The title of this blog post caught my eye – 'Velikovsky and the Weather' – go to http://geoffchambers.wordpress.com/2014/10/07/velikovsky-and-the-weather/
Chambers is a refreshing type of global warming sceptic as he is firmly on the Left side of the political spectrum which contrasts sharply with some of the more strident acolytes whose scepticism sometimes appears to go hand in hand with antipathy towards Barak Obama. It is also rather strange being confronted by somebody with a soft spot for the Guardian newspaper. The only other people I have met fond of that newsheet was an Indian bus driver who was obviously too well educated for the job he was doing (all his children excelled at university) and some regulars in a pub in Little Missenden I used to frequent (retired civil servants that often mentioned gongs) that trotted out the phrase, 'have you read what the Guardian had to say today …' and then expressed astonishment that you didn't actually read the newspaper (or even used it to line the rubbish bin).
Chambers says that Worlds in Collision stirred up a controversy, so much so that the publishers, Macmillan, were threatened with a boycott by the scientific roosters of academia. Macmillan caved in but one of their editors left and founded Doubleday in order to escape the official censorship – as a matter of principle (or with an eye on the main chance).
This was followed by the discovery of a magnetosphere around Jupiter and the retrograde spin and high temperature of the planet Venus (all part of the Velikovskian scenario) and this caused fans of Velikovsky to get very excited. Then, over the horizon came Carl Sagan and rescued the science establishment and saved their blushes. He invoked the little known greenhouse effect to account for the anomalously high temperature of Venus and the honour of the orthodox science establishment was saved. However, the genie was out of the bottle Chambers says. If the runaway greenhouse effect was good enough to see off Velikovsky and his supporters it could also be used for the greater benefit of mankind – which is where we are at today.