#Edit this page Wikipedia (en) copyright Wikipedia RSS Feed Wikipedia Atom Feed David Talbott From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search David Talbott (June 2007) David Talbott (June 2007) David N. Talbott (born 1942) is an American, self-taught, unaccredited comparative mythologist in the Velikovsky tradition.^[1] His work offers a radical point of view on the origin of ancient cultural themes and symbols, in which the planets Jupiter, Saturn, Mars and Venus play prime roles.^[2] ^[3] In 1970 as publisher (with his brother Stephen L. Talbott as editor) he revived the student magazine Pensée produced by the Student Academic Freedom Forum in Portland, Oregon. In late 1971 they decided to produce a feature issue on Immanuel Velikovsky which, between 1972 and 1974, grew into ten special issues, Immanuel Velikovsky Reconsidered, after the May 1972 issue on Velikovsky was advertised nationally in scientific and general interest periodicals, such as Industrial Research, Psychology Today and Intellectual Digest. It proved very popular,^[4] achieving a circulation of between 10,000 to 20,000 subscribers.^[5] He is also the author of The Saturn Myth (1980), co-author of a cosmological mystery, The Ecstasy of Sati-Ra, a video, "Mythscape: Remembering the End of the World" (1996), and co-author (with Wallace Thornhill) of Thunderbolts of the Gods (2005) and The Electric Universe (2007), and has contributed articles to Kronos, and Aeon journals, the latter having been founded by him in 1987.^[6] He has a B.S. from Portland State University.^[7] Contents * 1 Research + 1.1 The Saturn Myth + 1.2 Criticism * 2 Notes * 3 Bibliogaphy + 3.1 Books + 3.2 Video + 3.3 Journal articles [edit] Research The Saturn Myth which describes itself as "A reinterpretation of rites and symbols illuminating some of the dark corners of primordial society." The Saturn Myth which describes itself as "A reinterpretation of rites and symbols illuminating some of the dark corners of primordial society." His research, which began in 1971, has been the primary catalyst behind the "Saturn Model", motivated by an unpublished manuscript by Immanuel Velikovsky, In the Beginning,^[8] and is the subject of two documentaries in the MYTHSCAPE series: (1) When the Gods Were Planets (1995)^[9] and (2) Remembering the End of the World (1996)^[10] for which he was co-writer and co-narrator. The "Saturn Model" envisions a primordial, seasonless "Golden Age" in which a crescent-Saturn hovered over the north pole. [edit] The Saturn Myth In his book The Saturn Myth, Talbott contends that: ".. the evidence assembled in the following pages indicates that within human memory extraordinary changes in the planetary system occurred: in the earliest age recalled by man the planet Saturn was the most spectacular light in the heavens and its impact on the ancient world overwhelming. In fact Saturn was the one "great god" invoked by all mankind. The first religious symbols were symbols of Saturn, and so pervasive was the planet god's influence that the ancients knew him as the creator, the king of the world, and Adam, the first man."^[11] Basing his evidence on "the language of myth", Talbott suggests that they support the following elements: "(1) In the earliest age recalled by man the planet Saturn was the dominant celestial body. [..] (2) Accounts of Saturn's appearance suggest that the planet hung ominously close to the earth. [..] (3) The modern age has misread the ancient accounts of "the beginning." These accounts speak of a creator, a first man, and a first king -- all referring to the same cosmic figure. [..] The legendary creator, first man, and first king was Saturn. (4) .. massive quantities of cosmic debris exploded from Saturn, clouding the heavens and eventually congealing into a vast band around the planet. [..] (5) The ancients drew pictures of Saturn incessantly, and these pictures will be found around the world. [..] (6) Images of Saturn in his enclosure occur on every page of ancient texts. [..] (9) Receiving light from the solar orb, the Saturnian band acquired a brightly illuminated crescent, which, as the earth rotated on its axis, visually revolved around Saturn each day. [..] "^[12] A number of other writers have described similar scenarios.^[13] They are sometimes called Saturnists^[14] [edit] Criticism The neutrality of this section is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page. (July 2008) Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. Talbott has freely admitted that his ideas do not conform to the known laws of physics^[15]^[16]^[17] and the "best"^[18] physical model to date^[19] was refuted by two astronomers, Victor Slabinski^[20] and Tom Van Flandern^[21]. Subsequently, Talbott's defense of Grubaugh's model on talk.origins, in which Talbott consistently conflated "historical evidence" with "mythological interpretation", was rebutted point-by-point by Paul Gans,^[22] a professor of chemistry at New York University, with selected points critiqued further by Wayne Throop.^[23] Earlier, the general problem of a polar Saturn was refuted by independent Sanskrit scholar and mythologist^[24] Roger Ashton.^[25] Linguistic researcher Patrick C. Ryan,^[26] one-time participant on Talbott's kronia-l listserve, pointed out just before he was un-subscribed that the "Saturn Model" was the product of circular reasoning.^[27] Talbott's unorthodox, radical interpretation of the world's myths and religious traditions is considered by his peers in the post-Velikovsky era to be extreme and unsupported by an objective evaluation of all the data, physical and symbolic-literary.^[28]^[29]^[30] Considering the overarching primacy Talbott accords planet Saturn in antiquity, he never confronts the fact that, in the Babylonian-Assyrian astrology that he cites, Saturn was not given a specific name until after "Jupiter and Venus were specifically distinguished among the planets."^[31]^[32]^[33] His literal interpretations of mythology deny a role for metaphor and synecdoche as he projects modern concepts onto archaic perceptions. Professor of Social Theory, Alfred de Grazia noted that Talbott was one of several scholars who had "entered the full stream of Velikovsky's work"^[34] Another critical view is that Talbott's research program for the "Saturn Model", following Velikovsky, is based on a false premise: namely that, to our ancestors, the "great gods" were planets^[35] when in Mesopotamia, for example, the planets were merely one of several aspects of deities that were primarily anthropomorphic.^[36]^[37]^[38] By eschewing our ancestors' use of religious and mythical metaphors and taking divine "identities" out of cult context, the resulting interpretation is syncretism run amok. Especially vexing is Talbott's habit of substituting "Saturn" for the name of a deity, such as "Ninurta" or "Ninib", in his source and also substituting "Sumero-Babylonian" for "Assyro-Babylonian".^[39] In a paper Talbott accepted for publication in Aeon on Nov. 1, 1987, but then suppressed,^[40] Roger Ashton demonstrates the malleability of mythic imagery by showing how the imagery interpreted by Talbott can be explained without recourse to planets.^[41] Talbott's emphasis on coherence is entirely unjustified. According to him "I claim the model predicts all the recurring objects and events of myth. And I claim that a fundamentally false model could never achieve this predictive ability."^[42] However, "[c]oherence alone is not enough for justification because a coherent set of propositions may not be grounded in reality. A fairy tale may be coherent, but that doesn't justify our believing it. Since justification is supposed to be a reliable guide to the truth, and since truth is grounded in reality, there must be more to justification than mere coherence."^[43] It has also been noted: "[A]s anyone who has studied logic or mathematics knows, systems of thought can be internally consistent yet bear no resemblance to physical reality. Incoherence may be a sign of falsehood, but coherence is no guarantor of truth."^[44] Towards the end of an over two-year long discussion of the Saturn Thesis on talk.origins, Tim Thompson, a physicist at Jet Propulsion Laboratory, responded to Talbott's boast "That's why I shall continue to insist that a fundamentally false theory predicting the full content of recurring themes is not just unlikely, it's impossible" with the following reductio ad absurdum: "It should be fairly obvious that this must be false, and Talbott's continued adherence to it can only damage his credibility. One can, should one choose to make the effort, create an essentially infinite number of totally ridiculous explanations, all of them every bit as useful as Talbott's Saturn Myth theory. For instance, it is fairly obvious that myth comes from pre-historic times. I propose that 50,000 years ago a barbarian named Conan conquered th[e] entire human race, and imposed all of the known common themes of myth on everybody on pain of death. I challenge Talbott to *prove* that this did not or could not have happened. Mind, 'that's just silly' is not such a proof and should not be countenanced. My theory of Conan the Conqueror does not violate any known law of nature, and is not inconsistent with any known facts of history or myth. Therefore it must be seriously considered, and proven wrong, or else it must be given every bit as much validity and respect as the Saturn Myth itself deserves."^[45] At this same time after having engaged Talbott on talk.origins to no effect since 1994, Paul Gans concluded ". . . Saturnism is a religion. . . . Talbott's world-view has all the earmarks of a theological construct. It is a matter of belief, not proof. It is held to be based on ancient texts and revealed truth. And it is not capable of being modified, being already *true* in some deep sense."^[46] In relying on a necessarily subjective interpretation of ancient symbols, images, and astrologico-religious texts, to the exclusion of objective criteria, Talbott ignores Giorgio de Santillana's wise injunction: "Number gave the key. Way back in time, before writing was even invented, it was measures and counting that provided the armature, the frame on which the rich texture of real myth was to grow."^[47] The "great gods" in the pantheons of ancient Mesopotamia were assigned, on the basis of theological speculation unknown to us, sacred number names.^[48]^[49]^[50] Talbott's identifications of various gods with planet Saturn are not informed by these sacred number names which are different for each of the gods he claims was identified with Saturn and therefore his identifications are fundamentally unsound.^[51] Talbott's focus is exclusively on Saturn at the celestial pole, which to him is the pole of the equator, while dismissing the ancients' veneratiuon of the pole of the ecliptic. The most exalted place in the sky was not the pole of the equator, but the pole of the ecliptic,^[52] the "pole par excellence of the Chaldeans".^[53] When confronted with Assyriologist Peter Jensen's identification of Anu with the pole of the ecliptic and Bel/Enlil with the pole of the equator,^[54] Talbott declared "I certainly cannot accept" it.^[55] Except for one enthusiastic, though guarded, review in an obscure Velikovskian newsletter,^[56] Talbott's book was ignored by the main Velikovsky journals. Mainstream reviewers were not impressed: "Talbott's complex, mazelike narrative utterly fails to convince."^[57] "Implicit throughout is the naive supposition that the ancients equated the mythological with the celestial, but were not capable of thinking metaphorically."^[58] Talbott "draws on ancient myths and sacred symbols more than on physical data to build his thesis. Scientists are no more likely to accept this cosmic scenario than they did Velikovsky's planetary collisions...."^[59] "Well, if [Talbott's] not going to worry about providing a reasonable physical explanation to account for the gyrations he's requiring of Saturn, then I'm not going to worry about taking his seriously."^[60] In a post to the Usenet discussion group sci.skeptic in 1997, Jim Meritt examined critically the physical ramifications of what Talbott suggests in The Saturn Myth and found nothing made sense.^[61] [edit] Notes 1. ^ Talbott, David N., The Saturn Myth (1980), Doubleday. ISBN 0385113765. pp. 3-5. 2. ^ Trevor Palmer, Perilous Planet Earth: Catastrophes and Catastrophism Through the Ages (2003) Cambridge University Press, ISBN 0521819288 (p.122) 3. ^ Alfred de Grazia, Chaos and Creation (1981) Metron Publ. "Ch.8 Saturn's Children" ISBN 0940268000 4. ^ Anon. (1974). Why Pensee? Pensee X, 4 (5), 40 5. ^ Henry H. Bauer, Beyond Velikovsky: The History of a Public Controversy, (1984) University of Illinois Press, ISBN 0-252-011-4-X. 6. ^ October 5, 1987, "Dear Friends" letter from Talbott announcing "THE CATACLYSM: A Monthly Symposium on Myth and Science" would begin publication in early December, which slipped to January, 1988, with the title changing to Aeon with second issue. 7. ^ Kronos Vol. XI No. 1 (Fall 1985) 8. ^ Immanuel Velikovsky, In the Beginning, unpublished. Online in the the Immanuel Velikovsky Archive 9. ^ Kronia Communications (1995). advertisement, Aeon, 4 (1), back cover: "According to Talbott, only a few thousand years ago the gas giants Saturn and Jupiter, together with an assembly of smaller planets and cosmic debris, moved close to the earth and dominated the sky of our ancestors, who observed the massive congregation in awe and terror." 10. ^ Hardie, Lance (1999). Review. Parabola, 24 (2), 132-135. 11. ^ Talbott, David N., The Saturn Myth (1980), Doubleday. ISBN 0385113765. "Introduction". 12. ^ Talbott, David N., The Saturn Myth (1980), Doubleday. ISBN 0385113765. "Conclusion". 13. ^ See for example, Immanuel Velikovsky, In the Beginning, unpublished. Online in the the Immanuel Velikovsky Archive. Harold Tresman and B. O'Gheoghan, "The Primordial Light?" (1977) SIS Review Vol. II No. 2. Dwardu Cardona, "Let There be Light", Kronos Vol. III No. 3 (Spring 1978), see also God Star (2006) Trafford Publishing, 532 pages, ISBN-10: 1412083087. Lynn E. Rose, "Variations on a Theme of Philolaos", Kronos Vol. V No. 1 (Fall 1979). Ev Cochrane, "The Many Faces of Venus (2001) Aeon Press, ISBN 0-9656229-0-9. 14. ^ C. Leroy Ellenberger, "Still Facing... A Reply to Comments" Kronos Vol. XI No. 1 (Fall 1985) 15. ^ Gibson, John (1977). Research Communications Network Newsletter #3, quoting Talbott: "As a matter of fact, I'm going to go ahead with the writing of my second volume, called The Cataclysm, and not even worry about the physics of it all" (p. 4); also quoted by George W. Earley in his book review in Fate, Aug. 1981, pp. 108-110. 16. ^ Letter, David N. Talbott to C. Leroy Ellenberger, 9-29-88: "Since our ideas about what is possible are changing every day, and since most space age discovery involved encounters with data previously considered impossible, I am afraid I am not overly awed by occasional statements of the 'impossibility' of the polar configuration. But beyond this, my own emotional investment is not in a physical model anyway, but in the extraordinary coherent images." Critics contend that Talbott (1) therefore does not discriminate between space age discoveries that are "impossible" and those that are merely "unexpected" and (2) fails to appreciate Pierre Duhem's observation, captured by the Quine-Duhem thesis, which holds that any set of data can be interpreted in more than one way and, therefore, coherency does not guarantee uniqueness. 17. ^ Talbott, Dave (1993). From Myth to a Physical Model. Aeon, 3 (3), 5-38. 18. ^ Talbott, Dave (1993). From Myth to a Physical Model. Aeon, 3 (3), 5-38, in which the Grubaugh model is positioned as superior to earlier models by Talbott himself, Fred Hall, R.M. Smith, and Robert Driscoll. 19. ^ Grubaugh, Robert (1993). A Proposed Model for the Polar Configuration. Aeon, 3 (3), 39-48. In 1991, despairing of ever finding a solution to the polar configuration, Talbott abdicated his life's work for eighteen months until Grubaugh showed him his model which, according to Talbott in the documentary Remembering the End of the World, "wasn't a complete answer; but it gave me confidence that the dynamical issues could be resolved", whereupon Talbott ended his self-imposed sabbatical; cf. Talbott, Dave (1993). From Myth to a Physical Model. Aeon, 3 (3), 5-38. A key feature of Grubaugh's original model was that it produced a constant crescent on Saturn as viewed from Earth, thereby distinguishing it from the Moon which goes through phases. 20. ^ Slabinski, Victor J. (1994). A Dynamical Objection to Grubaugh's Polar Configuration. Aeon 3 (6), 1-10. "All Grubaugh succeeded in doing was to identify times when angular velocities [of Jupiter and Saturn] are equal in a regime in which the velocities and acceleration constantly change due to mutual interactions. Grubaugh's equilibrium configuration does not exist" (p. 4). 21. ^ Van Flandern, Tom (1994). Evaluation of Grubaugh model. Message-ID: <3cvphu$kfl@kosi.well.com>, posted to talk.origins 17 Dec. 1994 22:43:10 GMT. "The Grubaugh model shown above [which was revised to evade Slabinski's criticism by reversing the rotation of Jupiter and Saturn about their barycenter and whose effect was to lose the constant crescent on Saturn in favor of Saturn going through phases just as the Moon does] cannot be in equilibrium because there are times when all operative forces tend to collapse the system, with no forces opposing that collapse." 22. ^ Gans, Paul J. (1996). VELIKOVSKY: My Dinner With Tim. Posted to talk.origins Jul 18, 1996. 23. ^ Throop, Wayne (1996). velikovsky, grubaugh, bass. Posted to talk.origins Jul 30, 1996. 24. ^ A*E*O*N Promotional Mailer, postmarked Jul 11, 1988; and Letter, David N. Talbott to Dear Friends, October 5, 1987. 25. ^ Ashton, Roger (1988). The Unworkable Polar Saturn. Aeon 1 (3), 39-55. 26. ^ Ryan's exploration into the origin of language, Proto-Language, is the subject of his webpage 27. ^ Email Patrick C. Ryan to Dave Talbott. Subject "Talbot-Ryan (1) 'Twin Peaks'", copy to Leroy Ellenberger, 27 Oct 1997: "You did not hypothesize the hypothetical Saturn configuration based on physical or archaeological evidence, and then look for confirmation in the myths; you interpreted the myths, and contructed a hypothetical physical configuration of the skies. Therefore, your hypothetical construct cannot be used to validate the speculations on which it is based. Therefore, there are no predictions involved. You[r] argument is totally circular." This passage was quoted in the email "Circular Saturn", 29 Oct 1997, sent to velikov listserve plus others including Dave Talbott and Dwardu Cardona. 28. ^ Ellenberger, Leroy (1995). An Antidote to Velikovskian Delusions. Skeptic, 3 (4), 49-51. 29. ^ James, Peter J. (2000). The Saturn Problem. Chronology & Catastrophism Review, 2000 (1), 97-107. 30. ^ Rose, Lynn E. (2000). Sirius and Saturn. Chronology & Catastrophism Review, 2000 (1), 60-65. 31. ^ Ellenberger, Leroy (1994). Ellenberger Contra Cochrane: The Second Reply & Talbott, Too; posted to talk.origins 20 Jun 1994 16:12 MST. See ten-point section "Talbott's Shared Delusion" at end. . This point was ignored in Talbott's 3 July 1994 reply to Ellenberger on talk.origins. 32. ^ Jastrow, Jr., Morris (1910). Sun and Saturn. Revue d'Assyriologie, VII, 163-178. . Cited thrice in The Saturn Myth. 33. ^ Jastrow, Jr., Morris (1911). Aspects of Religious Belief and Practice in Babylonia and Assyria, G.P. Putnam's Sons. pp. 217ff. 34. ^ Alfred de Grazia, Cosmic Heretics (1984), Metron Publ., Chapter 4. ISBN 0940268086 35. ^ Talbott, David N. (1980). The Saturn Myth, Doubleday. ISBN 0385113765. p. 3. 36. ^ Ellenberger, Leroy (1994). An Antidote to Dave Talbott's "Saturn Thesis". Message-ID: . Posted to talk.origins 14 Oct 1994 by Benjamin T. Dehner. 37. ^ Bottéro, Jean (2001). Religion in Ancient Mesopotamia, University of Chicago Press. ISBN 0226067173. Ch. 5, "Religious Representations", pp. 44-113: "Every god was thus perceived as having been formed in our image but was believed to be superior to us in everything. . . . The most visible of the heavenly bodies--the Moon, the Sun, the planet Venus--were often more or less identified with the divinities who represented and ruled over them. . . . But a true divinization of the stars, making them equal to the god, never seems to have been formally recognized: the stars' names were not written out in full in the lists of gods and were never regularly preceded by the divine determinative, but only by the sign mul, "star," the determinative for stars." 38. ^ Zimmern, H[einrich] (1910). Babylonians and Assyrians. In Hastings, James (editor), Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, vol. II, C. Scribners Sons. pp. 309ff. "It is still less certain that the gods Marduk, Nabu, Ninib, Nergal, who in later times were associated on the one hand with phases of the sun, and on the other with the four remaining planets known to the ancients, [i.e., Jupiter, Mercury, Saturn, Mars, respectively,] had, to begin with, any solar or astral significance. There is much, on the other hand, to indicate that the connexion of these gods with the heavenly bodies did not belong to their original cult and nature, but that other features connecting them with nature and human life are the real key to their original character. . . . In its origin [the Babylonian religion] is connected with the remarkable conception of the world as a unity--another undoubted heirloom received from the Sumerians . . . . According to this view of the universe, all phenomena in the macrocosm and in the microcosm, in heaven and on earth, are in a relation of mutual correspondence" (p. 310). 39. ^ See The Saturn Myth, pp. 33, 40, 72, and 119, for examples. 40. ^ Letter, Roger Ashton to Leroy Ellenberger, Nov. 26, 1994. 41. ^ Ashton, Roger (1987). The Bedrock of Myth. Posted to WWW: 42. ^ Talbott, David (1988). On Testing the Polar Configuration. Aeon, I (2), 95-134. 43. ^ Schick, Jr., Theodore and Lewis Vaughn (1995). How to Think about Weird Things, Mountain View, Calif., ISBN 1559342544. p. 110. 44. ^ Oreskes, Naomi (1999). The Rejection of Continental Drift, Oxford Univ. Press, ISBN 0195117328. p. 316. 45. ^ Thompson, Tim (1996). Re: VELIKOVSKY: My Dinner with Talbott Part 1. Posted to talk.origins 1 Aug 1996. 46. ^ Gans, Paul J. (1996). Re: VELIKOVSKY Symposium- Florida, July 12. Posted to talk.origins 5 Aug 1996. 47. ^ de Santillana, Giorgio and Hertha von Dechend (1969). Hamlet's Mill: An Essay on Myth & the Frame of Time, Boston. LCCN 69-13267. p. xi. 48. ^ Parpola, Simo (2000). The Gods as Numbers. In Barbara Nevling Porter (Editor), One God or Many?: Concepts of Divinity in the Ancient World (2000), Transactions of the Casco Bay Assyriological Institute. ISBN 0-9674250-0-X. pp. 182-184. 49. ^ Stieglitz, Robert R. (1982). Numerical structuralism and cosmogony in the ancient Near East. Journal of Social and Biological Structures, 5, 255-266. 50. ^ Jastrow, Jr., Morris (1898). The Religion of Babylonia and Assyria, Ginn & Co., pp. 465-466. This book, which is listed in Talbott's bibliography in The Saturn Myth, has been digitized by Google and is on the WWW. 51. ^ Ellenberger, Leroy (1994). An Antidote to Dave Talbott's "Saturn Thesis". Message-ID: . Posted to talk.origins 14 Oct 1994 by Benjamin T. Dehner. 52. ^ Ellenberger, Leroy (1994). An Antidote to Dave Talbott's "Saturn Thesis". Message-ID: . Posted to talk.origins 14 Oct 1994 by Benjamin T. Dehner. 53. ^ de Santillana, Giorgio and Hertha von Dechend (1969). Hamlet's Mill: An Essay on Myth & the Frame of Time, Boston. LCCN 69-13267. p. 143. 54. ^ Jensen, Peter (1890/1974). Die Kosmologie der Babylonier, Strassburg/Berlin and New York. p. 24. 55. ^ Talbott, David N. (1980). The Saturn Myth, Doubleday. ISBN 0385113765. p. 342, n.60. 56. ^ Zysman, Milton (1982). Canadian Society for Interdisciplinary Studies Newsletter, 1 (2), 42-48: "The evidence gathered to support this reconstruction is convincing. The author, however, never provides a dynamic cosmographic model to support his arguments, leaving the frustrated reader to supply his own." 57. ^ Publisher's Weekly, Feb. 1, 1980; p. 78 58. ^ Library Journal, June 1, 1980, p. 1318. 59. ^ Cowen, Robert C. (1980). The Christian Science Monitor, Sept. 3, p. 16. 60. ^ Earley, George W. (1981). Fate, August, pp. 108-110. 61. ^ Meritt, Jim (1997). from back when: The Myth of Saturn. Posted to sci.skeptic 24 August 1997. Message-ID: <5tph0d$230@elf.wang.com>: [edit] Bibliogaphy [edit] Books * The Ecstasy of Sati-Ra * The Saturn Myth: A reinterpretation of rites and symbols illuminating some of the dark corners of primordial society (1980) Doubleday & Co., ISBN 0-385-11376-5 * Thunderbolts of the Gods (co-authored with Wallace Thornhill) (2005) Mikamar Publishing, ISBN 0977285103 (Official Web site) * The Electric Universe (co-authored with Wallace Thornhill) (2007) Mikamar Publishing, ISBN 0-9772851-3-8 [edit] Video * Mythscape: Remembering the End of the World (1996), Kronia Group (external link) [edit] Journal articles * "On the Nature of Cometary Symbolism", (with Ev Cochrane), Kronos, Vol. XI, No. 1 Fall 1985 * In Aeon (ISSN 1066-5145): "Reconstructing the Saturn Myth" (Vol. I, No. 1 1988); "The Ship of Heaven" (Vol. I, No. 3 1988); "On Models and Scenarios" (Vol. I, No. 4 1988); "Mother Goddess and Warrior-Hero" (Vol. I, No. 4 1988); "Servant of the Sun God" (Vol. 2, No. 1 1989); "The Mythical History of the Comet Venus" (Vol. 2, No. 4 1991); "From Myth to a Physical Model" (Vol. 3, No. 3 1993); "The Great Comet Venus" (Vol. 3, No. 5 1994); "The Saturn Thesis" (Vol. 4, No. 3 1995), Part II (Vol. 4, No. 5 1996), Part III (Vol. 4, No. 6 1996), Part IV (Vol. 5, No. 1 1997) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Talbott" Categories: Mythographers | Living people | Pseudohistory Hidden categories: NPOV disputes from July 2008 | All NPOV disputes Views * Article * Discussion * Edit this page * History Personal tools * Log in / create account Navigation * Main page * Contents * Featured content * Current events * Random article Search ____________________ Go Search Interaction * About Wikipedia * Community portal * Recent changes * Contact Wikipedia * Donate to Wikipedia * Help Toolbox * What links here * Related changes * Upload file * Special pages * Printable version * Permanent link * Cite this page Powered by MediaWiki Wikimedia Foundation * This page was last modified on 31 July 2008, at 15:55. * All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. (See Copyrights for details.) Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a U.S. registered 501(c)(3) tax-deductible nonprofit charity. * Privacy policy * About Wikipedia * Disclaimers