Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site gargoyle.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!gargoyle!carnes
From: carnes@gargoyle.UUCP (Richard Carnes)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: "light" gravity/ replies to Throop & Sonntag
Message-ID: <223@gargoyle.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 23-Oct-85 11:11:05 EDT
Article-I.D.: gargoyle.223
Posted: Wed Oct 23 11:11:05 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 25-Oct-85 02:02:00 EDT
References: <424@imsvax.UUCP> <7112@ucla-cs.ARPA>
Reply-To: carnes@gargoyle.UUCP (Richard Carnes)
Organization: U. of Chicago, Computer Science Dept.
Lines: 32

In article <7112@ucla-cs.ARPA> reiher@ucla-cs.UUCP (Peter Reiher) writes:

> Only the fact that the net
>is richer in experts in the physical sciences rather than myth and history
>has prevented Velikovsky from being raked over those coals, as well.  I would
>suggest that Mr. Holden keep quiet about this, or a true expert on ancient
>cultures may get incensed enough to totally destroy this position, as well.

Some of us who are knowledgeable about ancient cultures have more
interesting things to do than to respond to Holden's postings, which
is about as productive as arguing with someone who claims to be
Jesus.  Now that I mention it, perhaps he *does* think he is Jesus
-- I don't think he has ever denied being Jesus, and it sort of fits
the rest of his cosmology.  Anyone for starting the First Church of
Holden, Scientist?  It would make a great cult.  

There is no reason to respond to his writings about mythology because
he has not presented one single argument against accepted
interpretations of mythology, and indeed he appears unaware that
there are any non-Velikovskian theories of myth.  He uses Ovid as a
source for ancient history, which is like using *Paradise Lost* as
evidence that the Garden of Eden existed, or Wagner's Ring as
evidence for the existence of Wotan, Siegfried, Valhalla, etc.

Anyone who wishes to learn about mythology might start with something
by Joseph Campbell.  This is recommended for creationists, too, since
they have no understanding whatsoever of the nature of myth; on the
other hand they have no desire to learn, either, since the whole
point of creationism is the uncritical acceptance of myth as
historical fact.
-- 
Richard Carnes, ihnp4!gargoyle!carnes