From: jmeritt@rod.mitre.org (Jim Meritt)
Subject: More Velikovsky confusion
Organization: Mitre Corporation
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 18:51:18 GMT

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
I would like to thank the various members of the INTERNET and BITNET 
community of assisted me in proofing the document, providing numerous 
suggestions along the way.
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
Permission is given for this article to be copied and printed for
non-profit use showing arguments concerning Velikovsky.  Permission
must be given for other uses.  If you have any items which you believe
should be included, please email me.
........................................................................

	Since my expertise is not in history, I shall mainly address those
points made which have physical, astronomical, chemical, or general
scientific basis and are addressed in "Worlds in Collision" or in
Velikovsky's work which addresses his central thesis in that work.
An occasional item (primarily involving mythology) will be included
because I have been involved in the Latin mythology.  (I lived in
Italy and have been involved in various Latin clubs over the years.)
Additionally, I am only going to be covering Immanuel Velikovsky's
work itself - not what someone said he said.

					James W. Meritt
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&


In <An address before the Graduate College forum of Princeton University
on October 14, 1953 @ Earth In Upheaval supplement> Immanuel Velikovsky
said:

}I came upon the idea that traditions and legends and memories of generic
}origin can be treated in the same way in which we treat in psychoanalysis 
}the early memories of a single individual.
} [page 272]

Surely this psychiatrist recognizes the fact that memories do not have to
reflect reality.  Many of the trips to psychoanalytic facilities are
BECAUSE they do not.

}...the volcano on the island of Thera exploded with almost unimaginable
}force.
} [page 276]

It is a not uncommon opinion that this volcano was the CAUSE of the local
disasters which Velikovsky describes.  Good to see that he knew about it...

}carbon analysis of the wooden sarcophagi of Seti, Ramses II, Merieptah and
}Ramses III, or the furnature and sacred boats of Thutmose III or
}Tutankhamen, would yield dates 5 to 7 hundred years younger than those
}assigned by adherents of conventional history.
} [page 278]


From: msb@sq.com (Mark Brader)

It's in the October 1971 issue and the title is "Carbon 14 and the Pre-
history of Europe".  The article is by Colin Renfrew of the University
of Sheffield, and its bibliography cites articles from the years 1967-70.
I mention this because I don't know when Velikovsky wrote the book you
cited; he might, of course, have heard of this research.

The article gives a correction graph for raw C14 dates to true dates.
The curve is somewhat irregular.  In the AD millenia the errors are small,
but proceeding back, I read the following numbers off the graph.  There
is more than one possible date in some cases because of the C14 fluctuations
at those times.

      raw C14 date     true date
         500 BC          600 BC or 800 BC
        1000 BC         1300 BC
        1500 BC         1700 BC or 2000 BC
        2000 BC         2500 BC
        2500 BC         3400 BC
        3000 BC         3700 BC or 4200 BC
        3500 BC         4400 BC
        4000 BC         4800 BC


} Recent finds in Geology
} [pages 281 - 282]

Velikovsky obviously had absolutely no concept of continental drift.
Wegener proposed it later, it has been experimentally verified, and it
will explain quite easily most of his "mislocated" sites.

}reversely magnetized rocks are a hundred times more strongly magnetized
}than the earth's magnetic field could cause
} [page 282]

I cannot locate any recent support for this statement (supposidely made
in "Science News", July 1949)

}Chubb crater (northern Labradore)... covers an area of four square miles...
}It must have been created by the impact of an asteroid... the asteroid
}must have fallen about four thousand years ago.
} [page 286 - 287]

Velikovsky must have a rather small idea of what an "asteroid" is.
Interestingly enough, he finds the large craters on earth formed by
"asteroid" impacts, but the craters on the moon are suppose to be "bubbles".

}age of oil is measured in thousands of years, not millions
} [page 288]

This is suppose to support his "recent" origins.  What I find odd is that
Velikovsky seems to miss that the radiocarbon is formed in the air and the
date should be the date that the plant stopped taking in replacement
carbon (i.e. died).  If it came from extraterrestrial origins (as he is
proposing) it should be dated at an infinite age, since there was NEVER
any radioactive carbon (C14) incorporated from the atmosphere into any
plants.

}hydrocarbons have been identified in cometary tails by spectral analysis;
}also carbohydrates (edible products)
} [page 288]

Water appears very abundant, there are traces of ammonia and methane,
there is carbon monoxide and dioxide, atomic sulphur, CS, S2, H2S+,
hydrogen cyanide, methyl cyanide, formaldehyde, and HCO.  The sungrazers
have shown potassium, calcium, iron, cobalt, nickel, and copper.
No helium, neon, argon, nor krypton has been found.  This is VERY
nonedible (cyanide is a no-no), and the gases supposidely tagging along
that should be in the atmosphere of mars and venus and earth (the heavy
noble gases) are notably absent.

For where he picked up this odd bit, Huggins found some bands in the
comet's spectrum that coincided with "hydrocarbon" bands produced
in the laboratory by spark discharge through ethylene (C2H4).  The
bands are actually radiated from the double carbon molecule C2.  The
spark has been found to separate the C2 from the H4.  These bands are called
the Swan bands of carbon.  Velikovsky apparently didn't bother to read the
entire experiment.  No hydrocarbons.  (BTW:  This was the great comet of 1881.
Huggins also identified the sodium yellow lines.  This was in the infancy
of spectroscopic examination of the heavens)  Violet bands were found to
arise from the unstable CN molecule - the stable form is called cyanogen.

} (lunar craters from bubbles)
} [page 289]

As I said before:

1. Rock does not cool from molten to solid nearly fast enough to leave rings.
2. No combination of orbit and spin could have produced the current shape
from a molten body.
3. The Apollo astronauts would have noticed this trivial detail.  They didn't.
4. The rocks have been solid for millions, even billions, of years.
5. You get craters with impact on solids.  No "semiliquid mass" is needed.
In fact, you get very nice looking, and similar appearing, craters by
impacting projectiles onto solids FAST (rail-gun fast).  You even get
that central peak.

From the Lunar Receiving Laboratory: seven rocks were dated using the
K-AR method.  They yielded consistent dates of 3.0+/-0.7 X 10^9 years.
Radiation exposure ages varied from 10X10^6 to approximately 
160X10^6 years.  This surface was NOT molten recently and the rocks
were NOT "bubbled up" from beneath the surface.

} (cosmic rays are caused by positive charges rushing towards a negatively
}charged earth.

Get real.  There is no way earth has such an absurd electrical potential
to serve as a particle accelerator to those near-light speeds.

}...Worlds in Collision, which claims only the effects to be expected
}if a magnetic body like the earth should come very close to another magnetic
}body
} [page 297]

You can't get a lot closer to the gas giants than the Voyager probes did
without entering their atmosphere.  Their motions were unaffected by
a mystical magnetic field.

}Jupiter...it appears probable to me it sends out radio waves as do the
}sun and the stars.
} [page 297]

It doesn't.  It does emit strong, nonthermal, polarized, intermittent
radio emissions that are NOTHING like the sun and the stars.  And of the
actual distinguishing characteristics Velikovsky mentioned nothing.

}gases on Uranus... have a smooth reflective surface.
} [page 298]

WOW!!!!
A gas/vacuum interface that is optically smooth!!!!!!
Not a prayer.

}light reflected from the polar regions of Uranus to be polarized
} [page 298]

I scanned a lot on the optical observations of Uranus.  There is a lot
to be found relating to the light, but nothing in what I read on
polarization.  And if it were, there would be something.

Does "phase angle" ring a bell?  That was there...

In <Velikovsky Reconsidered (dated 1974)> Immanuel Velikovsky said:

}I claimed that venus possesses a massive atmosphere, a high surface
}heat, abnormal (disturbed) rotation, and hydrocarbon gases in its
}atmosphere
} [page 164]

"massive atmosphere" = 
	Cute enough, he also claims that it is the tail of it when it
was a comet wrapped around it - the tail that would pass for a good
vacuum if it were on earth.
"high surface heat" = "venus is hot"
	Another precise prediction.  Like those numerical estimates?
oh, BTW: n 1940 Rupert Wildt published a paper in the Astrophysical Journal
predicting a hot venus due to CO2 greenhouse efect.
"abnormal (disturbed) rotation" =
	Interestingly enough, mars was suppose to have its 24 hour day
because of its close passage to the earth.  Since he couldn't see what
venus's was, he cleverly didn't say.  Guess he couldn't think that
they would be consistent with his "theory".
"hydrocarbon gases" =

}I stipulated that hydrocarbons are present in condensed form (producing
}a reflected spectrum).
} [page 165]

Odd, since just the previous page he said "gases".  Perhaps he does not
know the different phases of matter (solid, liquid, gas, plasma) just
like he doesn't know different chemistries (hydrocarbons and carbohydrates)

Besides which, in 1969 Plummer (with the university of Massachusetts)
looked at the reflected spectrum of venus specifically for condensed
hydrocarbons.  He didn't find them.  That was when the bug V shifted to
gases - when his "prediction" measurably failed.

}I located them in the upper (reflecting) layer of the clouds.
} [page 165]

Clever - first, say you cannot get a decent observation from space,
then say you cannot from the surface, either.  Safe bet.  Unfortunately,
they don't show up in the reflecting spectrum, either (as shown just
above).

}I maintained they are the sole constituents of the clouds.
} [page 165]

Unfortunately, he already said that some mysterious dust is there.
Equally unfortunate, other chemicals have been ID'd there.

}The evidence of the presence of hydrocarbons and their derivatives should
}be sought in the deeper infrared... (3.4 - 3.5, 8-12 micron regions)

}hot and oxydizing atmosphere of venus
}[page 167]

}... upper atmosphere is reducing...
}[page 168]

}... polymerized and therefore heavy molecules of petroleum hydrocarbons
}are not necessarily present in the upper layer of the dense atmosphere.
}[page 165]

Talented hydrocarbons.  When he wants them in the upper clouds they are
in the upper clouds.  When he wants them off into space and travelling
to other planets (earth, for instance) they are free of the bounds of
gravity.  When he wants them to avoid the upper layer of the atmosphere,
they are not necessarily present.  When he wants them to be gases, they
are.  When he wants them condensed, they are.  When he wants them to
change to carbohydrates, they do.  And back to hydrocarbons on demand.
Immanuel Velikovsky's will must have more impact on these molecules
than gravity, heat, chemical bonding,...

}bacterial transformation of hydrocarbons into carbohydrates and
}proteins
}[page 168]

Where?  The lower atmosphere is lethal to any and all bacteria unless
they can live in molten lead instead of water. The hydrocarbons avoid
the cooler upper levels.  Not to mention the minor detail that there
is no indication at all that such bacteria exist. (not the conversion
part - the part about evolving in a reducing hydrogen-helium atmosphere
with ammonia and methane, then in a CO2 atmosphere)

}the envelope of venus may well contain some ferruginous particles
}and ash
}[page 168]

Ferruginous = iron containing.  His "may well" should be "better",
since that is what he based his "water to blood" spiel in Worlds
in Collision.  The odd part is that, if it were present in anything
like those amounts, venus should appear red.  It obviously doesn't.

ash = burned cellulose containing material.  Like, what burned?
Got it!  It is the remains of his "vermin" after being heated to
"candescence"!

}My claim regarding the presence of organic molecules in the atmosphere
}of venus awaits future testing.
}[page 168]

It has been tested.  None found.   I suppose those clever hydrocarbon/
carbohydrate/gas/condensed/upper layer/not upper layer molecules are 
also clever enough to hide.

}Venus is very, very hot (about 1000 degrees)
}[page 169]

Nice of him to provide any numerical estimate at all.   Of course, waiting
until AFTER it is measured on site gives one reason to wonder about the
origins of this postdiction.

}in rotating, it turns the same face to the earth at every inferior
}conjunction.  This "resonance effect" could indicate that venus passed
}near the earth at some point in its path
}[page 169]

What it indicates is that it did not.  For this resonance effect to be
in place, venus would have to be in its current orbit for a significantly
longer period than Velikovsky proposes.  At that distance, earth and venus
are not exerting a very significant tidal force on each other.  Since
venus has no moon, it gradually (under the effect of a REAL small periodic
force) synchronized.  This is not something that would happen quickly.
If venus had been in another orbit, the period would have been different
and it would not sync now.  If it had passed close to earth, the tidal
effects would have imparted a significant amount of angular momentum to
venus and insufficient time would have passed (by now) to dampen it.

}venus...body plastic or molten...molten crust...plastic rock
}(attributes mountains to ground tides)
}[page 169]

There are mountains, for instance, of 13 kilometers high.  That does not
sound like a molten or plastic crust.  It would have sagged like hot butter.

Ground tides from what?  There is no moon.  Perhaps solar tides? But that
would have these mountains migrating. Not an observed phenomena.  Also,
tides are caused in the same plane as the two bodies are in.  Please note:

There's a wide variation of altitude across Ishtar. The following
table is taken from "Kliore, A. J., V. I. Moroz, and G. M. Kesting,
The Venus international reference atmosphere, Adv. Space Res. 5,
no. 11, 1985, Pergamon Press. (also: COSPAR Report JPL-D-2216)."

Altitude        Temp            Pressure
 (km)           (K)             (bars CO2)      Feature
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
   0            743.0           98.12           "Average" lowland plains
  +3            720.2           81.09           Southern Lakshmi Planum
  +4            712.4           76.01           Northern Lakshmi Planum
  +7            688.8           62.35           Summits, Akna & Freya Montes
 +13            643.2           41.12           Summit, Maxwell Mons
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

What we have here is a pretty rough mountain.  No sagging evident. Also,
this particular mountain is in the north polar region.  No tides.

}It must be noticeably cooling.  In 1967 I offered this additional
}crucial test of my thesis.
}[page 169]

It isn't
I see no significant trend in the surface temperature of venus
using the microwave brilliance values for the last twenty years.
(reading chart prepared by David Morrison).

And for those who want to argue over interpretations, note that Velikovsky
said NOTICEABLY.  It clearly is not noticably cooling or there wouldn't be 
a disagreement.

In <Velikovsky Reconsidered: Venus' atmosphere (copyright 1972) Velikovsky
said:
}in historical time the trailing part of the protoplanet venus became partly
}absorbed into the atmosphere and cloud cover of venus, and that quite
}probably till today there are hydrocarbons present, or, indeed quite
}possibly, organic molecules.
} [page 193]

Interesting.  I wonder why the gravity suddenly increased, increasing
the escape velocity tremendously.  If it could escape before, forming
the cometary tail, what suddenly captured it into the bound atmosphere?
And since there were not hydrocarbons before (see previously), there
would be no reason for them to be now - at least not by this reasoning.

}There were also numerous spectroscopic observations of the tails of
}comets that disclosed the presence, even abundant presence, of
}hydrocarbons.
}[page 195]

For where he picked up this odd bit, Huggins found some bands in the
comet's spectrum that coincided with "hydrocarbon" bands produced
in the laboratory by spark discharge through ethylene (C2H4).  The
bands are actually radiated from the double carbon molecule C2.  The
spark has been found to separate the C2 from the H4.  These bands are called
the Swan bands of carbon.  Velikovsky apparently didn't bother to read the
entire experiment.  No hydrocarbons.  (BTW:  This was the great comet of 1881.
Huggins also identified the sodium yellow lines.  This was in the infancy
of spectroscopic examination of the heavens)  Violet bands were found to
arise from the unstable CN molecule - the stable form is called cyanogen.

I have no idea where "abundant" came from.

}Since I claimed that venus is extremely hot, I also maintained that
}any hydrocarbons present must be in the gaseous state.
}[page 195]

Back to those trained molecules again...
Any idea what 1000 degrees would do to oil?
Less than "candescence" and/or "incandescence"...

}And since only a few thousand years have passed....hydrocarbons...would
}still be present.
}[page 196]

Astounding.  Even after megatons being spewed throughout the solar system
and being heated to "candescence".  Stubborn, trickey molecules...

}If and as long as venus is too hot for the liquification of petroleum, the
}hydrocarbons will circulate in gaseous form
}[page 197]

Back to those trained molecules.  Offhand, I would say that being heated
to "candescence" or "incandescence" would probably do more than convert
this "petroleum" to vapor.  Unless, of course, he would like to admit
that the presence of hydrocarbons on venus would disprove his "close
passage" theory...

}From where could the massive amount of carbon dioxide have come?
}[page 199]

Really, the question is asked backwards.  The primary component of the
atmospheres of venus and mars is carbon dioxide.  The question should
be (and was, on talk.origins) why is there so little on earth.  My
explaination that I posted is as follows:

...........................................................................
Carbon Dioxide?  This one I am more familiar with.  The CO2 dissolves in 
the water.  The precipitant formed by the CO2 and the calcium (bit of maganese
and other things, I believe...) make up the rocks.  The seabed slowly creeps
along until it hits a subduction zone, at which time it goes down.  The
heat of the interior of the mantal releases the CO2, which bubbles back up
and vents through volcanoes.  See "The Carbon Cycle" in scientific
american a while back.  It has the clever diagrams....

The result of this, though, is that there is a LOT of CO2 bound up in the
crust.

You may have noticed the rather central role the oceans play in this.  If
you don't have oceans, the CO2 can't get bound up in the crust, so stays
in the atmosphere.  Venus is too hot for oceans.  Guess its atmosphere.
Mars is soo small that its atmospheric pressure is too low to maintain
significant amounts of liquid water.  Guess its atmosphere.  Earth
in 3/4 water.  Guess if its atmosphere is primarily CO2.
...........................................................................

Velikovsky guessed at burning hydrocarbons.  Hell of a fire to make that
much CO2!

}(claims press release after Mariner 2 said "clouds on venus are rich
}in hydrocarbons")
}[pages 199-200]

Read the data, not the press release.  The reporters made that "petroleum
found" up.  Sagan was, BTW, one of the scientists directly associated with
this probe and that instrumentation in particular.  What he finds funny
is that it was postulated to fill the greenhouse hole (filled by CO2 and HOH)
to support the temperature.  Immmanuel used non-data that was used to support
a theory he disclaims.  Double wrong!

}I introduced the sentence.... with the words "I assume"
}[page 200]

He starts MOST of his "predictions" this way.  Quite likely so that if he
lucks up it is suddenly a confirmed prediction and if it is shown to
be false he says exactly what he did here.

}On January 28, 1945, I registered a lecture copyright title "Transmutation
}of Oxygen into Sulfur"
}(thermonuclear fusion of atmospheric oxygen nuclei by the temperature
}in a lightening bolt into sulfur)
}[page 207]

The temperatures and pressures inside a lightening bolt are nowhere NEAR
that required.  As a demonstration, if it were the reaction would
totally consume the earth with the very first lightening bolt with a 
global-sized H-bomb.

In <Velikovsky Reconsidered "Are the Moon's scars only Three Thousand
Years Old"> Velikovsky rights:

}Venus' incandescent heat, its massive atmosphere (140 atmospheric
}pressures!), its retrograde motion controlled by the earth; its
}mountain-high ground tides...
}[page 215-216]

One hardly knows where to begin...
Where is venus incandescent (besides, of course, in the minds and hearts of
true Velikovskians)?
140 atmospheres is only off by 50% or so (and this is AFTER direct 
measurements)
Motion controlled by the earth?  Influenced, perhaps.  Controlled?  I am
inclined to believe its primary, the sun, has a bit more to do with its
orbit...
mountain-high tides?  Tides from WHAT?  There is no moon.  Ground has
a lesser tidal bulge than water.  The solar tide of water on earth isn't
mountain-high.  Also, astounding that these tides don't seem to move
around the planet like the other tidal effects do...  Mobile mountains...
hehehehehehe

} I maintain that less than three thousand years ago the moon's surface
}was repeatedly molten and its surface bubbled
}[page 216]

From the Lunar Receiving Laboratory: seven rocks were dated using the
K-AR method.  They yielded consistent dates of 3.0+/-0.7 X 10^9 years.
Radiation exposure ages varied from 10X10^6 to approximately 
160X10^6 years.  This surface was NOT molten recently and the rocks
were NOT "bubbled up" from beneath the surface.

}the moon has a weak magnetic field; yet its rocks and lava could
}conceivably be rich in remanent magnetism
}[page 216]

Note the "could conceivably be".  This is a good "plausable deniability"
statement like he had just used.

As an aside and relating to his magnetic points, the rocks brought back
solidified in the presence of a magnetic field that was only a few
percent of the present terrestrial field.  It was NOT molten in the
presence of a megagauss field. (from the Lunar Receiving Laborator
results)

}I would not be suprised if bitumens (asphalts, tar, or waxes) or
}carbides or carbonates are found in the composition of the rocks,
}although not necessarily in the first few samples.
}[page 216]

"would not be suprised" - so he can deny it as a "prediction" when it fails.
the carbon compounds, results from the Lunar Receiving Laboratory:
	"A survey of organic constituents by a pyrolysis-flame ionization
detector method and by means of a very sensitive mass spectrometer,
provided an estimate of the indigenous organic content of the lunar
samples.  The values published give the organic content as under 10 parts
per million.... No evidence of biological matter"
"although not necesarily" - so he can always say we just haven't found
those trickey molecules.  Must be related to those hiding on venus...

}In my understanding, less than ten  thousand years ago, together with
}the earth, the moon went through a cosmic cloud of water (the deluge)
}[page 217]

"In my understanding" - the same deniability dodge.
(the deluge) - his words.  Here we see the biblical basis.

}...excessively strong radioactivity....from interplanetary discharges.
} [page 217]

An electron flow causing transmutation of the nucleii?!?!?!?
No ____ing way.

In <Velikovsky Reconsidered "When was the Lunar Surface Last molten?"
(copyright 1972) Velikovsky:
Given the choice between:
1. Velikovsky is wrong.
2. The lunar landings just happened to hit places that escaped his surface
   melting.
3. There is something seriously wrong with radioactive clocks.

Velikovsky picks "3".
After all his "predictions" with "I maintain" leading off his sentences
concerning the lunar surface all fail, Velikovsky spends the time trying to
withdraw, not his predictions, the tests he proposed!

}small quantities of hydrocarbons and organic carbon were found in
}lunar material.
}[page 222]

Not according to the Lunar Receiving Laboratory report (see exact quote
above).

}...excess quanties of argon...
}[page 222]

Excess by HIS standards, if he insists it is only thousands of years old.
No mention that I could find in the LRL report.

}(talks about "boil-off of volatile products)
}[page 224]

R. Bales should know this one by now.  That makes the sample look
YOUNGER, not older.  The reverse of the effect he claims.

}When we measure the age of the universe, why do we assume at creation
}the heavy elements like uranium predominate and not the simplest ones,
}hydrogen and helium?
}[page 226]

Why does he say this?  In all the models I am aware of, the "at creation"
is so simple there isn't even anything as complex as hydrogen.  It forms
a fraction of a second later.  The heavier stuff (like past helium) isn't
formed until we go into second-generation stars, a LOT later.  Measuring
the hydrogen-helium isotope balances is one of the ways various "creation"
models are checked.  


&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

references for direct quotes from Immanuel Velikovsky"

Worlds in Collision 
	Immanuel Velikovsky

Earth in Upheaval
	Immanuel Velikovsky

Velikovsky Reconsidered
	The Editors of Pensee
	(has a lot of his papers in it, along with other papers pro-V.)
...........................................................................
counter-velikovsky references I found during this search:

Scientists Confront Velikovsky  
	Donald Goldsmith

Beyond Velikovsky:  The History of a Public Controversy
	Henry H. Bauer
...........................................................................
references that I have sitting here and referred to:

Computer Simulation of the Formation of Planetary Systems by S. Dole in 
      Icarus 13, 494-508 (1970)

Calculations on the Composition of the terrestrial Planets
      Reynolds & Summers, Journal of Geophysical Research vol 74, no 10
      May 15, 1969 p 2494

The formation of the Earth from Planetesimals
      Wetherill, Scientific American June 1981

Fractionation of Iron in the Solar System
      Harris & Tozer, Nature vol 215, Sept 30, 1967

Formation of the Sun and Planets
        A. G. W. Cameron, Icarus 1, 13-69 (1962)

The Supercontinent Cycle
      Nance, Worsley, & Moody, Scientific American, July 1988

Alfred Wegener and the Hypothesis of Continental Drift
        A. Hallam, Scientific American Feb 1975

Goldreich, Peter, and Stanton Peale, "Spin - Orbit Coupling in the
    Solar System", Astron. J. 71, 6 (August 1966), pp 425- 438

Cloud, Preston E., Jr., "Atmospheric and Hydrospheric Evolution on
   the Primitive Earth", Science 160, (17 May 1968), pp 729 - 736

Hart, Michael H, "Habitable Zones About Main-Sequence Stars",
    Icarus 37 (1979), pp 351 - 357

Mart, Michael H, "The Effect of a Planet's Size on the Evolution of
    its Atmosphere", published in some conference or another; I
    got a copy from the author. (Dave Allen <davea@ll-vlsi.ARPA>)

Planets for Man
      Dole

Our Evolving Atmosphere
        Is Anyone There? by Isacc Asimov
                      
Second Planet, Second Earth
        S. L. Gillett, Analog Dec 84

The Steady State of the Earth's crust, atmosphere and oceans
      Siever, Scientific American, May 1974

The Evolution of the Atmosphere of the Earth
      Hart, Icarus, 33, 23-39, 1978

Evolution of the Atmosphere and Oceans
      Holland, Lazar & McCaffery, Nature vol 320, 6 mar 1986

The Atmosphere of Venus
      Schubert & Covey, Scientific American, July 1981, p66

The Runaway Greenhouse and the Accumulation of CO2 in the Venus Atmosphere
      Rasool & Bergh, Nature, vol 226, June 13 1970

The Volcanoes and Clouds of Venus
      Prinn, Scientific American, Mar 1985

Venus, Near Neighbor of the Sun
	Isacc Asimov

Structure of the Lower Atmosphere of Venus
        C. Sagan, Icarus 1, 151-169 (1962)

Astronomy of the Ancients
	K. Brecher and M. Feirtag

The Mystery of Comets
	Fred L. Whipple

Geochemical exploration of the Moon and Planets
	I. Adler and J. I. Trombka

The Planet Uranus: a history of observation, theory, and discovery
	A. F. O'D. Alexander

The Planetary System
	Morrison & Owen

Werelden in Botsing (Dutch) 1963
	H. Freudenthal

...........................................................................
references from Matt Briggs on venus's atmosphere:

     Dickinson, R. E. (1986). "Venus mesosphere and thermosphere, pt. 1,
       heat budget and thermal structure," Jounral of Geophysical
       Reasearch: 91 (70-80).

     Kasprzak, W. T. (1986). "Wavelike perturbations observed in the neutral
       thermosphere of Venus," Jornal of Geophysical Research: 93 (11237-
       11245).

     Hou, A. Y. (1989).  "Further studies of the circulation of the Venus
       atmosphere," Journal of Atmospheric Science: 46 (991-1001).

     Lacis, A. A. (1975).  "Cloud structure and heating rates in the
       atmosphere of Venus," Journal of Atmospheric Science: 32 (1107-1124).

     Walker, J. C. G. (1975). "Evolution of the atmosphere of Venus,"
       Journal of Atmospheric Science: 32 (1248-1255).

...........................................................................
reference from Perry G. Ramsey:
There is an article in the Journal of Atmospheric Sciences, June 1975
(in fact, the entire issue is about the atmosphere of Venus) by James Pollack
and Richard Young describing a radiative-convective model of the Venusian
atmosphere. 

...........................................................................
Articles relating to geomagnetism:
Evolution of Overlapping Spreading Centers: A Sea MARC II Investigation
	MacDonald, K. C. ; Fox, P. J

Stratigraphic Aspect of Paleomagnetic Studies of Bottom Sediments in Seas
and Oceans
	Tretyak, A. N. ; Vigilyanskaya, L. I. ; Dudkin, V. P.

Magnetic  Anomalies  and  Sea-Floor  Spreading  in the Western North
Atlantic,  and  a  Revised  Calibration  of  the  Keathley  (M) Geomagnetic
Reversal Chronology
Tucholke, p857-876 1979
	Vogt, P. R. ; Einwich, A. M

An  Analysis  of  Near-Bottom Magnetic Anomalies: Sea-Floor Spreading and
the Magnetized Layer
Geophysical  Jnl.  of  The  Royal Astronomical Society v43 p387-424 1975
	 Klitgord, K. D. ; Huestis, S. P. ; Mudie, J. D. ; Parker, R. L.

Magnetic Study of Basalts from the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, Latitude 37 N
Geological Society of America Bull. v88 n70503 p637-647 May 77.
	Johnson, H. Paul ; Atwater, Tanya

Geochronology of the Neogene Paleomagnetic Polarity Epochs
Proceedings  of  the  Congress  (6th),  International  Union of
Geological Sciences, Bratislava (Czechoslovakia), 4-7 Sep 75, v1 p303-305
	Theyer, F. ; Hammond, S. R.

A  Revised  Time Scale of Magnetic Reversals for the Early Cretaceous and
Late Jurassic
Jnl. of Geophysical Research, v80 n17 p2586-2594, 10 Jun 75.
	Larson, Roger L. ; Hilde, Thomas W. C.

Magnetic   Lineations   Observed   near  the  Ocean  Floor  and  Possible
Implications on the Geomagnetic Chronology of the Gilbert Epoch
Geophysical  Jnl. of the Royal Astronomical Society, v28 p35-48 1972
	Klitgord, K. D. ; Mudie, J. D. ; Normark, W. R.

Evidence for the Opening of the South Atlantic in the Early Cretaceous
Nature, v246 n5430 p209-212 23 Nov 73.
	Larson, Roger L. ; Ladd, John W.

Faunal Extinctions and Reversals of the Earth's Magnetic Field
Geological Society of America Bulletin, v82 p2433-2447 Sep 71.
	Hays, James D.

Age of the North Atlantic Ocean from Magnetic Anomalies
Earth and Planetary Science Letters 11 p195-200 1971.
	Pitman, III, W. C. ; Talwani, M. ; Heirtzler, J. R.

Magnetic Reversals and Sedimentation Rates in the Arctic Ocean
Geological Society of America Bulletin, v81 p3129-3134 Oct 70.
	Clark, David L.

Palaeomagnetism of Deep-Sea Sediments
International Dictionary of Geophysics, v2 p1134-1141 1967
	Harrison, C. G. A.

Magnetic Anomalies over the Mid-Atlantic Ridge Near 27 Degrees N
Science v157 n3791 p920-3 Aug 1967
	Phillips, J. D.

Reference for volcanic activity:
	The End of Atlantis

...........................................................................
References for the tree-ring data:
Scientists Hope Tree Rings Will Answer Questions About Past
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS       DATE: June 16, 1988  12:44EDT

(Chris Stassen provided these)
Scientists Confront Creationism_, 
	L. Godfrey, Ed.;
        New York: Norton, 1983.  p. 35

Timescale
	N. Calder;
        New York: Viking, 1983.  pp. 28-29, 224, 271-273

Principles of Isotope Geology
	G. Faure;
        New York: Wiley, 1986.  pp. 390-39

Science and Earth History
	 A. N. Strahler;
         New York: Prometheus, 1987. pp. 155-158

Radiometric Dating, Geologic Time, And The Age Of The Earth:
A Reply To "Scientific" Creationism
	 Dalrymple, G. B.;
         USGS Open-File Report 86-110, 1986.  pp. 39-41

The Unexplained: A Sourcebook of Strange Phenomina
	Wm. Corliss

Science,133:729-735, March 17, 1961
	Farrand, Wm. R.

===================================================================

"No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right;
a single experiment can prove me wrong."  - Albert Einstein
.............................................................................

jwm@aplvax.jhuapl.edu  - or - jwm@aplvax.uucp  - or - meritt%aplvm.BITNET
-- 
James W. Meritt:  m23364@mwunix.mitre.org - or - jmeritt@rod.mitre.org
The opinions above are mine.  If anyone else wants to share them, fine.
They may say so if they wish. The facts "belong" to noone and simply are.