To those so skeptical about anything and everything that Velikovsky speculated on, I'd be careful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. It's unfortunate that when he was supposed to have a chance to layout the supporting evidence he had amassed for his theories at a debate with Carl Sagan back in 1978, he was then ganged up on and unethically shot down in a show of power by Sagan and mainstream academia, not given a fair debate. Prior to it, Sagan was able to manipulate and convince Velikovsy, in his old age, to allow Sagan to gather together a panel for Velikovsky's side in addition to his own, rather than, allow Velikovsky to keep his own panel of supporters to aid him in his defense. Makes me wonder what Sagan had to fear and if indeed there was some legitimate claims Velikovsky had, else why do what he did to gang up, humiliate, and even vilify Velikovsky the way he did in 1978. I think Sagan felt like he had something to lose in that debate and took unethical measures to ensure he had all the advantage he could. (Side note: It's also interesting that Sagan went on to write his novel
Contact while he was terminally ill, making me wonder if he wasn't at that stage in his life, hoping there was some grander purpose and meaning to life. If I remember right, during this same time of his later life, he grew quite remorseful with the way he had treated Velikovsky, but the damage had already been done.)
Moreover, it's interesting to me that a bit about Velikovsky is still left in print in the Old Testament Institute Student Manual as follows:
Although the majority of geologists, astronomers, and other scientists believe that even this long period is not adequate to explain the physical evidence found in the earth, there are a small number of reputable scholars who disagree. These claim that the geologic clocks are misinterpreted and that tremendous catastrophes in the earth’s history speeded up the processes that normally may take thousands of years. They cite evidence supporting the idea that thirteen thousand years is not an unrealistic time period. Immanuel Velikovsky, for example, wrote three books amassing evidence that worldwide catastrophic upheavals have occurred in recent history, and he argued against uniformitarianism, the idea that the natural processes in evidence now have always prevailed at the same approximate rate of uniformity. These books are Worlds in Collision, Ages in Chaos, and Earth in Upheaval. Two Latter-day Saint scientists, Melvin A. Cook and M. Garfield Cook, have also advocated this theory in their book Science and Mormonism. A short summary of the Cooks’ approach can be found in Paul Cracroft’s article “How Old Is the Earth?” (Improvement Era, Oct. 1964, pp. 827–30, 852).
Full context here:
https://www.lds.org/manual/old-testamen ... n?lang=eng
Now, this isn't to say that Velikovsky got everything right, nor does it say that his theories are the only ones that should be considered, but the fact that his theories, or at least some aspects, are still considered to be plausible enough to remain in a CES manual approved for student study and curriculum by the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve is all the more reason for me to stay open minded to what the Thunderbolts Project has put forward.
For many of the EU proponents to not have much, if anything, peer reviewed isn't cause for outright dismissal of them either, in my opinon. What would mainstream proponents have to gain by corroborating any data and evidence put forward to them that would completely take the carpet out from the mainstream cosmological model that they've established their entire careers upon? It would seem to me that the peer review process, while good in original intent, now days, has the unintentional effect of only corroborating that which advances the mainstream model and thus adds to their own credibility. That and there is so much funding that has been driven into the mainstream model now that it would make all of its proponents look foolish and non-credible if they were to corroborate anything that fundamentally opposed their mainstream model, and they themselves would likely lose funding and grants for their own pet projects as a result only to see that funding go to others already involved in experiments and projects established to survey evidence for alternative theories, such as the EU.
In defense of the mainstream model proponents however, it is my understanding (I'm no physics major) that all the successful interplanetary space probes, rockets, moon landings, satellite launches, space shuttle missions, etc...have succeeded by virtue of mathematical formulas and predictions rooted in Newton and Einstein. All that was controlled for the predicted effects of gravity, was it not?
So with all that said, I do try to remain objective with both theories and models, the casual observer that I am at this point. From all that I've read up on and watched and listened to from Thunderbolts Project and others exploring and researching EU related fields over the years, there is much to the still developing EU model that makes a whole lot more sense to me thus far than much of what is now virtually settled "fact" in the mainstream model that features the Big Bang, dark matter, dark energy, anti-matter and black holes. Much of that seems to fly in the face of LDS theology and what Joseph Smith taught by revelation. For example, it is said that black holes are so dark and dense that not even light can escape them. This is contrary to what we are taught in scripture about darkness not being able to comprehend (i.e. swallow up) light and that light
always dispels darkness. It's ironic that so many mainstream astronomers and astro-physicists who are atheists will label those who are religious as absurd for believing in an deity that they are unable to directly measure and observe, but then they themselves advocate dark matter and dark energy, which also requires a belief in something they cannot directly observe, even an act of faith, lest their cosmological model fall apart. Then there is Big Bang. Joseph Smith taught that matter is eternal and cannot be created nor destroyed, only organized and re-organized. This contradicts the Big Bang concept whereby all known matter in our Universe exploded forth from a spontaneous event in empty space whereby no matter existed in that space prior to that. Or at least that's how I understand the Big Bang.
Then you have the drawing from Philo Dibble, a bodyguard of Joseph Smith...If there's any truth to the planetary configuration in that, it certainly harmonizes much better with what's been proposed by guys like Velikovsky and I think further revised by David Talbott. That is an ancient planetary configuration featuring Saturn, Venus, and Mars in closer proximity to the earth, all sharing a polar axis configuration that was once stable (the 'Golden Age') prior to something triggering it all to become unstable, creating both beautiful and catastrophic and destructive electrical arcs and plasma discharges in the process. This then provides plausible support for much of the fantastic geological features found across the Earth's service and even more dramatically across Mars' surface as being largely sculpted via catastrophism (catastrophic series of events in relatively short period of time) versus uniformitarianism (a rather peaceful, subtle, and gradual series of events spread out over billions upon billions of years). It is convincingly supported by a vast array of ancient mythology, symbols, etc around the world that all resonate with each other in their abstracts and archetypes.
Then think of the origins of Theater. Thea=Theo, as in Theology, a system of study and beliefs concerning God(s)/deity. That is to say, the first acts of theater, which took place in Greece in and around Athens, were portrayals, re-enactments, story-telling of that which was once witnessed in the heavens, the skies, where the God(s) once dwelt and interacted with the inhabitants of earth.
Speaking of inhabitants of earth, it is well known among the medical and biological community that life here on earth is dependent on electrical impulses that keep our brain and nervous system running that then keeps our heart and cellular processes going. I also think about Nephi in the Book of Mormon being prompted to extend out his hand to "shock" his brothers at one point while constructing the ship. If it's electricity that quite literally provides the spark of life, as well as being something that can reprove us and even take away life, I think it's fair to say God may indeed govern life on earth via electricity.
Also consider how it is electricity that powers so much of our modern technology that makes it possible for us to communicate the way we can, power the computers and other devices we use, give us light the way it does, and so on. Even before we relied on DC/AC electricity to power our lights, we had fire (torches, candles, oil lamps, etc), which is plasma, which contains ionized atoms spinning around so hard that electrons are able to give off energy as visible light, all responsive to electro-magnetic fields. The sun is one big ball of plasma, with discharges appearing to follow a path of electro-magnetic fields, and gives off light illuminating all the other objects within our solar system. So I would reason that all light has or is influenced by electrical forces and properties. Thus, I don't think it would be unreasonable to speculate that even the light of Christ, which is supposedly the source of all light, is electrical in nature as well. That may go back to the spark of life, even electricity, which we all have inside of us, powering our nervous system.
And if electricity can be the key force by which God could govern life on earth, why couldn't it be a key force by which he organized and governs our solar system, our galaxy, and any other galaxy he's organized out there? Indeed, maybe the Priesthood itself is a form of refined electrical power that can only be operated upon standards of worthiness and in harmony with God's will? I don't know...all speculation at this point, of course.
Anyway, getting back onto the galactic level, there is also the "Grand Sign" prophecy concerning the second coming whereby Joseph Smith declared:
“Judah must return, Jerusalem must be rebuilt, and the temple, and water come out from under the temple, and the waters of the Dead Sea be healed. It will take some time to rebuild the walls of the city and the temple, etc.; and all this must be done before the Son of Man will make His appearance. There will be wars and rumors of wars, signs in the heavens above and on the earth beneath, the sun turned into darkness and the moon to blood, earthquakes in divers places, the seas heaving beyond their bounds; then will appear one grand sign of the Son of Man in heaven. But what will the world do? They will say it is a planet, a comet, etc. But the Son of Man will come as the sign of the coming of the Son of Man, which will be as the light of the morning cometh out of the east.
So, if there were indeed a planetary configuration and alignment like unto that which is alleged to have existed both by the Philo Dibble document and then Immanuel Velikovsky, and more recently David Talbott and other EU/Thunderbolts Project team members and supporters, then it makes all the sense in the world to me that a restoration of
ALL THINGS could include some day a restoration of this configuration, perhaps in part first before a fullness of it. This would likely go hand in hand with the "Grand Sign", with that Grand Sign not only being a catalyst for the coming of the Son of Man, but also a restoration of such an ancient planetary alignment.
This all makes the other comet recently discovered, not the one reported on in the OP, but C/2017 K2 PANSTARRS (K2), which is the one currently out in the neighborhood of Uranus, and will reach it's closest proximity to the Sun just over 4 more years in 2022
just beyond the orbit of Mars, all the more interesting to me. Given just how bright it already is with how far away it still is from the Sun, it's more favorable for the EU's theory about it's glow at such a distance from the sun than for the conventional, standard, mainstream view of comet behavior. Even
IF the mainstream belief about comets were to hold out as being more truthful than EU theory, this K2 comet would still fascinate me, and makes me question if it won't play a role in the fulfillment of the "Grand Sign" prophecy.