Category
😹
FunTranscript
00:00 How many times have you heard the world's going to end?
00:03 And how many times did it actually happen?
00:05 Often, but never.
00:06 However, delve back into ancient history, and there are countless claims and theories
00:11 on when the worst really did nearly unfold, long before we were all here.
00:16 This is Unveiled, and today we're taking a closer look at how Earth was allegedly almost
00:21 destroyed 3,500 years ago.
00:25 Do you need the big questions answered?
00:27 Are you constantly curious?
00:28 Then why not subscribe to Unveiled for more clips like this one?
00:31 And ring the bell for more thought-provoking content!
00:36 From some perspectives, 3,500 years is a long time.
00:40 Since 1500 BCE, whole civilizations have risen and fallen.
00:44 Whole religions have been created, become entrenched, and sometimes disappeared.
00:48 Many, many billions of people have been born, lived, and died over that period.
00:53 Discoveries have been made, technologies have been created and lost.
00:57 And yet, when set against the history of the Earth in total, 3,500 years is very, very
01:01 little.
01:02 On the timeline of this planet, it's the tiniest slither of a fraction right at the
01:06 end, so today's parameters can be viewed in one of two ways.
01:11 But nevertheless, for one alternate theorist in particular, we're actually extremely
01:15 lucky to have seen the last 3,500 years at all.
01:18 In 1950, the Russian-American writer Immanuel Velikovsky published Worlds in Collision,
01:24 a book in which he laid out one of the most controversial alt-history models of the twentieth
01:29 century.
01:30 Velikovsky proposed that the planet Venus, situated between Earth and Mercury in the
01:34 solar system as we know it, was actually born out of Jupiter.
01:39 According to him, Venus was once contained within the distant gas giant, but was ultimately
01:43 ejected - something like a massive comet - around 3,500 years ago.
01:49 It's then said that this version of Venus careened through space, blasting past Earth
01:53 itself on at least two occasions, and close enough to change and distort our planet's
01:58 orbit, as well as its axial tilt and rotation speed.
02:02 It's also claimed that this chaotic Venusian voyage affected Mars, leading it to also pass
02:08 perilously close to Earth.
02:09 Velikovsky doesn't go so far as to say that any planetary collision actually took place,
02:15 but he surmises that the various near-misses messed up the conditions on Earth so badly
02:19 in general that they did cause a large number of massive disasters on the ground - many
02:25 of which formed the basis for various catastrophic events as described in our myths, legends,
02:30 and religious and sacred texts.
02:32 In his original work, Velikovsky weaved in apparently sound scientific evidence, including
02:38 alternate explanations for how and why Venus got to be so hot, and to seemingly link its
02:43 chemical make-up with that of its alleged "planet mother", Jupiter.
02:46 However, and under pressure from the scientific community post-publication, some of that evidence,
02:52 such as key appendices, was subsequently removed.
02:55 For the most part, then, the new theory was constructed around comparative mythology - the
03:00 practice of analysing and cross-examining cultural myths and stories in order to uncover
03:05 potential patterns or repetition.
03:07 Broadly, we of course do have a lot of legends pertaining to massive, disastrous events - from
03:13 flood myths to huge, god-like eruptions.
03:16 These are key to Velikovsky's theory, as Venus passing nearby could have, according
03:20 to him, affected Earth enough to cause those events.
03:24 For example, the Minoan eruption circa 1600 BCE destroyed and literally changed the shape
03:30 of the Greek island Santorini.
03:32 It's before been mused that it may have even inspired the legend of Atlantis… but perhaps
03:37 it could here fall within the confines of Velikovsky's model, too.
03:41 Now, let's roll back a little bit, because why exactly is the World's In Collision
03:45 Theory quite so controversial?
03:48 In short, it's because it flies against almost all conventional, mainstream science
03:53 on the formation of the solar system.
03:55 While there is some mystery as to exactly the speed and order of things, most scientists,
04:00 astronomers, and cosmologists agree that our particular planetary setup is around 4.5 billion
04:06 years old.
04:07 It was created when the wider universe was about 9.3 billion years old.
04:12 Originally, what became the solar system was an inconceivably vast cloud of dust and gas.
04:17 An external something - probably a massive supernova explosion - triggered that cloud
04:22 to collapse in on itself.
04:24 The matter within then grew denser.
04:25 A quickly-swirling, seeming chaos of substance took shape, called a solar nebula.
04:31 At the centre, and with gravity doing its thing, the pressure grew and grew until it
04:36 became pressurised enough for early hydrogen atoms to fuse into helium.
04:41 This eventually resulted in the birth of the sun, which incredibly accounts for more than
04:45 99% of all of the mass in the solar system.
04:48 The other 1%, however, or just under, would go on to form the planets, moons, asteroids…
04:54 all of the everything else that circles our star.
04:57 Rocky worlds formed in the inner solar system, closest to the sun, while murkier, often icier
05:02 worlds formed further out.
05:04 In this way, and while conditions have certainly changed over time on both planets, Venus has
05:09 always been an inner rocky, and Jupiter has always been the first of the outer giants,
05:14 after the asteroid belt.
05:16 The solar system's habitable zone has changed and evolved in line with the sun itself, but
05:21 there is little to no room for Velikovsky's proposed version of events.
05:25 His detractors insist that the worlds in collision theory is impossible, based on known physical
05:30 laws of the universe, and also highly unlikely due to the dramatically reimagined timeframes
05:36 that it's built around.
05:37 Over billions of years, it's thought that Jupiter, as the second most massive solar
05:41 system object behind the sun, may have had some kind of hand in the way in which everything
05:46 settled down.
05:48 That its gravitational force might have helped to tweak and shape planetary orbits, but nothing
05:53 so major as what Velikovsky suggests.
05:56 And with regard to Venus being actually born out of Jupiter, mainstream science has so
06:01 far never supported that theory.
06:03 Of those against Velikovsky, Harlow Shapley and Carl Sagan are perhaps the most well-known,
06:08 and were amongst the more outspoken.
06:10 Sagan mounted his opposition throughout the 1970s and 80s, including as part of his much-heralded
06:16 book and documentary series, Cosmos.
06:19 Again, most of Sagan's criticisms boiled down to the insistence that Velikovsky's
06:23 Venus and the problems it may have caused for Earth were physically impossible.
06:28 Harlow Shapley is arguably a more intriguing figure in the story, however, given his history
06:33 in the years and decades before Worlds in Collision was released.
06:37 Shapley is probably most famous for being on one side of the "Great Debate" held
06:41 in 1920, when he pitched his ideas on space against one Heber D. Curtis.
06:47 Both were leading academics at the time, but they differed on their view of the structure
06:50 of the cosmos.
06:52 Curtis believed that there were "island universes" beyond the Milky Way, while Shapley
06:57 believed that the Milky Way contained "everything in the universe".
07:01 While neither was exactly right, it's generally deemed that Shapley was more wrong.
07:06 Thirty years later, though, and Shapley's career has gone from strength to strength,
07:10 so that he emerges as the first voice of scientific reason when Velikovsky's views first come
07:15 to light… to the point that Shapley and others actually campaigned to stop Worlds
07:20 in Collision from being published.
07:22 Or at least to stop it being published as a scientific text or under a reputable publishing
07:26 name.
07:27 All to say that, for all the turmoil that it imagines in the solar system around us,
07:33 this particular theory has been a thoroughly contentious issue from the outset.
07:37 And while there have been some defences mounted in favour of it, none have really caught the
07:42 wider scientific or public imagination.
07:45 But nevertheless, what's your opinion?
07:47 Let us know what you think in the comments below.
07:50 Could anything that Velikovsky had to say actually be correct?
07:53 Are the mainstream models just too watertight to be broken?
07:57 Or could there yet be another theory to account for exactly why the planets are arranged as
08:01 they are?
08:02 For now, Velikovsky is remembered by history as much more of an unfounded catastrophist
08:08 than a revolutionary thinker.
08:10 Those against him essentially argue that just because he said it was true doesn't mean
08:13 that it actually was.
08:15 The hard evidence for Velikovsky's birth of Venus seemingly just doesn't exist.
08:20 But his book does lay out an entire, spectacular tale regardless.
08:25 And that's how Earth was allegedly almost destroyed, 3,500 years ago.
08:30 What do you think?
08:31 Is there anything we missed?
08:33 Let us know in the comments, check out these other clips from Unveiled, and make sure you
08:37 subscribe and ring the bell for our latest content.