http://SaturnianCosmology.Org/ mirrored file
For complete access to all the files of this collection
	see http://SaturnianCosmology.org/search.php 
==========================================================

[1]Previous [2]Main [3]Next 
_________________________________________________________________

Worlds in Collision and the Natural Sciences

Although many articles were written against the theory of Worlds in
Collision, and its author was called many names, there are but two
arguments that are of real significance and with which the theory of
"worlds in collision" stands or falls. One argument is of
astronomical, the other of geological nature. Astronomers believe that
the Earth and the entire solar system have been moving unperturbed for
billion-years-long eons, every planet and every satellite on the same
unchanging orbit. Geologists believe that the earth passed through a
process of slow evolution, and that no vast catastrophe occurred in
the age of man, if at all.

Since these two beliefs are the foundation of these two sciences, a
theory that opposes them threatens to overturn the entire edifice. It
is branded as heresy and is summarily rejected as being incompatible
with the basic notions of natural sciences as taught in all textbooks
and from all professorial chairs of natural sciences in general, not
only astronomy and geology. If celestial mechanics went astray, the
physics upon which it is built contains some basic error, and if the
accepted view of geology is wrong, the theory of evolution that
excludes past catastrophes must be based on a wrong notion. But
astronomy is said to be the most exact of all sciences, being almost
the embodiment of mathematics, and modern physics is the mainstay of
all natural sciences, and the theory of evolution is the cornerstone
of modern biology now for more than ninety years. No wonder that a
theory that would contradict so much had to be rejected even without
attention being paid to it; then it is also no wonder that Worlds in
Collision was paid an unusual amount of attention.

It was the cumulative weight of the historical, literary, and
folkloristic material from almost every culture of the past and every
region of the world, or the collective memory, that made "worlds in
collision" to a contention that could not have been disposed of
without being answered. The emotional outbursts and the efforts to
suppress the book in the hands of its first and, then, the second
publisher, were no arguments; and the fact that now for over three
years, again and again, the theory is "disproved" for "the first time"
proves only that it was not sufficiently disproved at all, and that
ever new efforts are necessary to discredit a theory which, if right,
dislocates the very foundations of the natural sciences, and with
them, of humanistic studies--history, archaeology, folklore, history
of religion.

Aware of the consequences of the theory of cosmic disturbances in a
recent past, I explained in the concluding chapter of my first book
the various problems that come up. It could easily have happened that
the author of a work based on ancient literary sources would not feel
himself capable or willing to go out of the pale of his particular
field, and would let the scholars and scientists take up the problem
in their fields. If the cumulative evidence of the book is strong
enough to give to the events detected the validity of historical
facts, then scholars of other fields are under the obligation to
re-examine their tenets and try to find how a harmony between facts
and laws can be brought about. And if the laws and the facts conflict,
should the facts be annulled, or the man-made laws revised?

But a revolutionary revision of our heritage and the detection of
unexpected but omnipresent records of frightening events in the
history of human, animal and plant populations of the globe, and of
the globe itself, and of other celestial bodies of the solar system,
makes it most probable that under accepted contentions of eventless
geology and astronomy, these sciences would not be found prepared to
accomodate their views to a new theory in a foreign field. Therefore,
it can be expected that either this field must be invaded and cleansed
from the newly detected "facts," if this is possible, or other fields
must defend their contentions. Nobody invaded the field examined in
Worlds in Collision to show that the thousands of coordinated
references there could be torn apart or all of them given a different
interpretation--and such a work would be almost unthinkable. Therefore
the line of combat moved into other fields. And not expecting that
natural sciences, or even archaeology, would revamp their views in
response to a work in collective human memory, I took upon myself to
carry the conclusions of my work in this field into other fields, too.

In order to be able to do this, I decided to postpone the presentation
of the story of the earlier world catastrophes--of the third and
fourth millennia before the present era--and dedicate myself to the
exploration of the ensuing problems in astronomy and geology. And
before this I had the obligation to elaborate on the problems of
chronology and cultural history of the peoples of antiquity. This I
had to do first, because in Worlds in Collision I asked the permission
of the reader to use a synchronical scale of Egyptian and Hebrew
histories which is not orthodox. And though Ages in Chaos was not
written as historical argument for Worlds in Collision, being a work
of its own purpose, it answers the argument the my synchronization of
stories about catastrophes, especially the catastrophe of the days of
the Exodus and the fall of the Middle Kingdom in Egypt, was arbitrary.
It was not arbitrary, and a reconstruction of the history of the
ancient East for twelve centuries, until the days of Alexander the
Great and even beyond, was built upon the premise of a simultaneity of
the fall of the Middle Kingdom and the Exodus, both events having
taken place during a great natural catastrophe.
_________________________________________________________________