Criticisms of Catastrophism

Traditionally, talk.origins has been the principal USENET news group hosting discussions of catastrophism. Thus you will find criticisms of catastrophist positions (primarily those of Velikovsky and the Saturnists) at the talk.origins archive maintained by Brett Vickers. The USENET news group alt.catastrophism, not available at all sites, was originally intended to be a focal point for discussions of historical catastrophism. However, it receives very few messages anymore as most discussions of catastrophism have moved to private mailing lists.

While the following critics primarily target Velikovskian-style catastrophism, many of their arguments also apply to other types of astronomical catastrophism. Some of these critics are not against catastrophism in general, just specific types of catastrophism.

Philip R. "Pib" Burns

Here are some messages which I posted to the USENET news group talk.origins over the years. These messages contain responses to catastrophists who subscribe to the Saturnist and Velikovskian viewpoints.

• Response to Ev Cochrane on Clube and Napier.
• Response to Ev Cochrane on how much do Clube and Napier owe Velikovsky?
• Response to Ev Cochrane on the existence of prehistoric lunar calendars.
• Response to Ted Holden's comments on Clube and Napier vs. the Saturnist position.
• Response to Ted Holden's comments on Sauropods.
• Response to Ted Holden's question about Water on Mars
• Woolly Mammoths: Evidence of Catastrophe? from the talk.origins archive offers a collation of messages by myself and Sue Bishop about whether mammoth remains support some of the more unorthodox catastrophist positions.

Clark Chapman

• A preliminary version of Clark Chapman's review of Duncan Steel's book Rogue Asteroids and Doomsday Comets includes criticisms of Clube et al's coherent catastrophism. The final version of the review appeared in the journal Meteoritics and Planetary Science, v.31 (1996), pp. 313-314.

Leroy Ellenberger

• An Antidote To Velikovskian Delusions by Leroy Ellenberger was originally published in Skeptic magazine. Ellenberger was a supporter of Velikovsky's positions for a number of years, but later decided that Velikovsky was mistaken. In this article, Ellenberger discusses why he believes the ideas of Velikovsky as well as those of the Saturnists are untenable. Ellenberger suggests that Clube and Napier, among others, offer a more credible approach to Holocene catastrophism.

Bob Forrest

• Worlds in collision by Bob Forrest criticizes the way Velikovsky used his sources.

Paul Heinrich

• The Wild Side of Geoarchaeology offers rebuttals to some of the claims advanced in books such as Fingerprints Of The Gods and programs such as Mysterious Origins of Man. Heinrich discusses the crustal shifting hypothesis of Charles Hapgood, the death of the mammoths, ice cores, old maps, Atlantis, and much more.

Sean Mewhinney

• El-Arish Revisited discusses the inscription, found on a Ptolemaic shrine at el-Arish, which Velikovsky suggested was an Egyptian account of the Exodus. Mewhinney discusses Velikovsky's interpretation and critical reaction to it. Mewhinney believes (correctly, in my opinion) that the text has nothing to do with the Exodus.
• Minds in Ablation summarizes why Sean Mewhinney believes the physical evidence provided by paleoclimatic data, especially ice cores, demonstrates that global catastrophes of the type envisioned by Immanuel Velikovsky and others "could not have happened within the past many thousands of years," and refutes the defense of Velikovsky's scenario attempted by Charles Ginenthal in his Ice Core Evidence. Mr. Ginenthal's reply to portions of Minds in Ablation appears at Minds in Denial.
• Saturn and The Flood discusses how evidence from ice cores contradicts Velikovsky's idea of a Holocene Saturnian catastrophe. Velikovsky suggested a "nova-like" disruption of Saturn caused the Biblical Deluge.
• Tree Rings discusses annual growth rings of trees and how these fail to match the pattern expected if Velikovsky's catastrophes had occurred. Includes graphs of tree ring oscillations from 900 to 500 B.C.
• Uses of Pollen Analysis discusses how pollen analysis provides a means to establish the relative importance of each type of plant in the plant community over time. This provides a measure of climatic change. Pollen analysis results from the Holocene contradict the climatic patterns expected if Velikovskian catastrophes had occurred.

David Morrison

• David Morrison's reviews of recent books and articles on the impact hazard includes criticisms of Clube/Napier/Asher/Steel's coherent catastrophism.

Gunnar Ries

• Pseudoscience by Gunnar Ries comments on how Velikovsky and his followers misquote and misunderstand their sources. Also offers a message board for discussing if Velikovsky was right or wrong.

Tim Thompson

• Is the Planet Venus Young? by Tim Thompson refutes the Velikovskian position that the planet Venus is a newcomer (as in a few thousand years) to its current orbit in the inner solar system.
• Timothy J. Thompson's On the "Electric Sun" Hypothesis criticizes arguments advanced by proponents of the "Electric Sun" hypothesis against the standard solar model.
• Timothy J. Thompson's FAQs offers his critiques of unorthodox scientific ideas held by creationists and some catastrophists.
• Thompson Responds to Thornhill critiques the "electric star" hypothesis as espoused by Walt Thornhill and others working in the Velikovskian tradition.

Wayne Throop

• Wayne Throop offers some criticisms of Velikovskian catastrophism and Saturnism.

Back to catastrophism.
Back to my interests.
Back to my home page.

Last modified by pib on July 6, 2003.