Friday, February 07, 2020

Earth's Natural Catastrophes and the Ancient Sky

The electromagnetic plasma wheel of the ancient sky
In the book of Genesis, we read of a flood that encompassed the known world to the top of the mountains (Genesis 7). In every civilization of the world there are similar flood narratives.

The Dead Sea in Israel did not exist in the days of Abraham. The patriarch and his nephew "looked around and saw the whole plain of the Jordan toward Zoar was well watered, like the garden of the LORD" (Genesis 13:10). After the Exodus, the people of Israel encountered a massive Salt Sea on their way back to Canaan.

Catastrophes on earth can create seas, raise volcanic mountains, and change the landscape in the span of months and years, not eons.

When the people of Israel fled Egypt, the skies darkened, stones fell from the heavens, the seabeds dried, earthquakes felled cities and raised mountains, and fire encompassed the land (Exodus 7-14). The polymath psychiatric-anthropologist Dr. Immanuel Velikovsky discovered that the Egyptian Ipuwer Papyrus details natural catastrophes in Egypt that parallel the Hebrew account.

In the account of the defeat of the five kings by the armies of Israel under the leadership of Joshua (Joshua 10:11), it is stated that as the defeated armies were fleeing, "the LORD cast down great stones from heaven upon them ... and they died." 

The ancient sun (not what we call the sun)
In the book of Joshua, it is recorded that "the sun stood still, and the moon stopped" (Joshua 10:12-13) with the subsequent explanation, "The sun stopped in the middle of the sky and delayed going down about a full day."  

Native American cultures, ancient Aztecs, aborigines in Australia, and other cultures around the world all speak of a time when daylight extended and the sun never set. Along with the biblical accounts of earth's catastrophes, all the ancient cultures of the world speak in their oral or written histories of catstrophes occuring during their times on the earth. Immanuel Velikovsky documents these accounts from the ancients in his 1950  controversial book  Worlds In Collision.

The sky of the earth in the millennia preceding the birth of Christ looked different than our modern sky. Catastrophic events recording in human history signal that the nine planets of our solar system were moving into what are now their current orbits. In ancient days, Venus broke loose from Jupiter's orbit and swept through the Solar System in the shape of a comet. This Venus-comet almost collided with Mars and the Earth before settling into its current orbit.

An ancient Sumerian drawing of the sky
Ancient civilizations worshiped the gods of the sky because it looked to them that the skies were at war. The ancient mythologies of the pagans, myths based on Venus, Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, the Sun and the Moon all indicate that the planets appeared to man to be 20 to 40 times larger than today's moon in the ancient skies. 

In fact, if a 21st century person were to go back in time to 2,500 BC, that person would be frightened to look at the sky. Geometric shapes filled the ancient sky as the planets emitted electrical activity that scarred the face of the earth and other planets. The scars on Mars were so visible to the ancient peoples that the greatest warriors were often called Scar Face or Star Boy because of the respect that Native Americans (not to mention the ancient Romans and Greeks) gave to the planet Mars in its battle among the planets. As Venus and Mars moved as comets in the sky toward their current orbits, they rained down large stones on the earth, affected Earth's rotation, changing the seasons, and rapidly causing new geological formations of mountains and seas. 

The great lie of evolution is that everything in our present-day scientific observations of laws and processes is the same as it was in the past,  and that all the scientific laws and processes we observe today apply everywhere in the universe (the Doctrine of Uniformity).

The problem with uniformity, according to the leading plasma cosmologists and to modern physicists like Dr. Wallace Thornhill, is that modern science is built on false assumptions. "The universe is electric in nature,"  says Dr. Thornhill. The electromagnetic forces of the universe are infinitely more powerful than the weak gravity force. Plasma fills 99.9 percent of space, and it is the fourth state of matter that connects everything in the universe through electromagnetic forces that we are only now beginning to understand.

In short, when God said, "LIGHT," He literally turned on the lights. And just like you can "flip the switch to off," the Creator of the universe has the power to turn out the lights on the universe He has created. 

And He can do it quickly, similar to the manner He did just a few thousand years ago. 
"Prehistory was a dream turned nightmare. Mankind forgot the dream because it was too remote and the nightmare because it was too shocking. The prehistory that we have confabulated, however, is too bland to be believed." Roger Wescott, Aeon. 
To trust in the stability of the universe and not He who is the Light of the world (John 8:12) is to misplace your trust.

Every time you turn the lights on or off in your house, or every time you hear of a natural catastrophe on earth, you should remember to trust the Creator, not the creation.


David said...

New advances in astrophysics bolster this kind of view of the history of the universe.

The most obvious of these are calculations done recently by leading physicists (who presume naturalistic/big bang cosmology) that show that the initial expansion of the universe happened so fast as to exceed the speed of light, possibly more than 100x. According to General Relativity, such an event would radically affect the passage of time across the universe, meaning that some astrophysicists have suggested removing as much as 11 billion years off the current cosmological model.

We like to think we are so far ahead of the (superstitious) ancient peoples, when, in fact, science has only scratched the surface of this universe God spoke into existence.

Thanks for writing on this topic!

Bob Cleveland said...

I don't give any credence to scientific evidence that the Bible is accurate. That's because I would then have to give credence to scientific evidence that refutes Scripture. So I ignore both.

Ken F said...

Rex Ray said...


In a way this post reminds me of Chicken Little: “The sky is falling.”

You wrote: “the LORD cast down great stones from heaven…and they died.”

Wade would you agree when Scripture ends with a colon, that changing it to a period is not right?

I guess quoting the complete verse would be less ‘sky falling’:

“…and they died: they were more which died with hailstones than they whom the children of Israel slew with the sword.” (Joshua 10:11 KJ)

You conclude the Dead Sea did not exist in the days of Abraham based on Genesis 13:10. “Lot took a long look at the fertile plains of the Jordan Valley…whole area was well watered everywhere….”

I believe he saw the Dead Sea as “…whole area was well watered everywhere…” (He just didn’t know it was salty.)

“About 3 million years ago, water filled the graben, forming the Dead Sea, which was then part of a long bay of the Mediterranean Sea. A million years later, tectonic activity lifted the land to the west, isolating the Dead Sea from the Mediterranean.”

I’m not crazy about science, but I do know water evaporates while salt doesn’t.

Google states: "Jordan Valley" often applies just to the lower course of the Jordan River, from the spot where it exits the Sea of Galilee in the north, to the end of its course where it flows into the Dead Sea in the south. The valley is 65 miles long with an averaging width of 6.2 miles with some points narrowing to 2.5 miles over most of the course, before widening out to 12-miles when reaching the Dead Sea.”

Genesis 13:9 doesn’t say if Lot was looking ‘longways or sideways’ at the valley.

Judy waded in the Dead Sea.

Wade Burleson said...

Ken F,

After a little more research, you will discover that the modern Nobel Prize worthy physicists are all in on plasma cosmology and the electric universe. Unfortunately, dialogue on this subject is forbidden in the current scientific environment because it crushes unproven bur sacred presumptions held by many in the scientific community. Galileo was deemed a heretic in his day.

Wade Burleson said...


The sky never falls in God's hands.


Ken F said...

Wade Burleson said...

Ken F,

It might be worth your time to watch Dr. Wallace Thornhill, physicist and plasma cosmologist extraordinaire, explain in this superb video" how there is a "paradigm shift" taking place among physicists the world over.

Ken F said...

Hi Wade,
Time will tell whether or not this theory is true. I believe it will fail to get traction in any mainstream sense. As for Galileo being declared a heretic, it was the religious establishment that opposed him. Also, he was pretty much a jerk in the way he tried to explain it to them, so he did not do himself any favors. Christians should be very careful in jumping on faddish science because of the harm it will do when it is debunked.

Ken F said...

As for Thornhill:

From the article:

The gaps in electric universe theory do drive followers from the fold. David, a former enthusiast who now calls EU an "anti-science cult" and wished to use only his first name, was undone when someone asked about Thornhill's latest electric explanation of gravity.

"When I looked into it, I was literally flabbergasted at how stupid it was," he said. "I really was ashamed that I had ever listened to a word Thornhill said."

Now he tries to de-convert others in the Thunderbolts forum, a process that he calls his "work."

Rex Ray said...



Anonymous said...

Ken F. wrote:

"Christians should be very careful in jumping on faddish science because of the harm it will do when it is debunked."

This comment is brilliant!

Now, I'll go back to watching the "Ancient Aliens" marathon on the History Channel.

Ken P.

Wade Burleson said...

There are no aliens, Ken.

But there is electricity in space.


Wade Burleson said...


For my information, do you believe the Dead Sea parted and Israel walked on dry ground? Do you believe stones fell from heaven in the days of Joshua and killed soldiers? And, do you believe in Noah's flood? Finally, do you believe the earth slowed in its rotation so that daylight continued well into the night, and "the sun did not set" in the days of Joshua?

If you do, would you give me your scientific explanation?

I'm interested.

Ken F said...

"If you do, would you give me your scientific explanation? "

Hi Wade,
I believe this verse From Psalm 19 is true:
"The heavens are telling of the glory of God; And their expanse is declaring the work of His hands."

If this is true it means that astronomy is a witness to God's glory. However, if Velikovsky's theory is true, it means that astronomy cannot be such a witness.

Your question assumes that a scientific explanation is needed to explain all miracles. I doubt that all miracles can be explained scientifically. For example, what is your scientific explanation for the virgin birth, Jesus turning water into wine, his various healings, and his resurrection from the dead?

The scientific community is not in a conspiracy to suppress plasma cosmology. Rather, the theory is so wrong on so many levels that they have no interest in wasting time on it. Below are a couple of examples of the numerous resources that debunk Velikovsky's ideas.
"The essence of Velikovsky's unreasonableness lies in the fact that he does not provide scientific evidence for his most extravagant claims. His claims are based on assuming cosmological facts must conform to mythology. In general, he offers no support for the plausibility of his theory beyond an ingenious argument from comparative mythology. Of course, his scenario is logically possible, in the sense that it is not self-contradictory. To be scientifically plausible, however, Velikovsky's theory must provide some compelling reason for accepting it other than the fact that it helps explain some events described in the Bible or makes Mayan legends fit with Egyptian ones."

This link goes more into the planetary dynamics:
"Velikovsky would need to not just present his thesis, which he did, and the evidence for it, which he did and to most people was found to be lacking, but he also needs to go that extra step that scientists do but pseudoscientists usually do NOT do: He needs to go back through work that's been done before and show why his model explains the observational data AT LEAST AS WELL IF NOT BETTER THAN what has been done before. Velikovsky did not do this, and he specifically stated on page 11 of his book: 'If, occasionally, historical evidence does not square with formulated laws, it should be remembered that a law is but a deduction from experience and experiment, and therefore laws must conform with historical facts, not facts with laws.'"

Wade Burleson said...

Thank you, Ken.

My hObby is ancient chronology of the nations. The record history of the ancients is a fascinating glimpse of a pre-flood world. Velikosvky nails the history. As you say, time will tell of the science.

Thank you for commenting.

Rex Ray said...

Ken and Wade,

“God said…” (Genesis 1:3, 6, 9, 11, 14, 20, 24, 26, 29 KJ)
“And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.” (Genesis 2:2 KJ)

Talking doesn’t make you tired but work does. So, when God spoke, it was work. It was so much work, He needed to rest.

People who wrote the Bible didn’t know about chemistry or why energy was released when the atom was split as in the atomic bomb.

Simple chemistry is changing water into a solid or back to a liquid depending if cold or heat is added. (I’ve been a chemistry teacher.)

Scientist discovered if an atom (matter) was split (destroyed), energy was produced, thus the atomic bomb.

Like in chemistry when the opposite is done, the results are the same.

That means energy can produce matter. The conclusion is, God created everything with energy.

Christiane said...

The greatest 'force' in the Universe is 'love'.

I believe that God opened His Hand and created all in existence, visible and invisible, out of love.

If the 'energy' spoken of here is 'love', then I agree with this.

God is the 'ground of all being', all that exists. If the Creator were to 'disappear', so would the Creation that He maintains in existence.

I do not know more than this: that God IS love
and His Ways are far above our human understanding,

and I believe that our primitive human expressions of 'awe' and 'wonder' are, in reality,
an orginal form of responsorial prayer of thanksgiving to the Creator.

An interesting post, Wade, thank you. I may not agree with you, but I applaud all hands on deck when we are speaking of Creation and the Creator, we all see 'something' and if we share what we understand with one another, we can only be the better for it. :)

Anonymous said...

Wade, 1) do you believe NASA sent a man to the moon, 2) lost the technology and doesn't have enough money to repeat almost fifty years later?


Ken F said...

Hi Wade,
My concern here is when Christians hitch their wagons to movements, causes, theories, or political parties, because of the potential damage it causes. Even more concerning is hitching a wagon to a group that claims their opposition is part of a conspiracy to suppress truth. How would you react to a group that was convinced all Christian pastors are in a grand conspiracy to suppress the truth? You would probably not consider them credible. The same applies to scientists.

The Electric Universe proponents remind me a lot of young earth creationists such as Ken Ham.

Rex Ray said...


You asked Wade if NASA lost the technology…

It’s a fact the Boeing Company in Seattle ( lost the ‘tool design’ for the Space Shuttle Nose Cone, and couldn’t make it.

They had the ‘engineering model’ on a three-dimensional computer but that couldn’t be used entirely to produce the Nose Cone.

The tool design model used math rules on ‘joggles’ and other areas to adjust for ‘spring back’. The tool design was a model on a three-dimensional computer that Computer Programmers used to make a metal tool.

Four-inch carbon material was placed on this tool and heated until it melted into a sold material that wouldn’t catch on fire when it went through space.

I don’t know if they were too busy or what, why they didn’t make the tool design. They asked Tool Design of LTV Corporation in Dallas do the work. I was assigned the job. (That’s the company I retired from.)

Wade Burleson said...

Ken, I have examined EU for well over a decade. No "hooking wagon here." Would gently challenge you to learn more about the chronology of ancient kingdoms before denigrating what you may not understand. Finally, of course NASA placed a man on the moon. That, to me, is a silly question. It is interesting, however, that NASA's deep space saellites are hundreds of thousands of miles off course, a fact predicted (and found true) by EU physicist Dr. Thornhill. Thanks for the dialogue!

Wade Burleson said...

Rex, as always; fascinating story.

Ken F said...

Hi Wade,
A different Ken asked you about NASA. Do these links describe the anomaly you are referring to?

Are you saying you condone EU proponents claims that all mainstream scientist are part of a conspiracy to suppress the truth?

Christiane said...

For Ken F AND for Wade,
sometimes people can see things differently and it's okay
and sometimes it's not okay

What we need to do is to know the difference, and we can only figure that our for ourselves.

Wade Burleson said...

Ken F.

My apologies. Thank you for the correction.

I do NOT condone claims that all mainstream scientists are part of a conspiracy to suppress the truth.

I believe most scientists are brilliant in their fields of specialty, but lack a broad, polymath understanding of history, language, anthropology, psychiatry, and cosmology.

Uniformitarianism leads to false conclusions - including carbon dating and other “scientific” methods that are built on false premises.

It’s not a conspiracy. It’s a matter of not knowing certain things and a fear that learning them would change the paradigm of your thinking.

Christiane said...

what other 'scientific' methods do you think are based on false premises.

Do you have any links about carbon dating that you can share?

And thank you.

Ken F said...

Hi Wade,
Thanks for clarifying. I agree with you that many misunderstandings are due to the different sides not knowing much about the others. However, when a person attempts to speak with authority on a topic outside of their expertise, but gets all the facts wrong, and then blames the experts in that field for being part of a conspiracy, it does not help close the gaps. Young earth creationists like Ken Ham are famous for doing this. The video by Wallace Thornton reminded me of videos by Ken Ham.

The proposal that Mars and Venus bounced around the solar system a few thousand years ago and then settled into highly stable and circular orbits, without disturbing the orbit of the moon, is beyond laughable. So is the idea that Venus populated Earth with carbohydrates every night for 40 years. As is the theory that Venus carried insects to Earth. Such recent planetary billiards would leave evidence, but there is none. The theory would have to explain this.

Can you expound on what scientific methods you think are based on false premises, and how you can be certain that the premises are false?

Ken F said...

This articles describes only some of the effects of the earth suddenly stopping its rotation:
It does not mention the cataclysmic effects from the oceans and tectonic plates reacting to the massive acceleration forces. If Earth's rotation was stopped for a few hours and then restarted, the physical effects would have wiped out life and there would be massive evidence for it. When Christians propose this as a way to support a passage from the Bible it destroys their credibility. It also raises the question of why God would do such things withhout leaving behind solid evidence.

Rex Ray said...


Thanks, but the ‘rest of the story’ got to be a big argument.

Boeing said the Tool Design was wrong. A couple of their engineers brought a Nose Cone to Dallas to prove it.

There were several of us looking at the Nose Cone. One of our Computer Programmers measured the diameter and told them:

“There’s your problem. It’s too large! All designs are made exactly to the size of the part. When you put the tool in an oven to melt the part being made, it’s going to expand. You guys forgot to put in the ‘shrink factor’.

That ended the discussion.

Ken F said...

Hi Wade,
Do you have any information on where "Dr" Thornwall earned his PhD? The only info I can find on the web indicates he has nothing higher than a bachelors degree in physics. Not even an honary doctorate. Thanks.

Wade Burleson said...

Wallace Thornhill (b. May 2, 1942) earned a degree in physics and electronics at the University of Melbourne, Australia.Thornhill has written many papers for the U.S. journal, Aeon, and the SIS Review of the Society for Interdisciplinary Studies (SIS), in England, and served as a council member of SIS. In 2010, the Telesio-Galilei Academy of Science awarded Thornhill (and 9 others) its 2010 Gold Medal.

John Gill (1697-1771), the greatest Hebrew linguist the western church has ever produced, never obtained any formal education. When the University of Aberdeen (Scotland) wished to bestow him an honorary doctorate, he famously rejected it with this response: "I neither thought it, sought it, nor bought it." Dr. John Gill was "the most qualified practitioner of Hebrew" the Christian church has ever seen. Spurgeon called him "my mentor in Israel." He was called Dr. John Gill by his peers though having no formal or honorary degree because of his expertise. The word "Dr." for Wall Thornwall is used with respect for his expertise in cosmology, electric plasma, and physics, whether there is an official Ph.D. or not.

Ken F said...

I have to admit that I am still new to EU theory, but the more I read about it and its followers the more I become convinced that it has no place yet in mainstream science. It has a lot of growing up to do before it will be ready to move from the kiddie table to the grown up table.

Wade Burleson said...

Ken F,

Fair enough. Open mindedness is all that true scholarship requires.

Anonymous said...

"Finally, of course NASA placed a man on the moon. That, to me, is a silly question." "It’s not a conspiracy. It’s a matter of not knowing certain things and a fear that learning them would change the paradigm of your thinking. " " Open mindedness is all that true scholarship requires."

Wade - SIlly or not, it would behoove you to do a little research about the origins of NASA and their history of lies. I can't believe the number of people that are convinced like you are, yet haven't done any amount of critical research. NASA spends almost 60 million dollars per day of tax payer's money! The stuff they put out is worshiped by most Americans!

As President Reagan's science advisor George Keyworth said: "While all government agencies lie part of the time, NASA is the only one I know of that does so routinely." quote taken from

Very in depth scientific look at the space landing issue:

McGowan covers the political setting of the moon landings in depth:

SIlly Ken :)

Anonymous said...

For those who don't like to read:


Anonymous said...

watch the body tells all.

Ken F said...

Thanks Wade. If the EU folks want to be credible they need to find ways to get published in legitimate peer reviewed journals, they need to get recognized scholars in mainstream cosmology on board with them, and they need to not only make solid prediction but also show that EU theory explains current observations at least as well (if not better) as mainstream cosmology. Short of this and they will never get past the History Channel and Coast to Coast AM league.

For the record, I am not the Ken who denies the moon landings. :-)

Christiane said...

too many Kens :)

Rex Ray said...


February 7, 2020 Herald Democrat newspaper headline: “15 years later: Andre Thomas case back in court”

Three pictures shows him with two eyes, one eye, and no eyes.

“He was sentenced to death in 2005 for stabbing to death a 13-month-old, his young son, Andre Thomas Jr., and his x-wife. He confessed to removing their hearts because he believed she was Jezebel and his son was the ant-Christ.

His lawyers lost his case in claiming drugs made him temporary crazy.

While on trial, he read in the Bible about plucking out one’s eye, and pulled out one of his eyeballs. On death row, he removed his other eye and ate it.

At present he’s in the psychiatric ward of the state prison. His lawyers have him back for a new trial claiming the jury was prejudice against Blacks.

Wade, I believe if he became sane, he’d kill himself. Any thoughts?

Christiane said...

God have mercy!

what a terribly sad and tragic story, REX RAY

Anonymous said...

"If the EU folks want to be credible they need to find ways to get published in legitimate peer reviewed journals..."

Ken F - could you point me to a peer review of each of the moon landings? Silly Ken :)

Ken F said...

"could you point me to a peer review of each of the moon landings?"

Hi Ken,
The best theory I heard was the moon landings were indeed faked, but the "astronaut" actors were all such sticklers for details that they insisted all the footage be filmed on-site.

Unless you have a means to travel to the moon to investigate the landing sites for yourself, you will have to trust the testimonies of others. So the key issue is which of those testimonies are valid and which are not. There is plenty of material out there on both sides. Given the huge number of people it would have taken across multiple countries to pull off such a hoax, along with adversarial countries who had incentive to prove it was a hoax, I find it highly unlikely that the landings were faked. I won't both you with evidence because I dont think it will make any difference for a true believer like you. Your confirmation bias appears too strong to let you be swayed by facts.

DLF said...

When it comes to conspiracy theories the one thing that proponents never take into consideration is human nature. People simply can't keep their mouths shut. The higher the number of people who know about a certain event the less likely it is that they will all keep quiet. If the moon landing was faked, thousands were in on the hoax. That many people would never be able to keep quiet. It's impossible.

Ken F said...

I brought up that point a while ago when the other Ken was pushing his theory that the US government orchestrated 9/11. But facts like this won't deter a true believer. In the case of the moon landings, since there were more people and countries involved, and there has been lot more time since it happened, keeping the hoax silent for that long would be a bigger miracle than actually landing on the moon.

Tanner Riley said...

Wade, I must say I'm inclined to agree with Ken F. The ancient cosmology justifications for believing that the solar system was a catastrophic blender sound like Jordan Peterson-level metaphor mixing.
The ancient stories are very interesting and can absolutely tell us about the cultures they came from. But tons of people have done the same thing to 'justify' ancient aliens, reptilians, hollow earth, flat earth, fixed earth, expanding earth, etc.
The scientific community certainly has its flaws and is not impartial and immune to bias, as some scientists claim. But it is, in general, a community where people have a lot to gain from *very demonstrably* disproving a previous theory/hypothesis. Ultimately, I believe that writing about Electric Universe/Plasma Cosmology may detract from your incredible testimony to the Truth. This will only harbor conspiracy talk and will not, I believe, build up the church. I'm not saying that our disagreement on this invalidates my view of all the wonderful, touching, and insightful truths you've written. But this doesn't feel like the type of post that will give you more credibility with anyone.
Ultimately, there is one truth, but regarding humans in this era? There are certain aspects of the truth (the Good News) that are needed desperately. I feel like (and this may be a false presumption) you would agree that writing a post that focuses on the good Christian merits of young-earth creationism (or intelligent design evolutionism, or premillennial dispensationalism, etc) without strong biblical evidence in a way that really didn't focus on the Kingdom of God would be a bit of a fools errand. It serves to cause strife more than anything else, and not strife that necessarily brings people closer to God and each other.

My end question is this: what was the intended outcome of this post? How did this post manifest the holy kingdom of heaven?

Rex Ray said...

I said on Google, “One small step” and it referenced the link above.

It’s about a movie being made from Neil Armstrong’s children remembering the terrible friction between their parents about him going to the moon:


Wade Burleson said...


"How did this post manifest the holy kingdom of heaven?"

Earth's catastrophic history wakes people up from their spiritual slumber and collective amnesia which produces self-absorbed cultures more interested in sensual pleasures than they are spiritual principles.

The point of the post is to remind people that we do not know fully the nature of the universe, and just as civilizations of old disappeared without a trace, so too can civilizations of today end in natural catastrophe.

Trust in the faithfulness of God, not the uniformity and steady state of the universe. Trust in God will never disappoint you and prepare you for those times when things that seem established crumble before your eyes.

Christiane said...

I decided to focus on this:

"The causes of these natural catastrophes were close encounters between the Earth and other bodies within the solar system — not least what are now the planets Saturn, Jupiter, Venus, and Mars, these bodies having moved upon different orbits within human memory."

and I came to realize that the sun is a middle-sized star and science sees the development of the planets as material around the sun 'cooling' and forming rotating 'bodies' (the planets), of varying densities and sizes that 'revolve'around the star we call the 'sun' on relatively-fixed elliptical paths (orbits) . . .

so one way to examine the idea of bouncing planets in the solar system might be to examine how other stars are formed and as the gases cool, other planet bodies might be produced and in what way.

so are there any findings in the REST of the Universe that might support or not support Velikovsky's theses?

That is where I might start to look for evidence that either supports or does not support the idea that various planet moved around in the solar system and caused havoc or chaos as opposed to the 'natural order' of the way planets are perceived to move according to traditional scientific observations and 'laws'

I can see that this research would take an enormous amount of time and a whole lot more astronomy smarts than I have under my hat.

just some thoughts on a very interesting set of ideas

Anonymous said...

" Given the huge number of people it would have taken across multiple countries to pull off such a hoax, along with adversarial countries who had incentive to prove it was a hoax, I find it highly unlikely that the landings were faked. I won't both you with evidence because I dont think it will make any difference for a true believer like you. Your confirmation bias appears too strong to let you be swayed by facts."

Ken F - seems you brought this up last time we were discussing 9/11, and I tried to politely bow out of the conversation since it was apparent to me you had not looked very deep into the subject. I even asked you how many hours had your researched it - and you declined to answer. Remember your insistence that wires from all of the detonators would be too visible? Answer: GOV has deep pockets and can afford wireless. But I digress. :)

Since Wade called my question silly, I was thoughtful enough to post links. Did you read or view them? Your questions would be answered very specifically by many who have doctorates in their fields.

Here is a tidbit to wet your whistle: someone actually calculated NASA has just under 6k photos total from six moon landing missions. He calculated the amount of time they spent on the moon's surface and found it an utter impossibility for them to have enough time to take them all, let alone do all the other tasks they had on the agenda. His calculations:

Apollo photo every 15 seconds
Apollo photo every 27 seconds
Apollo photo every 62 seconds
Apollo photo every 44 seconds
Apollo photo every 29 seconds
Apollo photo every 26 seconds

Over and out, Ken

Tanner Riley said...

Also, I find your comments on the 'honorary doctorate' title a tad off-color in light of this post:
It's not necessarily contradictory, but the whole kit and caboodle sits oddly with me. Does Wallace Thornhill use the title doctor for himself? At severe risk of taking a verse entirely out of its proper context, (with a man who knows the scriptures far more intimately than I, no less) it seems like you're calling Wallace 'Rabbi,' though we only have one teacher and are all brothers.
I do know that Jesus wasn't simply saying "don't use titles," but I'll give it a rest.

I respect you so deeply, Wade. Your teachings and exhortations have made serious positive impacts on my worldview and philosophical approach to life. Your example of Kingdom servant leadership is powerful and your humility is sobering. Your outlook and approach to life is a lens I keep handy--the Wade View, just as I have the Bryan View, Tara View, and so on.

Thank you for being who God formed you to be, and to God be the glory.

Tanner Riley said...

Wade, thank you for the reply.
"Earth's catastrophic history wakes people up from their spiritual slumber and collective amnesia which produces self-absorbed cultures more interested in sensual pleasures than they are spiritual principles.

The point of the post is to remind people that we do not know fully the nature of the universe, and just as civilizations of old disappeared without a trace, so too can civilizations of today end in natural catastrophe.

Trust in the faithfulness of God, not the uniformity and steady state of the universe. Trust in God will never disappoint you and prepare you for those times when things that seem established crumble before your eyes."

^This I fully agree with. This is a valuable message. And it's a message I wasn't able to pick up on through the haze (hebel?) of interesting but relatively irrelevant speculation. I don't think one needs to argue the swift formation of the Red Sea based on a word and go into possible sources of celestial projectiles in order to show people that humanity and cursed creation are fleeting and God is immutable. In fact, I think it detracts from the message. Have the comments on this post been reflecting on the trustworthiness of God, or have they been by-and-large reeling at or extrapolating from the idea that "geometric shapes filled the ancient sky as the planets emitted electrical activity that scarred the face of the earth"? And while Uniformity can be dangerous, models based on current measured local observations seem to be on steadier ground than an appeal to ancient wisdom and theoretical plasmaforce.

We don't need to look to prehistory to see that the human condition is a nightmare. Atrocities directly manmade, indirectly manmade, and natural are happening every day. And yes, we flinch away from them and choose to live in the safe narratives that our brains are shaped to build. That's why tragedy is powerful, and why perseverance and wisdom come through trial.

Tanner G R

Rex Ray said...

I’m surprised no one replied to my comment of saying when God ‘spoke’ everything into existence, he did so with his energy.

If there’s no reply, I’m going to write “Perils of a Bear Hunt in Alaska”.

Wade Burleson said...


I 100% agree with "God 'spoke' everything into existence. He did so with His energy."


Wade Burleson said...


I did watch the links. I apologize for calling your question silly.

Thanks for the links. I still believe NASA landed men on the moon. :) Even after watching the links.

Rex Ray said...


I’m glad we agree how God made everything, but now I don’t get to tell my bear tale. :)

“nose cap…protected by panels of reinforced carbon carbon (RCC), a composite material capable of withstanding 3,000 degrees Fahrenheit.”

The Shuttle crashed in Palestine, Texas; 110 miles from Dallas. Many people, including my son, saw the Shuttle ‘trail’ as it streaked across the sky. It entered earth’s atmosphere at 6,000 miles an hour. A recovered tape recorder had the happy conversation of the crew. One of the two women was from Israel.

Anonymous said...

That's a good start, Wade.

If you ever get time to look at the critical science - here's a start with the link to the facts about the time and motion study I referred to above:

Thanks for your time and apology! Ken

Christiane said...


I still want you to tell the 'Bear' story! :)

I agree with Wade and with you about 'ex nihilo' Creation if the 'energy' you speak of is God's love . . . He creates out of 'love', the greatest force in all existence, as
God IS love.

The idea of 'love' and it's relationship to the Holy Trinity is something our more modern theologians have explored.

Rex Ray said...

Just for you. :)

Perils of a Bear Hunt in Alaska by Rex Ray
In 1954, my twin brother, Hez, and I were 22 and our cousin, Claude Hicks, was 27. We decided to visit our parents who taught school to Eskimos at Quinhagak, Alaska which was a mile from the Bering Sea.
Eskimos told us bears lived on a nearby mountain. We got the fever to shoot a bear. Dad, Dave Ray, borrowed three rifles. He was 57 and tough as a boot. He didn’t take a gun but went for fun. Our directions were to go a mile to the Bering Sea, turn left two miles, and go five miles up a river made by melted snow to a mountain. We weren’t told the river was hidden by entering the Sea at a sharp angle.
We went in a heavy iron river-boat with a ten-horse motor. We added an 8-inch board to the low sides, and hoped that would keep ocean waves out. Constant bailing was required because there was a gap between the steel and the wood. The main problem was, we were so heavy the boat went through waves instead of over them. That got us pretty wet and cold because it was about 40 degrees. Claude said we were in the ‘mouth’ of the river because the water on his face wasn’t salty. We went a little past the river before putting the boat on the beach.
Claude had matches and started a fire to dry-out and get warm for over an hour. My partners got in the boat. Since I was the only one with hip boots, I pushed off to reach water deep enough to run the motor. I pushed and pushed but gave up after fifty yards because the tide went out. In a little while, as far as our eyes could see, there was nothing but mud except for the water spreading out two inches deep from the river.
The mud was knee-deep as we went to the beach and ate supper. They had their bed-rolls. Mine was in the boat where I would sleep.
We had six hours for the tide to come back. I worried the heavy boat might stick in the mud and not float. I stayed awake so long, I was asleep when it came in. When Claude’s shooting failed to wake me, Dad told him to shoot closer.

Rex Ray said...

We loaded the boat and started up-river. The current was so strong, I looked at the bank to see if we were moving. We helped the motor out with some paddles. After seeing fish in the clear water, we agreed with Claude to catch some with his fishing pole. We caught enough for supper and spent our second night on the river.
We’d never seen the mountain because of clouds. There were two rivers that joined. After six hours, we knew we’d chosen wrong when water became too sallow to run the motor. The clouds lifted and the mountain looked near because it was huge. We decided to walk. We knew when we returned, it would be hard to find the boat so we made a tall pole by tying paddles together and Claude tied his red bandana on top. We tied the pole so it could be seen in some bushes.
Tundra is hard to walk on. You have to lift your feet two feet to get over it and then sink in mud. We divided our stuff to be carried. After an hour of walking, Dad said, “I don’t know why you guys are complaining; I have the heaviest load.”
I said, “I’ll trade with you.” (He had a back pack and I had a duffel bag that required walking in a leaning position.) I don’t know how he did it, but he threw the duffel bag in the air saying, “Light as a feather!”
After six hours we’d gone about three miles. We stopped at 10:00 P.M. There was still light enough to see. Half an hour later, Dad staggered in and threw the duffel bag down saying, “What’s in this?”
We ate and went to sleep, but some strange noise woke us up. Dad asked if the rifles were loaded. Next morning, the mountain didn’t look any closer. We ate the last of our food, and started back to the boat. We didn’t even discuss our unanimous decision.
Claude ran out of energy. He’d lay down until we were almost out of sight. When he started walking, we’d lay down and rest until he reached us. Then we’d start walking. (The bears may have been laughing at us.) At each ‘meeting’, Claude used his binoculars to look for the red flag.
As the day went on, our stops got more frequent, and the distance covered got shorter. At last, Claude yelled, “I see the flag!” We became delirious happy; knowing our ordeal was over.
Going with the current, got us to the ocean really fast, but there was only mud. We pulled the boat up the bank, and left everything in it.
Compare to tundra, the beach felt like an escalator to Quinhagak. The next morning, I retrieved the boat. Without their weight, the boat went OVER the waves very fast.

Christiane said...

Wow, I enjoyed that, REX RAY

Thank you.... good stuff . . .. my son is up in Alaska now with the Coast Guard but just brown bears around where he lives . . . no grizzlies.

He has eagles sometimes perch on his deck as he lives on the water. I'm sure he will never have a more beautiful view than he has now. A lot of rain, though, as he is in an Alaskan rain-forest area.

He is under orders from 'MOM' to get a bear horn and bear spray, just in case.

You take care. You've survived this long after many adventures, so be safe. Those stories are a joy to read. :)

Rex Ray said...


“…just brown bears…”

“…also known as the Kodiak brown bear.”

Christian, if your son is near this type of brown bear, he needs to carry a machine-gun as they can weight over 1,000 pounds and stand nearly 10 feet tall.

Christiane said...


my son corrects me and says the bears near him are black bears

they do eat salmon from the river but also walk the trails in the rainforest and WILL sometimes get into peoples' trash cans

what's the scoop on black bears?

Joel says he's not worried, but he does have bear spray and a bear horn and he knows not to crowd a mother bear with her cubs

Rex Ray said...


Sounds like your son has it right about black bears.

Once, I went hunting for deer in Colorado with a guy nick-named Tarzan because he was big and strong. It was the early season for ‘bow & arrow’ only.

We separated. Later I heard him yelling and found him standing on a stump yelling at a black bear. Her cub was ‘bawling’ in a tree near him. I convinced him to retreat and leave well enough alone. (After that, I figured he was no Solomon.)