Thus I entered a field that should be at the basis of the natural sciences, not only of the human soul and of racial memories, and soon I observed that the divisions in science are but artificial. I had to cross barriers. How could I do otherwise? Upon the realization that we are unaware of the most fateful events in human history, I had before me the task of explaining this well-known phenomenon of repression, the realization of which could also become crucial to the survival of the victim of amnesia playing with thermonuclear weapons. But before that I had the task of confronting the humanistic heritage with the message of stones and bonesdo geology and paleontology carry the same testimony? I went again from shelf to shelf, once more around the Earth, and the record from the bottom of the sea and from the top of the mountains, from the deserts, jungles, tundras, lakes, rivers and waterfalls, told the same storydocumented in every latitude and in every longitude. This evidence is presented in which I kept free from any bit of testimony that can be classified as human heritage. The scenes of devastation, mass extinction of many species in circumstances that are by far in excess of what can be considered as local catastrophe, the simultaneous change of climate all over the globe thirty-four and twenty-seven centuries ago, the drop of the level of the ocean and many other phenomena observed, could not be accounted for but by paroxysms in which the entire Earth was involved.
I do not denigratethe field for this; in science any work that enables us to bringmore material to bear in discriminating in favour of onehypothesis in preference to another earns respect accordingly.
In my published books, notwithstanding often repeated allegations, no physical law is ever abrogated or temporarily suspended; what I offered in them is primarily a reconstruction of events from the historical past. Thus I did not set out to confront the existing views with a theory or hypothesis and to develop it into a competing system. My work is first a reconstruction, not a theory; it is built upon studying the human testimony as preserved in the heritage of all ancient civilizationsall of them in texts bequeathed beginning with the time man learned to write, tell in various forms the very same narrative that the trained eye of a psychoanalyst could not but recognize as so many variants of the same theme. In hymns, in prayers, in historical texts, in philosophical discourses, in records of astronomical observations, but also in legend and religious myth, the ancients desperately tried to convey to their descendants, ourselves included, the record of events that took place in circumstances that left a strong imprint on the witnesses. There were physical upheavals on a global scale in historical times; the grandiosity of the events inspired awe. From the Far East to the Far Westthe Japanese, Chinese and Hindu civilizations; the Iranian, Sumerian, Assyrian, Babylonian, Hitto-Chaldean, Israelite and Egyptian records; the Etruscan, Attic and Roman theogonies and philosophies; Scandinavian and Icelandic epics; Mayan, Toltec and Olmec art and legendsall, with no exception, were dominated by the knowledge of events and circumstances that only the most brazen attitude of science could so completely disregard.
Some of the anaerobes commonly found on the uncircumcised penis and on occasion inside the male urogenital tract are the same species associated with bacterial vaginosis (BV) in women, says Liu. Deborah Anderson, an OB-GYN and microbiologist at Boston University School of Medicine, and her colleagues have found similar results. “One hypothesis is that the male microbiome might reflect or be related to [his] partner’s microbiome,” says Anderson.
A psychological situation provoked the change in the attitude of the scholarly world with the beginning of the Victorian age. The founders of the sciences of geologyBuckland, Sedgwick, and Murchinson (who gave the classification of formations used today); of vertebrate paleontologyCuvier; and of ichthyologyLouis Agassiznever doubted that what they observed was the result of repeated cataclysms in which the entire globe partook. Actually, Charles Darwin, observing the destruction of fauna in South America, was convinced that nothing less than the shaking of the entire frame of the Earth could account for what he saw. But the introduction of the principle of uniformitarianism by Charles Lyell, a lawyer who never had field experience, and the acceptance of it on faith by Charles Darwin, are a psychological phenomenon that I observed again and again. Exactly those who, like Darwin, witnessed the omnipresent shambles of an overwhelming fury of devastation on a continental scale, became the staunchest defenders of the principle of uniformitarianism, that became not just a law, but a principle that grew to a statute of faith in the natural sciences, as if the reasoning that what we do not observe in our time could not have happened in the past can in any measure claim to be philosophically or scientifically true.
This version ofPanspermia is the main playground of the purveyors of cosmicsources of diseases, for example, and that would peg the lowerlimit of ambient life at a frequency related to the frequency ofnew plagues on Earth.
Orbiter and Surveyor probes of the Moon were followed by Apollo probes; and on the historic night of July 21, 1969, when Man stepped on the Moon, I made a series of claims in an article written at the invitation of the and spelled out earlier as well in memos to the Space Science Board of the National Academy of Sciences. Strong magnetic remanence, I claimed, would be discovered in lunar rocks and lavas, though the Moon itself hardly possesses any magnetic field whatsoever. A steep thermal gradient would be found already a few feet under the surface. Thermoluminescence would disclose that the Moon was heated considerably only thousands of years ago. Hydrocarbons, preferably of aromatic structure, would be found in small quantities, but carbides, into which hydrocarbons would transform when heated, in substantial quantities; expressed radioactivity would be detected in lunar soil and rocks; and several more claims. Already following Apollo XI and XII the score was complete. But each of the discoveriessteep thermal gradient, strong remanent magnetism, recent heating of the lunar surface, carbides and traces of aromatic hydrocarbons, and rich radioactivity of the rocks and dustevoked exclamations of surprise and at best some far fetched, hypotheses. Magnetic anomalies, especially where interplanetary bolts fell, and huge enclaves of neon and argon 40 in lunar rocks, were also claimed by me in advance of the findings.
In this last example the controls aredifferent from the rest and would deal with the nature of themicrobes, their provenance and survival, rather than theimplausibility of their existence or genuineness.
This does not mean that the simplerhypothesis is right, Occam's razor is a working principle, not aproof, but it does imply that if we prefer the less parsimonioushypothesis, we have work to do before we can achieve cogency.
My work today is no longer heretical. Most of it is incorporated in textbooks and it does not matter whether credit is properly assigned. My work is not concludedI only opened new vistas. The young and the imaginative flock in an ever increasing stream. Numerous colleges and universities in this country hold courses or seminars on my work, include my books among the required readings and have theses on my ideas written for graduate degrees. Those who stopped thinking since graduating will claim authority, soon to find that they are left without a following. I may have even caused retardation in the development of science by making some opponents cling to their unacceptable views only because such views may contradict Velikovsky - like sticking to the completely unsupportable hypothesis of greenhouse effect as the cause of Venus heat, even in violation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics.
For another, it is notat all clear that its implications for terrestrial biology entailpredictions different from the reigning hypotheses of abiogenesison Earth.