writes again repeating himself more forcibly, adding a warning to Marx not to pretend to
represent V. in speaking to any scholars. He repeats words written earlier by Marx: "Umschau in
due course will wish to have proper signatures to the contract. You would have to empower me
accordingly." How, asks V., through Jan, can you now say you had power to sign.

Marx argues at length to this point: V. had orally and even in writing granted the power to
sign. Marx speaks of a further consideration being "my understanding of how distasteful Dr.
Velikovsky would regard a duty to sign a German contract personally." (Deg remembered that V.
had considered even not permitting his books to appear in German.) Marx states that V. had told
him not to worry about any claim of Doubleday to the subsidiary rights.

Finally on March 1, 1978, Mrs. Elisheva Velikovsky writes to Marx, repeating that Marx had
himself said that further empowering authority was needed, insisting that he not present
himself anymore as V.'s agent, and condemning the idea of an Institute. Marx rebuts this, and
indicates a desire to visit Princeton to settle matters.

The visit is declined by Mrs. V. Marx inquires about V.'s health. His letters continue to carry
news of books and meetings. Jan says in the middle of a letter May 17, regarding Marx's
expenses of purchasing books, that "in any case, they would have to be paid by you from the 7
1/ 2% designated for expenses connected with your efforts to arrange for translations." More
reports. V. telegraphs for an accounting twice in the same month, the second message being
misaddressed to "Immanuel Marx." And a third cable demands the transfer of funds to America.
Marx sidesteps these and writes of his work on the Dutch contract, which he had been called
away from, and of his dislike of entitling the German translation of The Velikovsky Affair
(Deg's Book) Immanuel Velikovsky, Die Theorie der Kosmischen Katastrophen, a publisher's
presumptuousness that one might find annoying.

On August 15 goes to Marx the first letter by V. in two years. It asks the transfer of money,
and that V. be informed of all negotiations from the beginning and that no contract be signed
without written approval; if not, any authority will be revoked. Marx on August 24 refuses the
"fundamental change," acknowledges the end of the agreement is inevitable therefore, and
suggests he be allowed his 20% of receipts from books signed up and be given all German
language rights. '.... Such German monies are not going toward an enrichment of myself.... no
other people in the world need your works as urgently than the German speaking peoples. ' On
September 5, V. signs a handwritten message, witnessed by his lawyer; it "terminates our
business relationship." Further, Marx is accused of having been in California and Washington,
D. C., "but did not give a ring to Princeton."

Marx retorted that he had too many rebuffs to continue telephoning. He protests that, in V.'s
name, the Kronos magazine group was denying him permission to publish in German various of its
articles. He also received in due course damning letters from Lynn Rose and Warner Sizemore.
Rose adds a postscript calling "a deliberate misrepresentation" a letter from Marx to the Times
which asserted that "Velikovsky saw the Holocaust in terms of collective amnesia."

Matters had been sliding into the hands of Robert Pinto, Velikovsky's atto