Immanuel Velikovsky

http://velikovsky.org/en/vita.html
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Sans-serif,sans-serif]Immanuel Velikovsky was born in Vitebsk in White Russia in 1895. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Sans-serif,sans-serif]He studied medicine, science and other subjects, e.g. philosophy, ancient history and law at the Universities of Montpellier (France), Edinburgh (Great Britain), Moscow (Russia) and Kharkiv (Ukraine) in difficult circumstances caused by the discrimination and persecution of the Jews as well as the political and war-related chaos of the time. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Sans-serif,sans-serif]After getting his M.D. in Moscow in 1921 he emigrated to Germany, where he founded the scientific journal Scripta Universitatis in Berlin. In this project he came into contact with Albert Einstein, who was editor of the mathematical-physical section. This project, furthermore, laid the foundation for the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, the presidency of which was offered to Immanuel Velikovsky. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Sans-serif,sans-serif]After getting married to his wife Elisheva (s. photo) in 1923 Velikovsky settled in Palestine and started to practice as a physician. At the same time he started to study psychoanalysis with Wilhelm Stekel, the first disciple of Freud, whom he visited several times in Vienna, published several scientific papers about the subject and opened the first psychoanalytical practice in Palestine.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Sans-serif,sans-serif]Doing research for a planned book project about Freud’s dream interpretation and about a new view of Freud’s heros Oedipus and Akhnaton, Velikovsky needed access to numerous literary sources. For this reason in 1939 he travelled to New York together with his family. Shortly afterwards World War II began and he had to extend his stay for an indefinite period, finally staying in the US for good due to his unexpected discoveries.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Sans-serif,sans-serif]The next 10 years he spent with intensive research about the geological and anthropological facts he had discovered, which in 1949 he presented to the public in his book Worlds in Collision. By its contents, as well as by the scandalous reaction of the representatives of the scientific establishment, this book initiated such a far-reaching and revolutionary development in many areas of science and society that until today its actuality and importance have even increased.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Sans-serif,sans-serif]Velikovsky himself, however, even after the publication of 4 more books, was confronted with a heavy up and down of overwhelming acceptance and devastating – unfortunately mostly very unserious – rejection, which resulted in a heavy psychological burden for him.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Sans-serif,sans-serif]After moving to Princeton in the fifties he had a close and friendly relationship with Albert Einstein, discussing his theories with him. After Einstein’s death Velikovsky’s Worlds in Collision was found open on his desk.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Sans-serif,sans-serif]Inspite of more and more recent research in geology and planetology supporting his theories, Velikovsky remained the victim of a discrediting campaign until his death, which is neither in proportion with his exact scientific methodology nor with the contents and importance of his works.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Sans-serif,sans-serif]He died in Princeton in 1979.[/FONT]

today the mainstream media has lauched a campaign against "fake news" but the fact is the scientific establishment has produced "fake news" for generations by ignoring and censoring all data that shows the inadequacy of their theories,

Dr,Velikovsky's books hight lightened the failings of ,archeology, cosmology, anthropologly,evolutionary theory, einsteinian and newtonian physics,geology, to mention a few.the scientific establishment responded by censoring his books and putting pressure on commercial publishers to not publish his books.

as Dr Velikovsky wrote, the Guardians of Dogma had vested interest in the existing theories and reaped profits from the books of the establishment theories, and therfore do not want the truth to upset their system of revenue.


professor velikovsky's series of books had the greatest affect on my deductive prespective and understanding of science than any other author.

http://velikovsky.org/en/vita.html
http://www.ruthvelikovskysharon.com/immanuel.html
http://www.lewrockwell.com/snyder-joshua/snyder-joshua21.1.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanuel_Velikovsky
though he was by no means an astrologer,his theories on the birth and interaction of the planets forever made me look behind dogma,whether science or astrology and prepared me to see the underpinning of astrology.

briefly, professor velikovsky theory is that the planet venus was either a comet caught by jupiter and sent toward earth or was venus itself burst forth from jupiter.
newly created venus struck mars before a close encounter with the earth, causing catastrophic physical affects on earth.

this doesn't seem too far out but the fact that he placed this cosmic event around 1500 bc,well within the historical record,this fact set of howls of protest from the scientific community .his intial book [Worlds in Collisionwas "banned" by academia and and publishers for over 10 years.

yet many of his prediction have turned out to be true.
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_autor_velikovsky.htm

he wrote a series of books ,each verifying his theory from diffferent scientific displines.
mythology and cultral anthropology.
geological evidence.
archeological and biblical evidence.


when venus hit mars,it set mars on a orbit than would several hundred years later bring mars close enough to the earth to cause the earths axis to be affected.

venus itself passes near enough to cause catastrophic affects on earth and affect the axis of the earth.

there are a few astronomical facts that support the near interaction with venus .


http://www.lunarplanner.com/HCpages/Venus.html

Venus orbits the Sun in 224.701 Earth days ( ~.615 Earth years ), moving slightly faster than Earth. Because of the two different orbital rates of Venus and Earth, Venus must orbit the sun 2.6 times while Earth orbits 1.6 times before the two planets align. This period (583.92 Earth days) is called the Earth-Venus synodic cycle (synod means "place of meeting").


Because the Earth moves 584 Earth days, (about 1.6 years around the ecliptic) before the two planets align, each alignment occurs about 215.6° further than the previous one (about seven astrological signs apart). As this process continues, five unique Venus-Earth locations are created in the ecliptic. The result is a pentagonal synodic series that takes about eight years and which consists of five synodic cycles (shown below). This near perfect pattern (also called a grand quintile) occurs because five cycles occur in an even number of Earth years--almost


that the same face of venus and earth reoccurs during the synodal conjunctions, implies the planet were at some time near enough for their gravitional force to entangled in this manner. it is statistically impossible to have this type synchronous rotation occur randomly.

this scenario presupposed that the orientation of the axis was changed within the last few thousand years.

the arabic astrologer Arzachel ,using ancient codices, calculated the ancient babylon was 2 degrees futhur north than in historical times.
the great astrologer johannes kepler took note of these clculartions and accepted the result.

when venus first encounter the earth in circa 1500 bc the gravitation effect between the planets pulled the easrth axis so that in the biblical tale of joshua,Joshua 10:12-13,the sun stood still for several hours allowing the israelite to win a decisive battle.
the hebrew commentary Midrashim describes the sun and moon standin still for 36 itim or about 8 hours.

when,several hundred years later mars started to affect the earth, there is actually a recorded date.

the chinese records show that on march 23 -687 bc time when the sun set and then rose back up.
this date is archeologicaly the date given when king sennscherib's army was utterly destroyed by hail and brimestone,according to the hebrew commentaries and the torah.
this episode is well known from the bible and archeology .

these books offer a mind boggling amount of evidence from multiple disciplines.

professor velikovsky also assails darwinian theory for it's inadequacy to integrate the geological evidence of these encounters.
it is very easy to see why creationism is making inroads to evolution, as the theory of evolution has claimed much more that the evidence supports.

the significance of professor velikovsky's work is shown by the active suppression of his theory for 60 years.
why is there a cultural amnesia?
why is the theory still actively suppressed when evidence is overwhelmingly behind him?

I created this thread to show examples of this books that undeniably show the censorship of the scientific establishment for generations.

rahu

Velikovsky was an important pioneer in opening up the field of celestial/earth cataclysms as having a vital role in history; however, his final conclusions I believe were flawed, and I don't accept them: but just because he came to conclusions with which I (and others) cannot accept does not mean that his work is of no value-it is of important value in supporting the cataclysmic view of history and it was ground-breaking work.

His assertion have proved correct 90% of the time. This theories are shown to be correct by physical evidence. Dr. Farr how many of his books have you read. Most who doubt him only repeat the opinion of the Guardian of dogma. My purpose in this thread is to go over his books and show by historical and archeolgical evedence that his theories are irrefutable.
rahu

I have read all of his books-and I agree with many of his ideas, and find the facts he presents of much value-only I disagree with his final conclusion regarding Venus; with the cataclysmic facts he emphasizes I am in complete agreement. I personally believe that the celestial catastrophe which he connects with a Venus event is more accurately explained by consideration of the Phaeton (Vela supernova fragment) disaster (circa 9500 BCE) hypothesis of later (non-establishment) researchers.
NOTE: I think it is great that Rahu is bringing Velikovsky to the attention of our AW members; Velikovsky has some very important things to say!

dr. farr said:

I have read all of his books-and I agree with many of his ideas, and find the facts he presents of much value-only I disagree with his final conclusion regarding Venus; with the cataclysmic facts he emphasizes I am in complete agreement. I personally believe that the celestial catastrophe which he connects with a Venus event is more accurately explained by consideration of the Phaeton (Vela supernova fragment) disaster (circa 9500 BCE) hypothesis of later (non-establishment) researchers.
NOTE: I think it is great that Rahu is bringing Velikovsky to the attention of our AW members; Velikovsky has some very important things to say!

Click to expand...

I agree Dr farr, I think Venus was a symtom of a larger celestial body!s affected. One of the current catastrophic scenarios involves nubiru, or planet X-ray or wormwood. But the fact that Dr velikovsky places the catastrophe at at 3600 years ago,places this in the time framework of sitching's nibiru .

It is entirely possible that a series of cataclysms have occurred in historically recorded time, so certainly that is a definite possibility.

Very interesting ! I should read some of his books .

a few years back ,i took some upper division courses on Ancient Egypt.at the end of the year,we had a few days with nothing to do,so the professor gave us these 4 days to study *for other classes or simply socialize.the professor was a older german woman who had spent years in the field.on the last day she was leaning against her desk and casually said"the greatest mystery of the ancient Egyptians is why the disappeared" .this was quite a schock to hear because in all the books in the course and all the books*i*have read since that time, nowhere has it ever been stated that the ancient Egyptians just disappeared.

as ancient Egypt buffs know, the 18th dynasty was followed by the 19th and 20th dynasty. to the 20th dynasty*belongs the famous ramses III, or ramses the great.but beginning with the 19th dynasty, the ancient Egyptians were Semitic. the*ancient Egyptian royal *bloodline ended with king *Tutankhamen ,the famous boy king,King Tut.there was another king,king Ay but he*was not of royal lineage.
then the history books say came haremhab, a general of king tut. he*was followed by ramses I .no where is there reported a breakage in this line of succession. so the mystery is how did the ancient Egyptian bloodline disappear between the 18th and 19th dynasty.and for that matter why is this fact totally ignored by the Egyptology establishment.

the only author who has ever explained*this subject is dr immanuel velikovsky. and like all this writings,the answer *totally blows away the field of egyptology.
velikovsky places ramses not in the 12th century bc*but in the 4th century bc. how could all the authorities on ancient Egypt make such a gigantic mistake. but then why does the egyptology establishment suppress the mystery of the disappearance of the ancient Egyptians.

*and as usually velikovsky provides archaeologically facts that show his assertions to be true.

to begin with, how do egyptologist know*ramses the great rule in the 12th century bc.
one would think that since *Egyptian history is the time line that all of the ancient world*is measue by, that there would be hard evidence of this date. but this is not the case . ramses1*was assigned the 12th century before Egyptian hieroglyphs had even be deciphered*.

the rosetta stone was found in1799, it contained 3 versions of a decree by king Ptolemy V. one version of Egyptian *hieroglyphics, one was demonic,*a cursive style of egyptian and one was ancient greek . from this jean francois Champollion was able to translate the rosetta stone in1825. but his tranlations were limited to the names ofkings a few other aspects. the full rosetta stone was not deciphered completely until the canopus decree was found in 1866,also with the same scripts. from this it *was able to *verify cahmpellon's decipherment and led to the complete understanding of ancient Egyptian.

so *would think that there is documentary evidence that ramses was reigning in the 12th century bc.

but this is not the case.ramses was asserted to *have reigned in 1147bc by a scottish psychiatrist,J.C.Prichard.................in 1819 ,6 years before the rosetta stone was translated and 50 years before the Egyptian hieroglyphs were totally decoded.
later, 1n1841*rosellini placed ramses at 1477bc with no explanation. Champollion figeac,brother of jean francois Champollion, had placed rsamses at 1277 bc in1841,again with no explanation .
so there is no*archaeological ,documentary or monumental evidence to assign ramses 1 to the 12th century.

but why does the archaeological Establishment accept this date for ramses?

in 238ad, a roman author named censorinus(whose daughter, hypatia invented the astrolabe),claimed that the ancient Egyptians used a heliacal year,or a "year of god" or the"sothic years" of 1461 years duration.in the 4th century ad theon wrote in his Liber Die Natali and that the new sothic year had begun in 139AD*that the greek menophres was ramses the1 and he reigned at the beginning of the last sothic years in1322BC.

the problem here is that there is no where in any ancient Egyptian monument or document mention of a*
"sothic year"*.*
Claudius Ptolemy whose epic work TertraBiblos ,was the standard astrological and astronomical book for a 1000 years was alive in Alexandria in 139AD, but made no mention of the "sothic year".

the sequence of egyptian king used by egyptologist is derived from the Egyptian priest manetho(3rd centurybc). this list was used by Eusebius of caesarea (260-340ad) and by julius africaus (180-250 ad) in writing their respective histories of the world.
but manethos king list were produced to impress upon the antiquity of the Egyptians over all others cultures. as such he list kings that go back to the time of the gods. and the names he gives the kings have no correaltion with existing archaeological names and so *it became a game of picking asnd choosing which king in manetho correlated with which king the greeks knew of.in addition there was no way to demark where the mythological kings ended and the"historical kings began.

yet despite the fact there is no documentary evidence to support manetho's king list and in spite of the fact that egyptologist *H.R. Hull(1873-1930), wrote"of manetho list,"a careless and uncritical compilation",it serves as the basis of Egyptian history.
and hull *himself would later write,"the complete skeleton of the scheme was provided by the continous literary tradition preserved by the egyptian preist manetho,this has been clothed with flesh hy the archeologist"

this is a factual lie, as there is no documentary of monumental evidence that shows haremhab was a general of king tut.
there is no* documentary or monumental evidence that ramses 1 followed *as king. when hull says that this "has been clothed with flesh by the archaeologist",he is simply lying.


and this is not all the archaeological evidence that places ramses the great in the period before the greek Ptolemaic kings of egypt.
but enough for now.
velikovsky's book*The People of the Sea, goes into amazing details that leave no doubt that ramses III reign 100's of years after the established timeline gives for egyptian**history.

rahu

Dr Immanuel VelIkovsky was a well known and respected scholar. he among a few others were integral in establishinges some fundamental blocks of the Hebrew University in Israel.

so the was no "crack pot",he was part of the intelligentsia of his time. this is the reason he was so vehemently attacked when his theories disproved established ideas in many different disciplines, not the least Einstein's relativity and newton's law of gravity.

his theories have continued to be proven ,his prediction in cosmology have been verified by the space probes launched. his book, Worlds in Collision was published in 1950 years before any space probes had been launched.yet the establishment or as he called them the "Guardians of Dogma" still slander his name and discoveries.
I bring his history up now because the concept of fake new has been existence and used by the establishment for 100's of years,if not 1000's.

a good place to research his ideas is at http://varchive.org/.
this gives much of his unpublished work and give his letters with Einstein and other notables.

just a few other archeological discoveries that place Ramses in the 4rd centruryAD and not in the 12th century AD.

a palace built by Ramses the great was found in the east delta and excavated by edouard naville near a place called Tell El Yahudiya or Mound of the Jews.
among the ruins were vast quantities of fired glossy square clay tiles with vivid stylized flowers on them. these style of tiles were well known as Persian in design.
on the backside of the tiles were marks made by the artisans before they were fired.half the markings were hieratic ,a cursive style of hieroglyphics .
but surprisingly the other half of the tiles had Greek letters on them. again the Ionians, Greeks, did not exist in the12th century BC, let alone their alphabet. and the case could not that maybe this was proto Greek because some of the letters ,alpha sigma ,were of a style from late greek classical times..4th-3rd century BC.
again archeological remains attesting to the fact that Ramses reigned in the 3rd century BC.

in addition a grave yard was found nearby. the graves were exactly of the same sort as another graveyard some miles away that was positively dated to the 3rd century. so the former grave yard was dated to the 3rd century until scarabs associated with ramses were fund. then a split occurred in the archeologists. one changed to 12th century BC, while the other archeologist would not change his date from the 3rd century because the form and style of the artifacts in the grave were clearly 3rd century BC.this dispute was never resolved and one gave the opinion of the date in the 12thcentury BC,the other gave the opinion of the date as the 3rd century BC.

the graves has double handle vessels called amphora, vessels for storing and transporting grains ,wine,etc these vessel were know to be no early that 7th century. but in spite of the fact that ramses's tomb showed paintings of these exact amphora, still the establishment archeologist place Ramses the great in the 12 the century.

one of the llargest papyri ever discovered is the great papyrus harris,133 ft longhand 16.5inches high.
it was found to be the last will and testament of Ramses the Great, though it was possibly writtenby his sonRamses 4.
but the problem that confounded the Egyptologist was that it describes Egypt under the control for many years by a Syrian named arsa.
the problem is that there is no record of a period of foreign rule over Egypt inthe12the century.it was supposed that there was a clear and peace time line stretching back to the18th dynasty .

yet the document clearly said Egypt had been "overthrown from without"
"other times have come often with empty years,Arza,a certain syrian, was with them as chief,he set the whole land in tribute before him, he united his companions and plundered their possessions, gods like men and no offering were presented in the temples"

the Persian king Cambyses conquered Egypt in 535BC . Persian king darius appointed a governor named arsame/arshu, Syrian to rule over Egypt and collect tribute. this is know because of the discovery of :"cowhide"papyrus" that the Persians used to write their cuneiform dispatches on .arza or arshu ruled from Babylon over Egypt and man cow hide correspondence have been excavated from about420BC

these royal cowhides tell of how arza did levy harsh tribute for Egypt and that this henchmen appropriated many of the Egyptians lands.
the Papyrus Harris was correct and as Ramses the greats last will and testament, it is clear Ramses reigned in the 4th century after he wage war to regain the sovereignty of Egypt. this is a synopsis and there is a great more details given in the Peoples of the Sea that further collaborate that Ramses reigned in the 4th century BC and not the 12thcenturyBC

yet all this hard archeological evidence is ignored. clearly science is not objective but a the whims of the guardians of dogma.

rahu

just a few more comments on the evidence of ramses the II reigning in the
4th century and not the 12th century .
the 4th century was after the biblical books of ezra,esther and nehemaiah so there would be no record of ramses there.
the greek historians Herodotus and Thucydides also wrote before ramses was born but later greek authors would write about the time of ramses.
among later greek writers the names of the kings, nepherites,acoris, nectanebo I, tachos and nectanebo II are recorded.
nectanebo I is the most impressive of these kings.nectanebo ruler form379-161 BC which is the time period Dr Velikovsky places Ramses III.
he equates ramses II with nectanebo I and equates ramese IV with nectanebo II.

nectanebo I was famous for many things ,one was that the completed digging a canal from the red sea to the Mediterranean sea that was originally began by the Persians. this canal site is know and when the archeologists started to dig, they came up with no inscriptions of nectanebo but of ramses III......

the greek writer equated king named Nekht-hor-hep with Nectanebo I and another king, Nekht-ne-Nef with Nectanebo II.

it turns out that ramses had a horus name(Egyptian kings had up to 5 names used for different purposes, such as correspondence of public proclamations or mortuary names in tombs. the latter is what we are mostly aware of ,the names from tombs). ramses horus names was Nekht-mau-pehti-Nekht-hor-neb-khepesh-sati

a fourth century statuette was found with the inscription "for the ka of the noble chief commissioner of the estates,governor of the entrances(to Egypt) by land and sea, Nekht-hor-neb."

this identifies ramses as reigning in the4th century,he had been a governor of the Persian king before he was made king of Egypt."

the achievement ad wars of RamsesII are mirrored in other descriptions attribute to nectanebo I. Ramses was the king called Nectanebo by the greeks.
again in dr velikovsky book, Peoples of the Sea, much more archeological evidence shows that Ramses reign was misplaced by 800 years.
rahu

I have mentioned in passing that Dr Velikovsky's work negates the theory of gravity ,Newtonian and einsteinian.
one reason is that electromagnetic fields can do the exact things that are attributed to gravity .
for instance gravity is said to bend light, but a electromagnetic field also bends light and in fact an asronmoer can not distinguish if light id bent bu gravity or an electromagnetic field. astronomers have detected electromagnetic field over 500 million light in length. but still they never consider the possibility that light they see can be anything but caused by gravity.

one of the main reason that scientist have rejected Dr VeliKovsky's theory is that if Venus,then a comet, had collided with the earth, then the mechanical interaction could not have shifted the magnetic poles and the earths crust would have been split open.

Dr.Velikovsky theories claimed that the electrical forces of the planets interacted and caused the pole shift and that as charged objects they did not necessary physically collide .

the scientist countered that the earths magnetic field to too weak to have had any part of this action.

but recent discoveries have shown that the notion that the earths magnetic field is weak has been proven wrong and instead the earths magnetic field including the Van Allen Belt are extremely strong, strong enough to accelerate sub atomic particles to near speed of light velocities.

Originally Posted by rahu
http://api.viglink.com/api/click?for...E%3C%2FFONT%3E
NASA recently discovered what appears to be a 'force field' over Earth, fueling the fire over whether our planet has been under spiritual and physical quarantine as many have suggested -

what appears to be a 'force field' over Earth, fueling the fire over whether our planet has been under spiritual and physical quarantine as many have suggested. According to Daniel Baker, director of the Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics, the electron barrier exists in the Van Allen belts, a pair of donut-shaped belts that ring the Earth teeming with protons and electrons -




First it has been determined that the Van Allen belt is accelerating atomic particles to relativistic speeds.
These high energy particles had been noted for decades. First they thought cosmic rays were imparting the relativistic speeds of the particles. It is now conclusive the particles are being accelerated in the Van Allen belt.
The second observation is that these streams of relativistic particle are being contained by a force field……………now there is a force field around the earth that has never been detected before, yet this force field can contain the relativistic energies the earth is seemingly generating.
The standard model is being marketed as complete, which it is not, the this model does not have any idea as to what or where the energy comes from.
Astrologically, it is quite obvious, if one considers the ecliptic.
A couple of decades ago, the Helios series were placed in orbit around the sun to monitor the close up the various phenomena. At one point the satellites were turned outward toward space and they recorded that the ecliptic includes a plane of iridescent light that extends out as far as can be seen from the sun equator. What is this energy? The Standard model, as usual, has no idea in the world and so the energy field is ignored.
The earth is the only planet that is coplanar with the ecliptic. The earth is always on the ecliptic. the force of this “unknown” force field is the ecliptic. This keeps the earth “locked’ on the ecliptic plane.
The earth moves up a minute of arc and then down a minute of arc, back and forth across the ecliptic. As a consequence the apparent motion of the sun across the sky is serpentine, reflecting the earths ‘up and down’ motion.
it seems plausible that it is the ecliptic which is confining the sub atomic particle, creating a giant cyclotron. The earth is a giant particle accelerator.
this is the source of the power tesla tapped into, this is the power that causes the catastrophic geological chaos of velikovsky and the source of lester hendershotts generator.
And it is the power source of the ufo’s which the government covers up.
Anyone who focuses on the rotation of the earth is hounded or killed. Lester narrowly escape a electrocution, tesla died in poverty as the corporations stole his patents or rather ignored his patents rights. Velikovsky prediction are verified by space exploration, yet these results are ignored and velikovsky is jeered at. Giordano Bruno was burned and Galileo condemned as a suspected heretic, all to keep the secret of the power of the earth’s energy fields.
This energy and knowledge is what the ufo/gods have used for thousands of years to their flights then as now.
If the earth can accelerate particles to light speeds then it should be able to accelerate a craft to light speed and who knows, travel in time

here is Dr.Velikovsky's explanation of the electromagnetic nature of the solar system
http://varchive.org/ce/cosmos.htm
below is partial copy of the text
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]THE FUNDAMENTAL theory of this paper is: Gravitation is an electromagnetic phenomenon. There is no primary motion inherent in planets and satellites. Electric attraction, repulsion, and electromagnetic circumduction(1) govern their movements. The moon does not “fall,” attracted to the earth from an assumed inertial motion along a straight line, nor is the phenomenon of objects falling in the terrestrial atmosphere comparable with the “falling effect” in the movement of the moon, a conjecture which is the basic element of the Newtonian theory of gravitation.[/FONT]







[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Aside from several important facts discovered in the study of cosmic upheavals, which are not illuminated here and only enumerated at the end of this paper, and which are discussed at length in a work of research entitled Worlds In Collision now being prepared for publication, the following facts are incompatible with the theory of gravitation:[/FONT]

1. 
   [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The ingredients of the air—oxygen, nitrogen, argon and other gases—though not in a compound but in a mixture, are found in equal proportions at various levels of the atmosphere despite great differences in specific weights. The explanation accepted in science is this: “Swift winds keep the gases thoroughly mixed, so that except for water-vapor the composition of the atmosphere is the same throughout the troposphere to a high degree of approximation.” (2) This explanation cannot be true. If it were true, then the moment the wind subsides, the nitrogen should stream upward, and the oxygen should drop, preceded by the argon. If winds are caused by a difference in weight between warm and cold air, the difference in weight between heavy gases high in the atmosphere and light gases at the lower levels should create storms, which would subside only after they had carried each gas to its natural place in accordance with its gravity or specific weight. But nothing of the kind happens. [/FONT]
   
   [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]When some aviators expressed the belief that “pockets of noxious gas” are in the air, the scientists replied:[/FONT]
   [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]“There are no ‘pockets of noxious gas.’ No single gas, and no other likely mixture of gases, has, at ordinary temperatures and pressures, the same density as atmospheric air. Therefore, a pocket of foreign gas in that atmosphere would almost certainly either bob up like a balloon, or sink like a stone in water.” (3)[/FONT]
   [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Why, then, do not the atmospheric gases separate and stay apart in accordance with the specific gravities?[/FONT]
   
2. 
   [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Ozone, though heavier than oxygen, is absent in the lower layers of the atmosphere, is present in the upper layers, and is not subject to the “mixing effect of the wind.” The presence of ozone high in the atmosphere suggests that oxygen must be still higher: “As oxygen is less dense than ozone, it will tend to rise to even greater heights.” (4) Nowhere is it asked why ozone does not descend of its own weight or at least why it is not mixed by the wind with other gases. [/FONT]
   
   
3. 
   [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Water, though eight hundred times heavier than air, is held in droplets, by the millions of tons, miles above the ground. Clouds and mist are composed of droplets which defy gravitation. [/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The spots of the sun are magnetic, and the filaments of hydrogen on the sun’s surface arrange themselves as iron particles in a magnetic field.(38) Besides the spots, the sun as a whole is a magnet. “The form of the corona and the motion of the prominences suggest that it is a magnet,” wrote G.E. Hale when he undertook to detect the Zeeman effect.(39) The Zeeman effect proved to be most pronounced at 45° in both hemispheres of the sun; Hale found the displacement of lines decreases to zero at the equator and near the poles of rotation; and also that “a first approximate value for the vertical intensity of the sun’s general field at the poles is 50 gausses.” Thus, it was confirmed that the sun is a magnet, but the magnetic field was found not to be strong.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]This result is questioned here. The lines of the corona suggested the existence of a magnetic field on the sun to the scholar who discovered it. But the form of the corona suggests a powerful magnetic field.(40) Visible coronal bands and streamers reach a distance equal to ten and more diameters from the disc of the sun—Mercury is only forty solar diameters from the sun and Earth 108 solar diameters. More recent investigation by Stevens, who photographed the streamers from 25,000 feet, disclose a globular corona more extensive than any known from ground photographs.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Disturbances in filaments and vortices of the sun affect the ionosphere of the earth and prove the existence of a powerful charge on the sun; rotating at the speed of the solar rotation, a strong charge must produce a strong magnetic field.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]A revised investigation of the magnetic power of the field around the sun is here suggested. It should be kept in mind that the observations have been made from the solar magnetic field, in which the earth is embedded, if our concept is correct. It is possible also that the strongest Zeeman effect will show itself in latitudes higher than 45°. As is well known, the angle of observation must be taken into consideration in observing the Zeeman effect.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The sun is a rotating charged body, and it creates a magnetic field. We assume the solar charge to be large enough to produce a magnetic field with lines of force reaching the orbit of Pluto. The charged planets move at right angles to the sun’s magnetic lines of force and describe the usual circular motion to which moving charged bodies are subjected in a magnetic field. Satellites, in turn, revolve in smaller magnetic fields produced by the rotation of the charged planets. The non-rotating planets have no satellites, for they do not produce magnetic fields. If there are rotating satellites, they may be able to revolve trabants around them.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]“The origin of the earth’s main magnetic field has so far defied all attempts of solution.” (41) The cause of the earth’s magnetic field is in (1) the magnetic field of the sun, and (2) the rotation of the charged earth around its axis.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]It has been calculated(42) that if the earth is a magnet because of the rotating charge on its surface, the charge must be so great as to “enter as a serious factor in planetary perturbations,” and therefore the theory was dropped.(43) But this is exactly what happens: the electromagnetic fields of the earth and of other planets are the causes of the planetary perturbations.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]We have constructed a theory according to which the members of the solar system are charged bodies; electric attraction and repulsion, and electromagnetic circumduction act in the system; the origin of the magnetic field around the sun is in its charge—the sun is an electromagnet; planetary motion is due to the electromagnetic force exerted on the planets by the sun. The planets as charged bodies create magnetic fields by their rotation. It follows that (a) gravity, depending on electrical charge, varies with the charge, (b) the masses of the planets are inaccurately calculated, (c) the positive and negative charges are manifested only in relation to the charge of the earth.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]One of the differences between the conception of celestial mechanism expounded here and the theories of gravitation of Newton and Einstein is that in our understanding the revolution of the moon is a process of a different order from that of the falling of objects near the terrestrial ground. The revolution of the moon is a phenomenon of circumduction of a charge by a magnetic field and is not a fall combined with inertia; the primary motion of planets and satellites along a straight line is a fallacious notion. At the distance of the moon the electromagnetic field of the earth causes circumduction while in the terrestrial atmosphere the electric field between the earth and the ionosphere causes the movement of the dipoles. Like the moon, the earth and other planets and satellites are subject to electromagnetic circumduction.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]“Universal gravitation” is an electromagnetic phenomenon, in which the charges in the atoms, the free charges, the magnetic fields of the sun and the planets play their parts.[/FONT]







[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]In the frame of this theory the following phenomena become explainable:[/FONT]

1. 
   [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]All planets revolve in approximately one plane. They revolve in a plane perpendicular to the lines of force of the sun’s magnetic field. [/FONT]
   
   
2. 
   [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The planets have a greater aggregate energy of motion than the sun. The revolution of the planets did not originate in the angular velocity of rotation of the sun; the magnetic field of the sun effected their revolution. Also, the fact that one of the satellites of Mars revolves with an angular speed greater than that of the rotation of this planet is explained here by electromagnetic circumduction. [/FONT]
   
   
3. 
   [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The retrograde revolution of a number of satellites. It is due either to retrograde rotation of the primary with inversed magnetic poles or to a difference of charges. The fact that the retrograde satellites of Jupiter and Saturn are the most remote from their primaries poses the problem whether their remoteness from the primaries and their relative closeness to the sun play a role in their being of a presumably different charge than the other satellites of Jupiter and Saturn.(44) [/FONT]
   
   [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]In the case of Uranus, the retrograde revolution of its satellites follows the retrograde rotation of the planet and its magnetic field. (One of the magnetic poles of Uranus can be readily investigated because it faces the ecliptic.)[/FONT]
   
4. 
   [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The rotation of the earth. The tidal theory fails to account for the rotation of the planets. The position of the magnetic poles of the earth at a distance of about 20 degrees from the geographical poles may be related to the rotation of the earth. Once each day the magnetic poles of the earth occupy the southernmost and the northernmost positions in the lines of the magnetic field of the sun. [/FONT]
   
   
5. 
   [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Perturbations among the members of the solar system are actions of attraction as well as of repulsion and depend on the charges of the planets and satellites and their magnetic properties. The fact that after perturbations, the planets resume their normal courses is due to the regulating action of the sun’s magnetic field. Similarly, the satellites are regulated in their motion by the electromagnetic fields of the primaries. [/FONT]
   
   
6. 
   [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The anomalies in the motion of Mercury and other planets. The velocities of revolution of the planets depend on their charges. A strongly charged body is carried across the lines of the magnetic field more swiftly than a weakly charged body. If the charge of a planet increases, the velocity of revolution of such a planet must increase too. Positive as well as negative charges arrive from the sun in an uninterrupted flow. [/FONT]
   
   [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The planet Mercury moves faster and faster. This must be the result of an increasing charge of the planet. Also, the anomalies in the motion of other inner planets may be attributed to a changing charge; other irregularities in the motion of the planets can be attributed to the fact that the electrical charge of the sun is not equally distributed on the solar surface.[/FONT]
   
7. 
   [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The deflection of a ray of light passing close to the sun. Before attributing the deflection to the gravitational field of the sun, the influence of the magnetic field of the sun on the rotation of light should be calculated. (The influence of the moon on a ray of light by creating a ripple in the atmosphere during a solar eclipse must not be overlooked; an investigation of the trajectory of a stellar ray passing close to the moon in a lunar eclipse is suggested here.) [/FONT]
   
   
8. 
   [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The repulsion of a comet’s tail by the sun. The head of a comet and its tail are charged under a great potential difference, accounting for the manifest repulsion of the tail and attraction of the head. The neck of the comet is probably composed of positive and negative elements in equal proportion, thus forming a neutral zone between the head and the tail. Under the influence of the temperature in space the charges change and the comet returns on its orbit. [/FONT]
   
   
9. 
   
   [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]* * *[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The theory of the Cosmos without Gravitation given here in synopsis is written also in a comprehensive form (1941-43). I arrived at this concept early in 1941 as a result of my research in the history of cosmic upheavals as they affected the earth and other members of the solar system. A number of facts proved to me that the sun, the earth and other planets, the satellites, and the comets, are charged bodies, that the planets and their satellites have changed their orbits repeatedly and radically, and that gravitational attraction or the weight of objects has changed during human history. I thus recognized the fact that not gravitation, but electric attraction and repulsion and electromagnetic circumduction govern the solar system.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]In construction the electromagnetic theory of the solar system, I am indebted to Miss Shulamith Velikovsky for valuable suggestions on the dipole explanation of attraction between the atoms and the dipole concept of inertia[/FONT]

http://anonymousmags.com/archaeolog...ian-army-from-the-biblical-exodus-in-red-sea/

Archaeologists Discover Remains of Egyptian Army From the Biblical Exodus in Red Sea

Egypt’s Antiquities Ministry announced this morning that a team of underwater archaeologists had discovered that remains of a large Egyptian army from the 14th century BC, at the bottom of the Gulf of Suez, 1.5 kilometers offshore from the modern city of Ras Gharib. The team was searching for the remains of ancient ships and artifacts related to Stone Age and Bronze Age trade in the Red Sea area, when they stumbled upon a gigantic mass of human bones darkened by age.

The scientists lead by Professor Abdel Muhammad Gader and associated with Cairo University’s Faculty of Archaeology, have already recovered a total of more than 400 different skeletons, as well as hundreds of weapons and pieces of armor, also the remains of two war chariots, scattered over an area of approximately 200 square meters. They estimate that more than 5000 other bodies could be dispersed over a wider area, suggesting that an army of large size who have perished on the site.

Many clues on the site have brought Professor Gader and his team to conclude that the bodies could be linked to the famous episode of the Exodus. First of all, the ancient soldiers seem to have died on dry ground, since no traces of boats or ships have been found in the area. The positions of the bodies and the fact that they were stuck in a vast quantity of clay and rock, implie that they could have died in a mudslide or a tidal wave.
The shear number of bodies suggests that a large ancient army perished on the site and the dramatic way by which they were killed, both seem to corroborate the biblical version of the Red Sea Crossing, when the army of the Egyptian Pharaoh was destroyed by the returning waters that Moses had parted. This new find certainly proves that there was indeed an Egyptian army of large size that was destroyed by the waters of the Red Sea
I posted this here because dr velikovsky definitively established the reign of akhentaten in 8 century bc. exodus occurred under another Egyptian king and the celestial catastrophe inaugurated the second intermediate period in Egyptian history at the end of the middle kingdom.

rahu

http://beforeitsnews.com/space/2017/08/new-clue-to-solving-the-mystery-of-the-suns-hot-atmosphere-2508669.html

New Clue to Solving the Mystery of the Sun’s Hot Atmosphere

The Sun’s surface, the photosphere, has a temperature of around 6000 degrees, but the outer atmosphere, the corona – best seen from Earth during total solar eclipses – is several hundred times hotter. How the corona is heated to millions of degrees is one of the most significant unsolved problems in astrophysics. The solution will help scientists better understand the heating of other stars.
“Why the Sun’s corona is so hot is a long-standing puzzle. It’s as if a flame were coming out of an ice cube. It doesn’t make any sense! Solar astronomers think that the key lies in the magnetic field, but there are still arguments about the details,” added Dr Brooks

dr velikovsky's theory of catastrophic planetary interactions has been criticized mainly because scientist have always said that the magnetic forces of the planets are not sufficient to cause the catastrophic interactions that dr velikovsky proposed.


http://humansarefree.com/2014/12/ear...ield.html#more
NASA recently discovered what appears to be a 'force field' over Earth, fueling the fire over whether our planet has been under spiritual and physical quarantine as many have suggested -

what appears to be a 'force field' over Earth, fueling the fire over whether our planet has been under spiritual and physical quarantine as many have suggested. According to Daniel Baker, director of the Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics, the electron barrier exists in the Van Allen belts, a pair of donut-shaped belts that ring the Earth teeming with protons and electrons -

critics of velikovsky claimed the earth's magnetic field could not describe the chaos of a venus/earth close encounter.
but it seem the earth is a giant cyclotron capable of accelerating matter to relativistic speeds. might this not be capable of time travel?

rahu

dr velikovsky recognized the time line of the middle east was off by over 600 years. king ankhenaten was reigned not in the 15th century bc bur in the 9th century bc

dr velikovsky thoroughly explores the synchronization of akkadian cuneiform tablets written in assyro-babylonian(akkadian) in the archives of tel el amarna in egypt under king amonhotep111 and amonhotep1V/ankhetaton with annual of shalmanserIII and the books of chronicles and kings in the torah and the mesha stella. The mesha stella was erected by the king of moab who rebelled against the kingdom of Israel in the time of the book of kings and the amarna tablets where mesha is mentioned exactly.

The pharaoh ankhenaton was a heretic king. He initiated the worship of one god, aton, . freud calls him the first monotheist. At this time in history, all the kings of Palestine were vassals of ankhenaton. the tablets of amarna were written in assyro-babylonian(akkaidian), the common diplomatic language of the day. Letters to and from the kings of Jerusalem(ursulim) capital of judah and samaria(sumara) capital of the king Israel are found in addition to correspondence of many of the lesser kingdoms of edom,sidon etc.
60 of the 360 tablets of the armarna archive were from king ahab.
This places ankhenton in the 8th century bc
Why was there such a close connection between ahab,who embraced the mother goddess through jezebel?
One reason may be that ankhetaton likely embraced a Egyptian mother goddess. I little mentioned fact is that ankhenaton built the greatest temple to amon in Egyptian history. Up to the 1960’s Egyptologist though Ramses the great ‘s temple to amon was the greatest . in the 60’s with one of the first applications of computers to archeology, Egyptologist discovered that a “pile of debris “a mile long and 4 Some 2 million building stones were photographed, researches had to go all over Europe to photograph stones in various national museums.when the photos were collated, they found that this was indeed the greatest temple ever built to amon.
But the most amazing fact was that throughout this immense temple, there was only one image portrayed. It was not amon but rather it was ankhetaton”s, queen Nefertiti, still concerned one of the worlds great beauties to this day.
So it seems that the pharaoh himself worshiped an egyptiam form of the mother goddess.
This may be a reason why ahab was so intimate to ankhenaton , even as a vassal prince.
Of course according to the guardians of dogma, there is a major problem with this scenario.
That is archeologists place ankhenaton in the 15th century bc and king ahab is place in the 9th century bc.

Again the hands of the levite editors of history had to separate the clear examples of the worship of the mother goddess and so they ignore the fact that in spite of the amarna archive showing a multitude of
kingdoms in plaestine and Syria, they place anhketaton in the 15th century bc when there were no such kingdoms existant. The tablets have correspondences with urusalim,(Jerusalem) but in the 15th century bc Jerusalem did not exist.it was called salem. Likewise sumeria and Judah did not exist in the 15th century bc. And some of the tablets used Hebrew idioms, yet Hebrew did not exist in the 15 centurybc.
In addition the cuniform archives at tel el amarna speak of the “jannu”. The “jannu is assyro-babylonian for the early greeks or ionians.l yet the greeks/jannu did not exist in 1500 bc the alleged time of ankhenaton.
I suggest anyone interested in this period to read Ages in Chaos by Immanuel Velikovsky.


to this day "establishment" archeology places ankhenaton in the 15th century and simply refused to integrate that the cuniform tablet archives of tel el amarna record Akhenaten corresponding with the kings of samaria and judah.
in a attempt to elevate Yahweh to a single creator god, yahwist propagandist or the guardians of dogma as dr Immanuel velikovsky (http://varchive.org/calls) them, the entire of history of the middle east has been turned on it's head.

the purpose by the yahwist propagandist was to separate ankhetaten ,the first monotheist, from the time of king omnri and king Ahab and king Jehoshaphat because the want to institute Yahweh as the first and sole creator god.

Another interesting piece of archeological evidence that ties ankhenaton’s reign to the later 9th century date is the copper scroll that was found among the dead sea scrolls.
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/mistic/scroll_qumran.htm 396
In March 1952, Henri de Contenson, an archaeologist seconded from France to work with the team at the École Biblique in East Jerusalem, was leading a team of ten Bedouin, when he discovered two lumps of what is now known as the Copper Scroll, in a hillside cave, some 2 km from Qumran.

The Copper Scroll was in an highly oxidized condition, and had broken into two separate rolled up sections. In its original state it measured 0.3 m in width, 2.4 m in length, and was about 1 mm thick. No one knew quite how to open it up without damaging the text. One lunatic suggestion was to try to reduce the copper oxides with hydrogen, or even electrolysis, to recover the copper!

After considerable preparatory research, John Allegro of Oxford University, a member of the original international translation team working on the Dead Sea Scrolls in Jerusalem, persuaded the École Biblique team to let him take one of the copper pieces to England. There the first piece of scroll was
finally ‘opened’ by Professor H. Wright Baker at Manchester College of Science and Technology (now UMIST) in 1955, followed by the second piece in 1956.

The technique Wright Baker used was to coat the outside of the scroll with Araldite adhesive and then slice the scroll, using a 4,000th/inch thick saw, into 23 separate sections
It was written in an early form of Hebrew - a square form script - and has been shown to have linguistic affinities to pre-Mishnaic Hebrew and Aramaic, with some terms only comprehensible through study of Arabic and Akkadian. Other Dead Sea Scrolls were written in square form Aramaic script, or the so-called ‘Paleo-Hebrew’ script, derived from ‘Proto-Canaanite’ - itself an evolution from ‘Ugarit’, Egyptian hieroglyphs and ‘Phoenician’.

The language was a major puzzles for scholars. The Hebrew palaeography (style of script) and orthography (spelling) in the Copper Scroll is quite unlike anything found in other texts of the time, from Qumran or from elsewhere. It has, nevertheless, been almost unanimously classified as one of the Dead Sea Scrolls, and now resides in the Archaeological Museum of Amman, in Jordan.
John Allegro, a religious renegade, amongst a team of predominantly Catholic members, must have been the first person to translate the ancient Hebrew of the Copper Scroll into English. What he read, started a controversy that has raged for over 50 years amongst scholars. It contained a list of some 64 locations where fabulous treasures had been hidden, over a wide geographical area, including large quantities of gold, silver, jewellery, precious perfumes, ritual clothing, and other scrolls.
In conventional translations of the Copper Scroll the weight of gold mentioned in various locations is generally given as adding up to a staggering 26 tonnes and silver 65 tonnes.

When the weights of the treasures itemized in the Copper Scrolls are totaled, we come to the following:

• Gold - 1285 Talents
• Silver - 666 Talents
• Gold and Silver - 17 Talents
• Gold and silver vessels - 600 Talents
• Mixed precious metals - 2,088 Talents

Items with unspecified weights are as follows:

• Gold ingots - 165
• Silver bars - 7
• Gold and Silver vessels - 609

In Biblical Talent terms the sheer weight of the gold and silver is enormous. One Talent is estimated to be about 76 lb or 34.47 kg.

The Copper Scroll seems to be referring to precious metals worth around $2 billion at current prices, but whose intrinsic historic value would be many times this figure!
The Scroll does not reveal by whom, or when, the treasures were buried, let alone why.
But from some of the recognizable place names mentioned, the treasures are generally assumed to have been hidden within Judaea or near to Mount Gerizim, in Samaria (parts of modern Israel) and to relate to treasures of the Second, or possibly First Temple of Jerusalem. Both temples were known to be places where considerable wealth was accumulated through the donation of sacrificial gifts and ‘tithes’ by the general community.

Although, from palaeographic studies, the Copper Scroll is now thought to have been copied at a date between 150 BCE and 70 CE, there are enigmatic passages which correspond to early Biblical Hebrew, dating back to 700 or 800 BCE, and it contains many unique word constructions not in use in mainstream Judaism at the time of its production.

The presence of Greek letters interspersed at the end of sections of the text aroused my curiosity, as their meaning was not understood and they appeared to be some kind of cryptic code. Many theories have been put forward to try to explain these apparently random Greek letters. They are variously considered to be made by scribes as reference marks of some sort, initials of place names, entry dates, or location directions, but none of these explanations is accepted as conclusive and they remain a puzzle.

The numbering units given in the text, which relate to the amounts of treasure, are also not clearly understood by modern translators. The numerals are in an unsophisticated long-hand form involving apparently unnecessary duplication.

There were other ‘anomalies’ for which there appeared to be no satisfactory answers. No other Dead Sea Scroll was engraved on copper, nor any known Hebrew texts from anywhere else, prior to the period.

• Why should this be?
• Why should a non materialistic community go to such trouble to preserve the information on the Copper Scroll?
• Where did they get the extremely pure copper (99%) from?

How could they afford its very high cost?
When I looked closely at the numbering units and weights used in the scroll, it soon became clear they were not of Canaanite or Judaean origin, where the Qumran Essenes resided, but Egyptian! Indeed, the numbering system in the Copper Scroll is typical of that in use in Egypt around 1300 BCE. The Egyptian system used repetitive single vertical strokes, up to the number 9, combined with repetitive decimal units for larger numbers.

If the numbering system was Egyptian, why not the weight terms also? The ancient Egyptians had developed a system of weights specifically designed for weighing precious metals, and this system was based on the ‘Kite’, a unit weighing approximately 10g, but sometimes used as a double unit (KK) of 20.4g. I believe it is no coincidence the ‘hard ch’ sound of the weight term used in the Copper Scroll text equates to the Egyptian ‘K’ in ‘Kite’!

When these ancient Egyptian weight units are applied, typical of the period prior to 1000 BCE, to calculate the quantities of gold, silver and jewellery mentioned in the Scroll, rather more realistic weights are obtained than those given earlier.

The approximate totals of precious metals mentioned in the scroll now become:

• Gold - 26 kg
• Silver - 13.6 kg
• Mixed precious metals - 55.2 kg

We were now looking at weights which are a fraction of those given in modern translations of the Copper Scroll, but they are at least plausible values, quite consistent with the amounts of gold and silver in circulation for the period.

For example, if we look at the Harris Papyrus, an ancient text in the British Museum, dating to about 1180 BCE, it gives the total gold holdings accumulated over a 31 year period by Egypt (by far the most wealthy country in the ancient Middle East), as 387 kg.
The strange thing is that, although the type of numbering system used in the Copper Scroll might have persisted in Egyptian temple writing for some time after the Greek conquest of Egypt (in 330 BCE), its use was always specific to Egypt and it was not in use outside Egypt, except in the period of Egypt’s campaigns in Canaan from 1400 to 1100 BCE.
Egypt’s shadow had obviously been cast over the early Hebrew’s experience, and yet, like other blind spots, modern theology shies away from considering the Egyptian connection too closely.
all the major characters of the Bible, from Abraham and Sarah, to Jesus and Mary, had strong links to Egypt. Joseph, Jacob, all the founders of the 12 tribes of Israel, as well as Moses, Aaron and Miriam, Joshua, Jeremiah and Baruch, all lived for long periods in Egypt and were influenced by its culture and religions
The use of the ancient Egyptian system for weighing metals died out around 500 BCE and had previously always been specific to Egypt.
Why would a document, ostensibly written by a devout, unorthodox Jewish community living near the Dead Sea in Judaea around the time of Jesus, have so many Egyptian characteristics?
And why would the writing material, numbering system and system of weights used, be typical of Egyptian usage from a period at least 1,000 years earlier?
After a lengthy analysis I came to the conclusion that Joseph had interacted with a pharaoh by the name of Akhenaten - a monotheistic pharaoh - and many of the basic tenets of Judaism, and by extension Christianity and Islam, came out of Egypt. The river that branches from the Nile at Amarna (ancient Akhetaten), Pharaoh Akhenaten’s capital city, is to this day know as ‘Bahr Yusuf’, ‘Joseph’s River’, and there are many other clues.(here the author is accepting the establish viewpoint that ankhenaten reign in the 15th century ,before exodus, but in fact ankhenaten reigned in the 9th century which one will find matches the conclusions reached I this paper ,rahu)
When I started comparing descriptions of the treasure locations given in the Copper Scroll with sites at Amarna, it soon became apparent there were many close parallels. Not only that, some of the locations have already yielded archaeological finds of treasures that match very closely the descriptions and weights given in the Copper Scroll.
Many of these treasures can be seen in Museums in Britain and Egypt. Having made a connection for the Copper Scroll to Akhenaten’s Holy city in middle Egypt, it was not surprising a most powerful piece of evidence emerged when I looked again at the strange Greek letters scattered in the Scroll. When the first 10 are put together they spell out the name Akhenaten!

The validity of this conclusion is re-enforced by the opinion of Professor John Tait, of University College London, who considers the reading of the Greek letters as quite plausibly the name of the Pharaoh in question.
One of the most interesting aspects of this theory relates to Ezekiel descriptions of a Temple, which is generally taken to be a visionary Temple that would one day be built in Jerusalem. However, when you compare the descriptions Ezekiel gives in the Old Testament to those of the archaeological reconstructions of the Great Temple that stood in Akhenaten’s Holy City, it is quite clear he was talking about that actual Temple and not one which would one day stand in Jerusalem.

Other Dead Sea Scrolls confirm this finding in incontrovertible detail. The New Jerusalem Scroll, for example, which by the way never mentions Jerusalem, ties its descriptions to Akhenaten’s Holy Temple.
Recently Michael Chyutin, and Shlomo Margalit, Israeli architects, have conducted independent studies on the Scroll and come to the conclusion it is almost certainly describing Akhenaten’s city at modern day Amarna. Without the explanation I have put forward, for a link from Amarna down to the possessors and authors of the New Jerusalem Scroll, conventional history has no answer to the problem.
Incidentally these studies show that two other Egyptian cities also exhibited similar characteristics to those described in the New Jerusalem Scroll - namely Sesebi, a city located between the second and third cataract of the Nile, and the Hebrew settlement on the Island of Elephantine, near Aswan in southern Egypt.
A connection to Sesebi is not so surprising as it was, like Akhetaten, built by Akhenaten. Why the strange pseudo-Hebrew settlement on Elephantine Island, which is dated to at least the 7th century BCE, should show similarities is more intriguing. The people there worshipped Yahwe, the Israelite name for God, and built a temple as a place of worship. The explanation of how this isolated community came into existence has never been satisfactorily resolved.
My own theory is they were a residual enclave that formed after the destruction of Akhenaten’s Holy City when survivors, mainly the earliest monotheistic Hebrews, fled south for safety. An Australian scholar, E. Maclaurin, of the University of Sydney, adds weight to my theory in a paper entitled 'Date of the Foundation of the Jewish Colony at Elephantine', published in The Journal of Near Eastern Studies, Volume 27, 1968.
He concluded that the style of worship at Elephantine, “...was of a form which could not have existed in a Hebrew group which had been exposed to the influences of Sinai and Canaan after the settlement.”
In other words Maclaurin rules out any possibility of the community at Elephantine having derived from outside Egypt after the Exodus (c. 1200 BCE) let alone at the time of Solomon or the kings of Israel.
Another scroll, the Temple Scroll, spells out the dimensions of the longest Temple wall as 1600 cubits, equivalent to 800 m. Conventional scholarship has nowhere to go in Jerusalem to accommodate the Qumran Essenes’ concept of this building. The Temple Mount in Jerusalem measure only 550 m x 185 m. So they conclude it must be the description of a fictitious temple. The length of the longest wall of the Great Temple at Amarna has been measured, from detailed archaeological excavations, as being 800 m.

The logical conclusion is the information in the Temple Scroll, in its original form, existed before Moses, and it described the plan of a real temple that was not the Temple at Jerusalem. The details must have been handed down in secret through a distinct line of Levitical priests, to the Qumran Essenes, who based their copy on the original version.

When the Qumran Essenes built their main settlement building at Qumran in ‘exact’ alignment to the main walls of Akhenaten’s Temple, and constructed 10 ritual washing pools, they were echoing a recorded memory of that Temple. Uniquely, and unknown from anywhere else in Israel, one of the ritual washing ‘Mikvaot’ has four divisions - just as one of the ritual washing basins in the Temple at Akhetaten exhibited.
That the name of Aten or Aton, the name by which Akhenaten knew his God, is embedded throughout the Old Testament, has many attesters, from Sigmund Freud onwards. Many Egyptian names are read with the letter ‘D’ or the letter ‘T’ - Touchratta or Douchratta, Taphne or Daphne, and in Egyptian Coptic the letter D can be pronounced ‘D’ or ‘T’ .
Thus, Aton could well be written ‘Adon -ai’ where ‘ai ’ relates God to the Hebrews in the sense of ‘my master’.

Dr velikovsky maintained that ankhenaten reign in the 9th century not the 15 th century bc. This fact clears up many of the conundrums that this article brings up.
The scrolls were copied in the 150-70bc tie period.liinguistic consideration indicate by certain “enigmatic passages” would place the original document at 700 -800 bc.
But “The strange thing is that, although the type of numbering system used in the Copper Scroll might have persisted in Egyptian temple writing for some time after the Greek conquest of Egypt (in 330 BCE), its use was always specific to Egypt and it was not in use outside Egypt, except in the period of Egypt’s campaigns in Canaan from 1400 to 1100 BCE”
The question not raised in this article because of the archeological establishments mistake of placing Akhenaton in the 15th century bc, is how could the writers of the scroll used systems of numerial and weight measures that had not been used for at least 600 years.
The article supposes that the levites transmitted this tradition but the fact is the levites and indeed Yahweh do not appear in Jewish history until the 9th or 10th century bc. Yahweh is a cult god in the 9th century bc, not a creator god although the levite yahwist have rewritten jewish history to make yahweh the creator god of primordial times.

And how could the authors of the copper scroll know all the details of ankhenatens city and temple when ankhenatens city was leveled and destroyed upon his death. For that matter the Egyptians did not even know that Akhenaten had existed when the Greek scholar visited egypted in the 5 and 4th centuries. So how could jewish scholars know what the Egyptians themselves had forgtotten?
All these problems clear up when one realizes that ankhenaten ruled I nthe 9th century so the authors would have been living very near the time of ankhenatens rule and therefore knew the dimensions of
his city etc. also the problem of how a numerical system used in the 1500-100 bc could have been know in 700 bc disappears because there is a lacunae of 600 years.1500bc in the Egyptian history books us actually the 9th century bc.
Dr velikovsky’s genius came in part because he used his own mind to see through the jumbled facts created by the Yahwistic distortion the historical record of the middle east so as to separate the original monotheist ,ankhenaton ,from the time of the Levite usurpation of Judaism and the Levites inserting Yahweh, a cult god of asherah, to the monotheistic creator god.
rahu

Dr. Velikovsky was one of the founders of the Hebrew university . the was the first psychiatrist trained in Israel and his studied under onWilhelm Stekel (German: March 18, 1868 – June 25, 1940) was an Austrian physician and psychologist, who became one of Sigmund Freud's earliest followers, and was once described as "Freud's most distinguished pupil .because of his sterling credentials he could not just be ignored. But his controversial theories affected so many disciplines that the establishment attacked and slandered him while never refuting 90 percent of his insights.
There is a 21012 book titled the velokovisky heresies which concentrates on the luynch pin of his discoveries which was that venus was a comet that either was spewed out of Jupiter or was captured by Jupiter and redirect to a collision course with the earth around 1500 bc.in the Wilhelm Stekel (German: [ˈʃteːkəl]; March 18, 1868 – June 25, 1940) was an Austrian physician and psychologist, who became one of Sigmund Freud's earliest followers, and was once described as "Freud's most distinguished pupil". In Velokovsky heresies the author does not try to substantiate all of dr Velokovkys discoveries but concentrates on the astronomical discoveries of the last 50 years of space satellites discovery to see how many of Velokovsky’s prediction fared. Needless to say almost all of velikovsky’s prediction have been substantiated by these space discoveries, yet the establishment still ignores his accomplishments and prescient visions. This is a short volume but gives the evidence that shows velikovsky was correct in his premise.
One of his collar discoveries was that the history of the middle east has been off set by several hundred years.
Ramses the great did not live in 1200 bc but rather reigned 3oo-400 hundred bc.
But ,to me the most amazing of all his amazing books was Oedipus and Ankhetaten.
As he was a psychiatrist ,I assume this would be a treatise on the psychological similarities between the myth of Oedipus. And so I put off for years reading this book.
But his amazing insights proved t me that the myth of Oedipus was in fact written about the life of ankhetaten .
The amazing details of archeology that vikovsky drew from is added to by unpublished research about the time of ankhetaten and king tutmoses .
Ankhetaten lives in the 9th century bc, in the time of king Ahab of Israel and king Jehoshaphat of Judea .
Of course from the beginning the scientific establish derided this thesis as ankhetaten is placed incorrectly in the 15th century bc.
As I am sure any who read ths and have a working knowledge of middle eastern history will say this is impossible as venus being a captured comet, but once again dr velikovsky discoveries are proved by archeological discoveries that show irrefutably that ankhetaten in fact reigned in the time of the book of kings and some of the book of chronicles .
This irrefutable evidence are the amarna tablets which are clay table written with cuneiform in the language of akkadian. Akkadian was the lingua franca of the middle east and the 100,000s of tablets found have been and translated and the meanings clearly understood.
The amarna tablets were from the royal archives of ankhetatens capital at tel-el amarna.,Egypt. The are composed of some 360 tablets tha record the internation correspondence between ankhetaten’s father Amenhotep the 111 and ankhetaten with the kings of israel.,king od Judea, king of Damascus,king of Babylonia, king of Mitanni and many kings of city states in the levant. Critics of velikovsky reject his thesis but they can not refut the existence of these cuneiform tablets and their contents. Archeologist insist ankhetaten reigned in the 15th century but the can not refute the fact that the tablets are real and more importantly that the kingdom of Israel, judea, Syria and babylon did not exist in the 15th century. yet here is king ankhetaten corresponding with them. In addition many loan words from ancient Hebrew are used. Aain the Hebrew language did not exist in the 15th centrut bc and for that matter the Hebrews did not exist as a people I the 15th centruybc. In addition the tablets speak of the “jannu” which is the akkadian word for the early greeks,ionians. Yet not only did ankhetaten refer to the jannu but he also has a greek (jannu) mercenaries in his armies. all this is written in akkadian on clay fired cuneiform tablets
These are fact. Yet the guardian of dogma, as velikovsky refers to them ,to this day ignore thee fact and continue to place ankhetaten impossibly in the 15 th century bc.
But this post is about dr velikovsky’s insights thaa the myth of Oedipus is taken from the life of ankhetaten.
So those who refuse to look at reality cansign off and I will continue to give a brief synopsis of the evidence that Oedipus was in fac ankhetaten.
537
rahu

the greek myth of Oedipus concerns a king of thebes who murdered his father and wed his mother, there by bring down a terrible fate to his city thebes and himself.there are numerous variations to the greek myth given by different authors but they agree on most points except the ending.

greek thebes was ancient city in central Greece that was said to have been inhabited continuously for 5000 years. it was called the 7 gated thebes because of 7 formidable gates that opened into the city.

the ancient thebes in Egypt which was capital fo Egypt at one point was called the 100 gated thebes. as thebes had been a religious center for thousands of years,it was composed of thousands of temples. thebes did not have a 100 gates rather the temple doors were packed togtehr froming a walled city and the doors of the temples were said to number in the 100's,hence the 100 gated thebes.

in the greek myth king Laius and queen jocastas had a son. the augur's said that he would kill his father and marry his mother, so a servant took Oedipus to a distant mountainside to be abandoned to the elements. but the servant gave Oedipus to a shepherd who raised Oedipus. the greek myth says that Oedipus legs had been bound the result which was his legs were in some way deformed, hence his name,oedipus which meads swollen foot in greek.

in Akhenaten's royal city, Akhetaten), among the royal tombs was found a royal tomb for a servant, this was unheard of. a royal tomb for a servant has never been found again or before. archeologists could only surmise that the servant had performed some action that saved Akhenaten's life when he was an infant. in addition, sculptures and stella with ankhenatens image always show him with abnormally ,grotesquely large or engorged thighs. Egyptologists have tried to identify some medical issue with these portraits of the king.but nothing is certain. it turns out than in greek the word for foot is also used for leg. so Akhenaten could be called swollen foot as Oedipus was.

in the Oedipus myth, Oedipus is on his way to thebes but a female sphinx guards the way. he is force to answer a riddle or be killed. the riddle being what walks on 4 legs in youth,then walks on 2 legs and then walks on 3 legs. Oedipus anserws correctly, man an infant crawls on all fours, a man walks on two legs and an old man walks with a cane, 3 legs. the sphinx then caste herself off the cliff to her death. there are several aspects that do not add up in this scene. the first is that the sphinx not a greek creation. there were no examples of greek sphinx among there myths. secondly it seems illogical that the sphinx would kill her self for such a reason.

in ancient Egypt,the sphinx is a common symbol but the sphinx was always a male. there is no record of female sphinx' until the 18th dynasty, the dynasty of ankhenaten. in fact the first female sphinx ever found had the face of Akhenaten's mother. and this female sphinx was a killer of men. also near the entrance to the valley of kings where the royal Egyptian tombs are found. archeologist found the shattered remains of a sphinx that had apparently been cast down from the high cliff surrounding the valley of kings.

these may seem only curiosities but these coincidence continue.

Oedipus returned to thebes in manhood.he had been away since a baby.
this leads to an interesting archeological fact that I had never been taught of ever read about. there is no mention of ankhenaten in the royal annals of his father ,amenhotep the 111, what so ever ,before Amenhotep 111 died. there is not mention or pictures of ankhenaten as a child his name is never brought up until he ascended the throne after his father death. the cuneiform archives make this clear because a vassal king upon writing to ankhenaten about this ascension to the throne says" ask your mother the great tiy, and she will tell you how well I got along with your father. so the question is were was ankhenaten in all those years and why was he never mentioned?
dr velikovsky was of the mind that maybe ahkenaten was raised in the kingdom of mittani which provides another clue to the similarities between Oedipus and ankenaten, which I will bring up later on.

the parallel with Oedipus is self evident.
546
rahu

The myth of Oedipus is famous because he killed his father and married his mother.
What evidence exit that supports supposition in ankhenaten’s life?
Oedipus was said to have killed his father on the road to thebes not realizing this was his father .
There is no evidence that Akhenaten physically killed his father as Akhenaten arrived after his father’s death. But ankhenaten did spiritually kill his father.
In Egyptian theology, a man’s soul/ka would have eternal life as long as someone said his name each day or if his name was enscribedsomewhere. This is why the Kings would create a shrine and priesthood whose sole function was to sing hymns to the king everyday forever.
When Akhenaten changed his nane to Akhenaten from Amenhotep the 111, he had the temples destroyed of his father and had all hieroglyphic inscriptions of his father’s named chiseled out or otherwise destroyed any mention of him. So by doing this ,the killed his father’s soul.
Oedipus infamously married his mother and became king of thebes
The evidence for the correlations to Akhenaten’s life at this point seems hopeless because most of us recognize the famous bust of the beautiful neferiti who was ankhenatens wife. But the archeological evidence is much more complicated that this simple scenario seems.
First off, ankhenatenwas raised in some foreign country, most likely the kingdom of mititanni . to this day archeologist are not clear were mititanni was but some believe in was near modern day armenia.
Dr velikovsky places mititanni in the areas of ancient Persia and the medes. Thereby Akhenaten was raised under the priesthood of the magi. Many know that the magic were the priest caste of the ancient Persians and medes, but the magi were also the preist class of all Indo-European countries and cultures besides the Persians .
The magi had a religious tenet that the most exalted and sacred form of sexual union was between parents and children and uterine siblings. Incest was sacred to the magi.
So Akhenaten easily could have had this religious belief. But the archeological record is much clearer on this theme.
A few years before the fall of the 18th dynasty, neferiti lost face at court and retreated to a walled gate in the northern part of the city of ankhetaten, the royal city of Akhenaten at what is now called tel el armarna.she was replaced by queen tiye, who was ankhenatens mother, and who took over as queen in the courts.
It is known that ankhenaten had 4 daughters as 4 daughters as numerous picture and stome stelli exist showing the happy family. One daughter was known to have died early and so many pictures of the family with 3 daughters exist.In fact more picture of ankhenatens family exist that all the picture of English royal families from the entirety English history.
But there is one more daughter that is attributed to ankhenaten. This was beketaten. The problem was beketaten was always associated with queen tiye. The are stelli which show ankhenaten,queen tye and beketaten all going into to their separate royal “chapels” . so beketaten was clearly of royal blood, but nowhere in this scene do you find neferiti or the other 3 daughters. Finally archeologists had to concede that beketaten was likely queen tiye’s daughter not Nefertiti’s .as such it was decided that she was the child of Amenhotep11 and queen tiye who was conceived before Amenhotep’s death. But the archeologist ignored one glaring archeological fact.
Beketaten was smaller than the other daughters of ankhenaten and it was calculated that she was 6-7 years old. But Amenhotep died 11 years before ,so it is obviously impossible for Amenhotep to have been the father of beketaten. But archeologist ignored this fact while conceding that beketaten was the daughter of queen tiye. But more archeological remains were uncovered that further proves that beketaten was ankhenatens daughter and that ankhenaten was married to his mother.
This evidence is in the form of the only tomb that was ever used in ankhetaten. The tomb belonged to a vizier and his wife,as I recall.as according to religious observances the portcullis of entrance to the tomb had a depiction of the reigning king and queen stretching over the gate holding hands forming a arch. the problem is that though the king was ankhenaten the queen portrayed was queen tiye, not neferiti.nefertiti was in the background of ankhenaten along with their 3 daughters and on the opposite side was beketaten behind her mother.
Well archeologist finally tried to solve this enigma by saying that it was not Akhenaten being portrayed but his father Amenhotep.this attempt to explain the pictures did not stand up because the hieroglyphic inscriptions clearly identified Akhenaten. So as archeologist do when their dogma does not match the archeological evidence at hand…. They simply ignored this discrepancy to this day.
So clearly Akhenaten was married to his mother just as Oedipus was married to his mother queen jocaste.
The correlations between Oedipus and ankhenaten are even more similar in the aftermath of the marriage of these kings,one mythical ,one historical, to their respective queen/mothers.
When I first started reading this book I was quite skeptical even though I am a devotee of velikovsky. But as the archeological evidence of the aftermath of the marriage of ankhenaten and queen tiye, I can only say I was and still am amazed how dr Immanuel velikovsky had the genius to see the truth , hidden in mythology and history.
I will post the remaining archeological evidence shortly.
rahu
576

http://humansarefree.com/2017/12/worlds-in-collision-controversial.html#more
603


(Guardians of Dogma as Dr velikovsky called them harassed and censored all who publishes and promoted his theories. these guardians of dogma, who call Yahwistist Propagandist ,have been twisting the philosophical base of science,and history since the falsehoods written in the ook of Kings in the torah.the tenacity of there liying can be seen in in this article.
this article is by the author of the Velikovsky Heresies, but for some reason at he end presents a series of doubts rather that affirmation that are in his book.the guardians of dogma have black listed velikovsky since the beginning and it seem to me that this author is back tracking to appease the scientific establishment. one should read this book anyway and judge for yourself, if the scientific evidence he provides on venus is sufficient or not to vindicate velikovsky. this brief presentation is like a back handed compliment . as this author is self censoring his own work about velikovsky, I will go through the article and add the omissions that this author makes rahu)

Worlds in Collision: The Controversial Theories of Immanuel Velikovsky May Be Proven Right

Some of the controversies that arise in the world seem to latch on to the public’s imagination and then, for decades or years following, simply will not let go. Such is the character of intrigue that has, for more than sixty years now, swirled turbulently around the personage of Immanuel Velikovsky.

Velikovsky, who sadly died in 1979, was a Russian-born medical doctor and psychoanalyst. He first came into the public eye in the 1920’s for founding the Scripta Universitatis academic journal in Berlin, and later worked alongside others to establish the Hebrew University in Jerusalem.

Velikovsky was an intensely curious man who had been broadly educated in many different fields of study as diverse as science, medicine, philosophy, ancient history and law. He studied psychoanalysis under Sigmund Freud’s acclaimed protégé Wilhelm Stekel.

Velikovsky first worked alongside Albert Einstein in Berlin, when Einstein edited mathematical articles (again Einstein is falsely credited with knowledge he did not have, though much what is written here is true, velikovsky wrote that of the many scientific works he sent to Einstein to look at, Einstein never critiqued even one because Einstein said he was not familiar with the subject , the only topic Einstein knew about was his theory of relativity,varchive.org rahu)in Scripta Universitatis, again in Jerusalem during their efforts to help found the Hebrew University, and later in life as close friends and colleagues at Princeton University.





In 1939, Velikovsky brought his family to New York City, planning to spend the summer engaged in research at Columbia University’s library. He was compiling a psycho-historical text to outline the many intriguing parallels he had uncovered between the Greek literary character Oedipus and the Egyptian Pharaoh Akhnaton.

This research, however, was soon sidelined when Velikovsky uncovered an Egyptian papyrus called “The Admonitions of Ipuwer,” a text that seemed to provide historical confirmation for biblical accounts of the 10 plagues in Egypt at the time of Moses.

Intrigued that the biblical account might possibly have foundation in actual historic events, Velikovsky began to seek out other ancient references that might serve to uphold that point of view.

Using the techniques of a comparative mythologist, Velikovsky began a comprehensive review of ancient texts from around the world dating from that same time period, and produced a body of supporting evidence that was more substantial than he at first imagined.

The ancient texts presented what he saw as a kind of universality of theme relating to reports of global calamity – descriptions of fire raining from the sky, violent earthquakes, volcanoes erupting, displacement of great bodies of water, and similar disasters of seeming mythic proportion.

At the same time he also began a search for references that might point to some real-world agent capable of inflicting the kinds of misfortunes described in the Book of Exodus. He eventually settled on the theoretic close approach of a comet to the Earth as the type of natural event that most closely fits the profile of destructive consequences described in the texts.

This tentative conclusion was upheld in his mind by many explicit ancient references to a fearful wandering comet associated with great calamity. References to this comet were given by different cultures under various names such as Seth and Typhon.

Velikovsky also found himself confused to learn that in some cultures, the names that had been initially assigned to this fearful comet also came later to be associated with the planet Venus.
( Velikovsky was not confused, he knew from the beginning venus had to be a comet)
Meanwhile, Velikovsky became aware of the sudden rise at about that same historical period of what seemed to be a global obsession with tracking the motions of Venus. Many different cultures began to keep careful written counts of the number of days between the risings and settings of Venus.

Tracking Venus is the likely motive that is cited by some historians as having inspired the Oracle Bone texts – the earliest form of written record known to exist in China. For Velikovsky, these facts taken together seemed to implicate Venus as the fearsome agent of terrible events that he believed may have ravaged our planet.

Velikovsky associated this same period of destruction with the stupendous eruption of the volcano Thera on the island of Santorini, the sudden fall of the Minoan Empire in the Mediterranean, and the end of the Middle Kingdom in Egypt at around 1500 BCE.

In support of this unorthodox thesis, Velikovsky noted that the texts of most ancient cultures prior to 1500 BCE – most notably those of the Hindus, Babylonians and Egyptians – refer only to four planets – Jupiter, Saturn, Mars and Mercury.

References to Venus prior to that date are inexplicably given using words and symbols that were traditionally reserved for comets. They describe Venus as appearing “hairy” or refer to its “horns” or “long tail.”

(There are references prior to 1500 BCE to goddesses such as the Sumerian Innana, however, the iconography associated with these goddesses typically involve images of comets.)

Two independent but synchronised sets of ancient astronomic records – one from China and the other from Korea – describe the first appearance of a supernova on the same observation date and both compare it in size and brightness to Venus “with its rays.”

Furthermore, virtually all ancient cultures went through a period during which they classified Venus alongside the Sun and the Moon, rather than with the planets, based on its brightness.

While it’s true that even now, under proper circumstances, the planet Venus can remain visible during the first hours of daylight, there are ancient reports that refer to the brightness of Venus as rivalling that of the Sun.

Velikovsky changed the focus of his study from Oedipus to the origins of Venus, and in 1950, MacMillan and Company published his highly controversial book on the subject called Worlds in Collision.

In the book Velikovsky postulated – based on a wide range of ancient accounts and references – that the planet Venus must have been formed within the historic memory of mankind as a consequence of the impact of a large astronomic body with Jupiter.

This event was recorded in a Greek myth in which Jupiter was said to have swallowed whole a pregnant goddess named Metis, soon after which Athena burst newborn from Jupiter’s head.

According to Velikovsky, Venus – whose name in Greek means “the newcomer” – at first “blazed as brightly as the Sun” as it roamed across the sky, far outside the Newtonian bounds of its familiar modern-day orbit.

He proposed that Venus, in its travels, had wrought considerable havoc within the solar system, that its trajectory had brought it to a near-miss with Earth around 1500 BCE and that Venus had directly impacted Mars. This impact caused Mars, in turn, to leave its orbit and to become the catalyst for a second series of close encounters between Mars and the Earth.

The worst of these happened, according to Velikovsky, around 750 BCE. One serious consequence of this final interaction with Mars, according to Velikovsky, is that it affected the Earth’s orbital period, lengthening it from an ancient 360-day year to our familiar 365-day year, and ejecting Mars into its present orbit.

Several factors conspired together to help position Velikovsky’s book to become a top seller. The first of these was Velikovsky’s own personal reputation and long time association with high-profile projects and people, which together made him a difficult heretic to simply ignore outright, since Velikovsky already had a well-established reputation.

The second was that his theory of an historically recent birth for Venus directly contradicted modern planetary theory and scientific conceptions of proper planetary motion.
The third may have come out of the sheer astonishment on the part of traditional scientists that Velikovsky would presume to offer a theory that crossed the traditional boundaries of numerous academic disciplines, and move outside of his own field of expertise into another field entirely – namely astronomy – to make his case.

The fourth was that he deemed it appropriate to cite as evidence for this theory ancient textual references that, in the estimation of many astronomers of the day, rated somewhere alongside a child’s fairy-tale in scientific evidentiary value.

Moreover, this evidence – which was drawn from the fields of ancient history and archaeology – fell far outside of the ability of most astronomers to even attempt to evaluate, let alone refute.

With the help of some very effective advance publicity – including a condensation of the book that appeared in a popular magazine and advance copies of the book that were sent to several leading astronomers – the outrage of the astronomers was effectively stoked. Their professional outrage helped propel the book to the status of a runaway bestseller.

( the above scenario is partially true. the truth that velikovsky first tried to publish his book with a academic publisher, but he was censored. secondly he went to a regular publisher, Doubleday. this publishing house accepted his book but when a few editions were published the academic establishment forced double day to take back the book. finally it was published in paperback and then later in a hard copy in 1950 i. there are several books devoted to exposing the aggressive censorship used against velikovsky and I a first surmised this author is going back and censoring what he himself wrote. rahu)
The rising popularity of Velikovsky’s book turned the astronomic world on its head. The din of uproar against the heretic Velikovsky approached levels that had not been heard since the Catholic Church’s infamous persecution of Galileo in the mid-1600’s.

In retrospect, the outrage was understandable: In what had by 1950 become an increasingly Darwinian world, Velikovsky’s theory threatened to resurrect a kind of fire-and-brimstone religion that the scientific world had struggled for more than a century to supplant.( this is a obscure reference to the belief that earth is subject to cataclysmic changes .in fact virtual every part of the world shows scientific evidence of cataclysmic change. this scientific evidence is why Darwin was reject. darwins theory ,as he stated in his book, needed eon of unbroken change,his critics pointed out that this supposition simply was not correct. in fact Darwin theory only gain adherents when he out lived his critics... and of course with the yahwist propagandist making sure the belief in a deity was extinguished in our culture.rahu)

Likewise, by contradicting the view that all planets must be billions of years old, Velikovsky’s theory threatened to undermine the Uniformitarian views that provided the foundation for Darwinism itself. Darwin’s theory required a stable and unchanging universe to accommodate the imperceptibly slow processes of the evolution it proposed.

Several top astronomers wrote to MacMillan’s management urging the company to block publication of Velikovsky’s book. Dr. Harlow Shapley (then director of the Harvard Observatory) worked behind the scenes to organise colleges and universities in a boycott of MacMillan’s highly profitable textbook division, hoping to financially arm-twist them into dropping the book.

MacMillan – hoping to defuse the boycott without actually bowing to the demands of the astronomers – took the highly unusual step of transferring its lucrative publishing rights for a bestselling book to Doubleday, one of its competitors who had no stake in the sale of textbooks.

At the time of publication of Worlds in Collision, many aspects of Velikovsky’s theories were flatly characterised as purest nonsense by authorities within the astronomic world.

Later the truth would surface that some of Velikovsky’s harshest critics had never actually read his book prior to making their declarations, but had instead based their critique solely on pre-publication summaries of the book.

Certainly Velikovsky’s vision of a young, hot Venus ran counter to the conventional wisdom in 1950, which presumed that Venus had an Earth-like atmosphere and might ultimately prove to be colonisable.

The seemingly acrobatic requirements for the motions of Venus laid out by Velikovsky in his book – moving first like a comet but then somehow eventually coming to inhabit one of the most circular and regular orbits of all the planets – appeared to flatly contradict Newtonian laws of motion.

Carl Sagan pointed out that the great amount of energy required to eject a body the size of Venus from Jupiter would likely have vaporised large portions of Jupiter and left those areas intensely hot, even today.

Even Einstein, whose natural impulse was to be sympathetic to his friend and colleague, at first sided against Velikovsky, flatly discounting his suggestion that electromagnetic forces must play a significant role in planetary dynamics.( the newest theory about the universe is that it is base on electromagnetism and not gravity . velikovsky was ahead of his time.einstein before hos death was comiog round to velikovsky view and was rereading velikovskys book when he died)rahu

Velikovsky’s theory, when carefully considered, carries with it a number of logical eventualities or consequences that, if they were not all within the reach of scientists to prove or disprove experimentally in 1950, would surely become testable sometime in the near future.

For example, a geologically-recent birth for Venus would require the planet to be intensely hot. Likewise, it would imply that Venus exhibit a seemingly unevolved set of geological formations.

Furthermore, if Venus had roamed the solar system as a rogue astronomic body for centuries then we would expect to find certain anomalies in its orientation and rotation when compared to the other planets.(this data does exist, for instance venus is the only planet that rotates in the opposite direction of all other planets.. this article is a snow job rahu)

Surely we would eventually be able to detect if either Mars of Venus had ever suffered a direct impact with a planet-sized body. If Venus and Mars had made close approaches to the Earth in ancient times, we should be able to identify chemical, geological or magnetic signatures associated with those events. ( again the author is ignoring the facts that this evidence does exist...about 2-3 years ago nasa released a photo of a portion of the northern hemisphere of mars. there is a absolute flat plain existing for hundreds of mile. astronomers said this is evidence that mars was struck by a large planetary object as the photo clearly shows the surface of mars had been sheared away like a knife cutting a shallow portion of an apple. as I thought, this author is buckling under the establishment to negate the true nature of velikovskys work . this proves mars was hit by a planetsayr object. velikovsky had predicted that such evidence would be uncovered rahu)

Moreover, Velikovsky himself had provided a long list of his own “prognostications” – consequential observations that he felt must eventually show themselves to be true, if the facts were to uphold what he saw as the unmovable cornerstones of his theory.

Soon after publication of the book, certain of Velikovsky’s “prognostications” began to be affirmed, if not always for the precise reasons offered by Velikovsky. (what BS rahu)

For example, the controversial outlook Velikovsky held on the role of electromagnetism in the interaction of planetary bodies – the one that had been at first opposed by Einstein – was upheld by the incidental discovery of radio emissions from Jupiter and acceptance based on work by Van Allen of the existence of a significant magnetic field surrounding the Earth.

By the 1960’s, Velikovsky was considered a credible enough authority on questions of astronomy to be hired by a leading television network to consult and comment during NASA’s live Moon landings.

In 1974, a symposium of scientists (including Velikovsky) was held in San Francisco to debate Velikovsky’s theories that ended up pitting several leading critics against Velikovsky. The official “spin” coming out of that conference – and the impression left on the general public – was that Velikovsky’s theories had been finally and definitively disproved.

However since that time, as new evidence continues to emerge, there has been a persistent nagging tendency for new findings to – at least outwardly – appear to uphold many of Velikovsky’s “prognostications.”

In recent years when new discoveries are made that could potentially relate to the controversy, these findings are most often presented without official mention of Velikovsky. Instead, they are typically announced bundled with an accompanying new theory, whose net effect is to distance the find from Velikovsky’s controversial theories.

For example, when probes to Venus did, in fact, show the planet to be intensely hot – a key point that Velikovsky had cited as a crucial demonstration of the correctness of his theory – scientists completely sidestepped the issue by pre-emptively postulating a runaway greenhouse effect to explain the unexpectedly high temperature. ( the high temperature predicted by velikovsky,by itself should have been conclusive proof, but carl sagan brought up the hot house effect. the hot houde affect is pure speculation thought up to counter velikovsky correct prediction. the hot house affect has absolutely no scientific presence. to this day no scientist has ever given a method by which the hot house effect could be achieved.it is sumply a lie conceived to counter a truth. rahu)

When Venus was found to have far fewer impact craters than would be expected for a billions-year-old planet, astronomers again proposed that “unknown geologic forces” must have somehow caused a geologically-recent global resurfacing of Venus, thus wiping away evidence of the craters.

As far-fetched as some of Velikovsky’s proposals may seem at first blush – especially his often questionable musings on chemical interactions that he presumes to have occurred between the atmospheres of Venus, Mars and the Earth – there is a perspective from which we might profit by carefully considering certain aspects of his theory.

For example, his suggestion that a planet might be formed as a consequence of a large impact on a gas giant planet seems as reasonable as either of the two leading traditional theories of planetary creation – both of which are believed by some astronomers to suffer from serious (perhaps fatal) theoretic difficulties. ( put it this way, the theory of accretion of the planetary disc can not be fudge in any manner to predict the existence of the gas giants rahu

Likewise, it is already an accepted part of traditional astronomic theory that our own Moon was formed as the by-product of an impact. Surely it is not unreasonable to think that what can happen on a small scale in our solar system could also happen on a larger scale.

Some of Velikovsky’s critics say that it is unreasonable to think that the wandering orbit of Venus as a comet could have circularised for the planet Venus in such a short period – and yet it is well known there are some comets that have apparently achieved circular orbits around our Sun. ( what is not mentioned is that venus has 2 tails, as all comets do. one follows the orbit of venus and the other points away from the sun just as in all comets. the author omits this,though it is in his book. rahu)

Some theories suggest that a comet’s tail can provide the necessary drag to circularise its orbit. Others claim the tidal forces of gravity can cause the orbits to circularise.

The way Velikovsky’s argument is structured, there are a number of single-question fail-points attached to his scenario. For example, if it could be definitively shown that granite exists on Venus (a type of rock that takes millions of years to form) then much of Velikovsky’s theory would simply fall to the ground. ( granite was first said to have been detected but this was later retracted and to this day astronomers can not say what the surface of venus is made of,except that the surface is a single "plate" indicating that no geological process have occurred,and hence indicative of a early planet. rahu)

The same would be true if an archaeologist suddenly turned up an ancient document from prior to 1500 BCE that explicitly referred to Venus as a planet. Likewise, if explicit evidence could be produced for the existence of a 365-day year in ancient times, then one of Velikovsky’s key claims would be effectively rebutted.(again the author omits evidence he presents in his book. the evidence consist of a list of about 15 ancient cultures who changed there calendars from a 360 day calendar before about 600bc ,to a 365 day calendar after about 600 bc. this proves that the earths rotation was affected by a outside planetary body, changing the year from 360 days to our current 365 day years as velikovsky predicted rahu)

My purpose in writing my newest book The Velikovsky Heresies is to help bring Immanuel Velikovsky and the many still-unanswered questions he raised relating to Venus back into the consciousness of the reading public. My goal is to remind this audience that – notwithstanding the symposium held in 1974 – an open, ongoing controversy still exists relating to Velikovsky.

That controversy continues to be coloured by the disturbing suggestion of long-term, politically-motivated manipulation of scientific results. Another of my main goals is to update the Velikovsky controversy with the latest astronomic evidence relating to Venus, Mars and Jupiter. ( the author raises the specter of politically motivated censorship by noting that some of his research was taken from scientific websites .but the data that supported velikovsky was deleted after this author published his book, the guardians of dogma at work rahu )

Much of this new evidence is drawn from the wealth of data gathered by recent probes such as the European Space Agency’s Venus Express, and recent first-hand studies that have been conducted in relation to comets.

One of my original hopes – unfortunately not yet realised –was to pinpoint a single fact upon which the controversy could be said to turn – one essential, illusive bit of evidence that a person could point to as unquestionable proof that Velikovsky’s theory must either be largely correct or specifically and fatally flawed. ( this writer obviously has not read all dr velikovsky's books or he would see for one thing that the royal archive at tel el amarna contain cuneiform tablets which are written in akkaddian and that place positively Akhenaten in the 9th century not the 15th century bc. this writer like so many others can not come to grips that velikovsky works are correct rahu)

Instead, I believe I have brought new eyes and new evidence to bear on many of the critical questions and criticisms that shape the unique and enduring controversy fostered more than sixty years ago by Velikovsky’s Worlds In Collision.

Virtually all of Dr Immanuel Velikovsky’s heretical” theories have been verified by new discoveries.And his observation that the history of the middle east is offset by 500 -600 years, ideas that are proved by cuneiform tables and stone monuments, are stillignored. The science of archeology and the guardians of dogma as he phrased them, these censors still lie and hide the truths that he has uncovered 30 years after his death.what about the truths he discovered still has authors reneged on their own veracity under the threat of… the threat of what?
As I have already mentioned it is ironic that Dr velikovsky paved the way for Jewish scientist to have a platform to present their research after many centuries in the background. Yet he himself one odf the greatest scholars, not just Jewish scholars , of the last century is denigrated and lied about. This theories ridiculed because they can not be disprove and evidence of the truth is hidden away.
The answer ,I believe can be seen in his works dealing with the age of the book of kings and parts of the book of chronicles in the torah. It was Dr. Velikovsky that first pointed out the contradiction in the book of kings, and for that matter the separate stories that weave throughout the torah.
In my threat Yahweh and asherah ,I quote freely from Dt Velikovsky’s observations that several passages are simple wrong. The most obvious has to do with the death of king ahab. The first version that dr velikovsky, did not believe, said that king ahab was killed on the field of battle when the king of moab rebelled. The torah said that this fulfilled a prophecy of Isiah. But ehsecond version which follows says only that ahab was wounded and retreated from the field . which is correct? The answer lies in the Stella of mesha. Mesha was the king Moab and set in stone the record of his rebellion.the stella of mesha is written in Hebrew, which shows that Hebrew was not the exclusive language of the Israelites and it said specifically that he. king mesha rebelled in the middle ofthe reign of king Omni’s son( ahab). So history record that the first version of ahabs death is a fabrication. And ahab did not die in the manner that fulfilled isaih’s prophecy. But why would the Yahwist scribes lie. Very simply because the y we intent are establishing Yahweh as a omnipotent god. But this assertion again have been proven false by archeological evidence. As pottery shards have been found mentioning Yahweh and asherah.yahweh could not be the god on mt Sinai in 1500 bc and then be a consort to the mother goddess asherah in the 9th century.
This is why the the yahwist propagandist have falsified the torah and the history of the middle east by offsetting the history by 5-6 hundred years.
Ankhenaten ruled at the time of Ahab. ankhenaten has been considered the first monotheist by some, the yahwist propagandist had to separate Egyptian history from jewish history is that they could claim that Yahweh was the first monotheistic god. when in fact it more than likely that the concept of monotheism was transferred to the Hebrews by Akhenaten because both Judea and Samaria were vassal kings to akhenaten.

So to enshrine Yahweh as a nomnipotent god whereas he was nothing more that a cult god at best.
640
rahu

675

the greek myth of Oedipus concerns a king of thebes who murdered his father and wed his mother, there by bring down a terrible fate to his city thebes and himself.there are numerous variations to the greek myth given by different authors but they agree on most points except the ending.

greek thebes was ancient city in central Greece that was said to have been inhabited continuously for 5000 years. it was called the 7 gated thebes because of 7 formidable gates that opened into the city.

the ancient thebes in Egypt which was capital fo Egypt at one point was called the 100 gated thebes. as thebes had been a religious center for thousands of years,it was composed of thousands of temples. thebes did not have a 100 gates rather the temple doors were packed togtehr froming a walled city and the doors of the temples were said to number in the 100's,hence the 100 gated thebes.

in the greek myth king Laius and queen jocastas had a son. the augur's said that he would kill his father and marry his mother, so a servant took Oedipus to a distant mountainside to be abandoned to the elements. but the servant gave Oedipus to a shepherd who raised Oedipus. the greek myth says that Oedipus legs had been bound the result which was his legs were in some way deformed, hence his name,oedipus which meads swollen foot in greek.

in Akhenaten's royal city, Akhetaten), among the royal tombs was found a royal tomb for a servant, this was unheard of. a royal tomb for a servant has never been found again or before. archeologists could only surmise that the servant had performed some action that saved Akhenaten's life when he was an infant. in addition, sculptures and stella with ankhenatens image always show him with abnormally ,grotesquely large or engorged thighs. Egyptologists have tried to identify some medical issue with these portraits of the king.but nothing is certain. it turns out than in greek the word for foot is also used for leg. so Akhenaten could be called swollen foot as Oedipus was.

in the Oedipus myth, Oedipus is on his way to thebes but a female sphinx guards the way. he is force to answer a riddle or be killed. the riddle being what walks on 4 legs in youth,then walks on 2 legs and then walks on 3 legs. Oedipus anserws correctly, man an infant crawls on all fours, a man walks on two legs and an old man walks with a cane, 3 legs. the sphinx then caste herself off the cliff to her death. there are several aspects that do not add up in this scene. the first is that the sphinx not a greek creation. there were no examples of greek sphinx among there myths. secondly it seems illogical that the sphinx would kill her self for such a reason.

in ancient Egypt,the sphinx is a common symbol but the sphinx was always a male. there is no record of female sphinx' until the 18th dynasty, the dynasty of ankhenaten. in fact the first female sphinx ever found had the face of Akhenaten's mother. and this female sphinx was a killer of men. also near the entrance to the valley of kings where the royal Egyptian tombs are found. archeologist found the shattered remains of a sphinx that had apparently been cast down from the high cliff surrounding the valley of kings.

these may seem only curiosities but these coincidence continue.

Oedipus returned to thebes in manhood.he had been away since a baby.
this leads to an interesting archeological fact that I had never been taught of ever read about. there is no mention of ankhenaten in the royal annals of his father ,amenhotep the 111, what so ever ,before Amenhotep 111 died. there is not mention or pictures of ankhenaten as a child his name is never brought up until he ascended the throne after his father death. the cuneiform archives make this clear because a vassal king upon writing to ankhenaten about this ascension to the throne says" ask your mother the great tiy, and she will tell you how well I got along with your father. so the question is were was ankhenaten in all those years and why was he never mentioned?
dr velikovsky was of the mind that maybe ahkenaten was raised in the kingdom of mittani which provides another clue to the similarities between Oedipus and ankenaten, which I will bring up later on.

the parallel with Oedipus is self evident.

the greek myth of Oedipus concerns a king of thebes who murdered his father and wed his mother, there by bring down a terrible fate to his city thebes and himself.there are numerous variations to the greek myth given by different authors but they agree on most points except the ending.

greek thebes was ancient city in central Greece that was said to have been inhabited continuously for 5000 years. it was called the 7 gated thebes because of 7 formidable gates that opened into the city.

the ancient thebes in Egypt which was capital fo Egypt at one point was called the 100 gated thebes. as thebes had been a religious center for thousands of years,it was composed of thousands of temples. thebes did not have a 100 gates rather the temple doors were packed togtehr froming a walled city and the doors of the temples were said to number in the 100's,hence the 100 gated thebes.

in the greek myth king Laius and queen jocastas had a son. the augur's said that he would kill his father and marry his mother, so a servant took Oedipus to a distant mountainside to be abandoned to the elements. but the servant gave Oedipus to a shepherd who raised Oedipus. the greek myth says that Oedipus legs had been bound the result which was his legs were in some way deformed, hence his name,oedipus which meads swollen foot in greek.

in Akhenaten's royal city, Akhetaten), among the royal tombs was found a royal tomb for a servant, this was unheard of. a royal tomb for a servant has never been found again or before. archeologists could only surmise that the servant had performed some action that saved Akhenaten's life when he was an infant. in addition, sculptures and stella with ankhenatens image always show him with abnormally ,grotesquely large or engorged thighs. Egyptologists have tried to identify some medical issue with these portraits of the king.but nothing is certain. it turns out than in greek the word for foot is also used for leg. so Akhenaten could be called swollen foot as Oedipus was.

in the Oedipus myth, Oedipus is on his way to thebes but a female sphinx guards the way. he is force to answer a riddle or be killed. the riddle being what walks on 4 legs in youth,then walks on 2 legs and then walks on 3 legs. Oedipus anserws correctly, man an infant crawls on all fours, a man walks on two legs and an old man walks with a cane, 3 legs. the sphinx then caste herself off the cliff to her death. there are several aspects that do not add up in this scene. the first is that the sphinx not a greek creation. there were no examples of greek sphinx among there myths. secondly it seems illogical that the sphinx would kill her self for such a reason.

in ancient Egypt,the sphinx is a common symbol but the sphinx was always a male. there is no record of female sphinx' until the 18th dynasty, the dynasty of ankhenaten. in fact the first female sphinx ever found had the face of Akhenaten's mother. and this female sphinx was a killer of men. also near the entrance to the valley of kings where the royal Egyptian tombs are found. archeologist found the shattered remains of a sphinx that had apparently been cast down from the high cliff surrounding the valley of kings.

these may seem only curiosities but these coincidence continue.

Oedipus returned to thebes in manhood.he had been away since a baby.
this leads to an interesting archeological fact that I had never been taught of ever read about. there is no mention of ankhenaten in the royal annals of his father ,amenhotep the 111, what so ever ,before Amenhotep 111 died. there is not mention or pictures of ankhenaten as a child his name is never brought up until he ascended the throne after his father death. the cuneiform archives make this clear because a vassal king upon writing to ankhenaten about this ascension to the throne says" ask your mother the great tiy, and she will tell you how well I got along with your father. so the question is were was ankhenaten in all those years and why was he never mentioned?
dr velikovsky was of the mind that maybe ahkenaten was raised in the kingdom of mittani which provides another clue to the similarities between Oedipus and ankenaten, which I will bring up later on.

the parallel with Oedipus is self evident.
The myth of Oedipus is famous because he killed his father and married his mother.
What evidence exit that supports supposition in ankhenaten’s life?
Oedipus was said to have killed his father on the road to thebes not realizing this was his father .
There is no evidence that Akhenaten physically killed his father as Akhenaten arrived after his father’s death. But ankhenaten did spiritually kill his father.
In Egyptian theology, a man’s soul/ka would have eternal life as long as someone said his name each day or if his name was enscribedsomewhere. This is why the Kings would create a shrine and priesthood whose sole function was to sing hymns to the king everyday forever.
When Akhenaten changed his nane to Akhenaten from Amenhotep the 111, he had the temples destroyed of his father and had all hieroglyphic inscriptions of his father’s named chiseled out or otherwise destroyed any mention of him. So by doing this ,the killed his father’s soul.
Oedipus infamously married his mother and became king of thebes
The evidence for the correlations to Akhenaten’s life at this point seems hopeless because most of us recognize the famous bust of the beautiful neferiti who was ankhenatens wife. But the archeological evidence is much more complicated that this simple scenario seems.
First off, ankhenatenwas raised in some foreign country, most likely the kingdom of mititanni . to this day archeologist are not clear were mititanni was but some believe in was near modern day armenia.
Dr velikovsky places mititanni in the areas of ancient Persia and the medes. Thereby Akhenaten was raised under the priesthood of the magi. Many know that the magic were the priest caste of the ancient Persians and medes, but the magi were also the preist class of all Indo-European countries and cultures besides the Persians .
The magi had a religious tenet that the most exalted and sacred form of sexual union was between parents and children and uterine siblings. Incest was sacred to the magi.
So Akhenaten easily could have had this religious belief. But the archeological record is much clearer on this theme.
A few years before the fall of the 18th dynasty, neferiti lost face at court and retreated to a walled gate in the northern part of the city of ankhetaten, the royal city of Akhenaten at what is now called tel el armarna.she was replaced by queen tiye, who was ankhenatens mother, and who took over as queen in the courts.
It is known that ankhenaten had 4 daughters as 4 daughters as numerous picture and stome stelli exist showing the happy family. One daughter was known to have died early and so many pictures of the family with 3 daughters exist.In fact more picture of ankhenatens family exist that all the picture of English royal families from the entirety English history.
But there is one more daughter that is attributed to ankhenaten. This was beketaten. The problem was beketaten was always associated with queen tiye. The are stelli which show ankhenaten,queen tye and beketaten all going into to their separate royal “chapels” . so beketaten was clearly of royal blood, but nowhere in this scene do you find neferiti or the other 3 daughters. Finally archeologists had to concede that beketaten was likely queen tiye’s daughter not Nefertiti’s .as such it was decided that she was the child of Amenhotep11 and queen tiye who was conceived before Amenhotep’s death. But the archeologist ignored one glaring archeological fact.
Beketaten was smaller than the other daughters of ankhenaten and it was calculated that she was 6-7 years old. But Amenhotep died 11 years before ,so it is obviously impossible for Amenhotep to have been the father of beketaten. But archeologist ignored this fact while conceding that beketaten was the daughter of queen tiye. But more archeological remains were uncovered that further proves that beketaten was Akhenaten’s daughter and that Akhenaten was married to his mother.
This evidence is in the form of the only tomb that was ever used in ankhetaten. The tomb belonged to a vizier and his wife, as I recall.as according to religious observances the portcullis of entrance to the tomb had a depiction of the reigning king and queen stretching over the gate holding hands forming a arch. the problem is that though the king was Akhenaten the queen portrayed was queen tiye, not neferiti.nefertiti was in the background of Akhenaten along with their 3 daughters and on the opposite side was beketaten behind her mother.
Well archeologist finally tried to solve this enigma by saying that it was not Akhenaten being portrayed but his father Amenhotep. this attempt to explain the pictures did not stand up because the hieroglyphic inscriptions clearly identified Akhenaten. So as archeologist do when their dogma does not match the archeological evidence at hand…. They simply ignored this discrepancy to this day.
So clearly Akhenaten was married to his mother just as Oedipus was married to his mother queen jocaste.
The correlations between Oedipus and Akhenaten are even more similar in the aftermath of the marriage of these kings,one mythical ,one historical, to their respective queen/mothers.
When I first started reading this book I was quite skeptical even though I am a devotee of velikovsky. But as the archeological evidence of the aftermath of the marriage of ankhenaten and queen tiye, I can only say I was and still am amazed how dr Immanuel velikovsky had the genius to see the truth, hidden in mythology and history.
I will post the remaining archeological evidence shortly.
the myth of Oedipus has several variations especially at the end.
After reigning and having 4 children with hjocastsa, a plague descended on thebes and while searching the cause of the plague mit was discovered that Oedipus ahd killed his father and married his mother. Most ariations have Jocasta hanging herself and Oedipus blinding himself. Some say antigone followed her father into exile, some say Oedipus died in colonus, some same Oedipus returned as reigned again.
The variation that reflects the similarities of Akhenaten’s destiny has Akhenaten’s two sons Eteocles and Polynices. After the banishment of Oedipus, they agree to share the kingship, each reigning a years and then the other reigning a years and so on. But after one years Eteocles refused to give up the kingship and so recruited followers and rage war on Eteocles . in the ensuing war, both brothers were killed and jocasta’s brother creon took the throne. He declared Eteocles a outlaw and dereed that Eteocles body should receive no burial rituals and show be left in the dust to be eaten by the dogs. Furthermore anyone who disobeyed this edict would be put to death.
But Antigone so loved her brother Eteocles, that she took the body and secretly buried it in a cave. When king creon discovered her actions, since he could not kill a royal, instead had her buried alive in a shallow room quarried from the ground.
The priest Tiresias though said that creon would bring the wrath of the gods down on thebes for breaking the holy laws of internment. So creon relented and allowed the original burial to proceed. But when he went to release Antigone from her confinement, he found that she had hanged herself.
This scenario is incredibly similar to what the archeological record shows after Akhenaten’s reign ended. And in the end ,the mythology of Oedipus explains archeological enigmas that establishment archeologist have been unable to adequately explain to this day, though the charlatan hawass has fabricated explanations to this inexplicable archeological evidence.
This evidence begins with the tomb KV55,KV designating the Valley of Kings tomb55.the valley of kings is where the kings and family of thebes were buried.
When first accidentally discovered the entrance to kv55 was found to have the original Anubis seals of the mortuary priesthood of the valley of kings ,which lead to the belief that ths was a unplundered tomb. But as the debris was cleared away an ,earlier anubis seal was found broken, so it was apparent the tomb had been entered but resealed. After opening the gate, the archeologist found a corridor that was filled in with debris. I narrow tunnel on the top had been cleared and several wooden doors with gilden gold were found in the narrow passage way. Upon gaining access, they found a rough hewn chamber with no pained walls or murals.at first it was doubted this was a tomb at all because of the crude condition. But littered about were burial object of different sorts. But some these objects had had the identity of the owners removed. Some objects were marked by Tutankhaten ,who later changed his numen to Tutankhamun (king tut).there were objects that seem to be associated with the enigmatic king Smenkhare . The largest object as a gold gilded shrine, one of whose side panels was the one found at the entrance to the tomb. The shrine belonged to queen tiye and had collapsed on one side and partially spilled a outer coffin that was attributed to the queen but he inner coffins were not of queen tiye and the final coffin was thought to be Akhenaten’s coffin. But even this was not clear because the royal cartouche had been chiseled. It was determined to be the coffin of Akhenaten because the area of erasure was followed byt eh word, living in truth. This epithet was used by ankhenaten and was unique in all Egyptian history. So the archeologist were baffled by this series of discoveries.in 2010 the zahi hawaas proclaimed this as ankhenaten. Hawass is a profession self serving lying fraud who narrowly escape prison for missing artifact and the original observations showed a man of nor more than 25 and then later pathologist moved this down to 20. The skull did not have the characteristics that all of Akhenaten sculptures were noted for.hawass decided the mummy was a man of 35 and regardless of no evidence named this Akhenaten. one can surmise I have no respect hawaas for many reasons. He has hidden and lied about many different things and this identification of Akhenaten was only to proclaim he was the discoverer of the mummy of the great heretic king.
So this tomb was the most enigmatic every found.one very interesting object was found. Inder the heel of the mummy was a love poem, again something that had never occurred before.it was written on gold foil, but the authors name had been erased.
I wished I had a copy of this poem, written to a deceased loved one. It was haunting even after 3000 years. the only partial verse I remember is “…. Call to me and I will answer you forever”

The other unexplained archeological discovery that pertains to this comparison is a rough hewn,small square pit or room that was found equitant fro king tuts tomb and kv55. This “pit was first said to be a trash pit….. but not trash pit had ever been found in the sacred burial valley. then 6 wooden dishes and cups were found, which was explained as the burial meal from king tut. But this was untenable because a royal dinner would have had golden plates and utensils. So the pit became a forgotten item because no record of the excavation of the [it existed. But after ww11, a friend of dr velikovsky send him the complete inventory of the”pit” the original Egyptologist had not bothered to publish . when the man died,this inventory was ignored among his papers. Though when it was discovered it caused a small uproar because it was to other researchers is was inconceivable that this data was not published.
The inventory showed several dozen single portion vessels , marked barley, roast goose etc…single portions….then in a water jug was found the remains of many more broken food vessels, other water jugs were found that showed they had contained water but that the water evaporated over time leaving residue rings on the inside of these jugs.
In addition two scarves were found, but the linen was of the highest quality, better that the linen used on king tuts mummy. These scarves show the belonged to a person of high nobility…….in a trash pit ?one was intact but the other had been folded over and used to clean with as the edge was frayed and worn.
Most amazing was a length of linen cloth ,again of the highest quality, it was about 4 feet long by 2 feet wide. a 2 inch swath of material had been torn form one edge.
but most interesting was the hieroglyph of smenkare was sew into the fabric with white thread so that it could not be see on first glance, but looking at an angle the raised stitching was clearly legible ..
so the truth of kv55 seems to be that mimicked in the myth of oedipus.
smenkhare and his queen./ sister meritaten are known to have reigned a short time .
and like eteocles and polyneices, the two kings must have fought for succession to the throne.historically king tut reigned on for about 12 years.but one brother was interred in a "cave" and the other king tut was given a royal burial.
it seems smenkhare's tomb was discovered and looting had begun before it was resealed. This is exactly the scenario in the Oedipus myth. and when the new king Ay when to release meritaten form her pit, she had already hung herself with the swath of cloth she ripped from her linen "shawl". Thre parallels of the oedipus myth are clear.
a few other minor similarities also exist. creon became king and was jocastas brother.king ay was the brother of queen tiye and he became king after king tuts death by marrying king tuts widow ankhesaten .another variation of the odipus myth said that king creon was banished becasue he brought unnatural practices to thebes. one theory was that this related to homosexual love. but this seems out of place in Thebes and Greece in general because homosexual love and pedophilia were part of a patricians rights. the Greeks had not strictures against homosexuality. so why would creon be banished? but in Egypt there was religious prejudice against homosexuality. the trivia that dr velikovsky noted was that Akhenaten’s father Amenhotep 11, was in later sculptures was shown wearing clothes that were characteristic of women’s clothing and there are no other examples of kings wearing female clothing is all of Egyptian history. Though there are instance of queens who were pictured in mens attire.
another minor similarity is that the myth says that Oedipus was blind, dr velikovsky found references in the Amarna tablets were a vassal king mentioned that though Akhenaten "could not see" the dangers of the approaching barbarians were real. The term for could not see" was taken as to mean Akhenaten was not paying attention to the pleas of the vassals. but dr velikovsky found that the term was also used to denote a certain ocular aliment that caused blindness. these are just interesting similarities.
Another minor legend was written by the Greeks. the said a unnamed Egyptian king had live in the swamps(the deltas) but that he returned to his city that had the same name as the king.he one must recall that Akhenaten’s royal city at tel el amarna was called ankhetaten, a name so similar that it was confused with Akhenaten’s name by archeologist at times.

as establishment timelines place Akhenaten in the 15th century bc and the myth of Oedipus arouse somewhere in5th or 6th century bc. it would seem unlikely tht the to accounts could be of the same event. but as the amarna cuneiform tablets prove Akhenaten reigned at the time of ahab,approximately 8th or ninth centuries bc
and therefore th elegend of the heretic king could have easily still be known to the greek historians .

i added this post about ankhenaten and oedipus to show that though the yahwist progandist to this day slander and condemn dr velikovsky, his theories always explain seemingly inexpicable historical periods and archeological evidence as well as astromioicasl,geological anonomlies thast science ignores in there attempt to sactify science in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

in todays world the lies of science for politcal reasons is well established. fake news is used to hide real scientifc truths.... and it has been happening for many many
years.
rahu