The thing I find interesting about the whole debate, is that for as long as I can remember scientists have been vilifying Velikovsky for his theories about exactly this kind of thing, and now all of a sudden (like over the last five years or so), this kind of "Planets in Collision" theory has become the standard view.

Sure Velikovsky was a bit of a crackpot and the specifics of his theories are pretty much made-up, but he was the first person to take a look at the same evidence quoted in this article and evolve some reasonable suppositions from it. At the time, his idea that planets could actually move around and change orbits, colide with others etc. and *especially* the idea that stars outside of the solar system or other objects could significantly affect our own planets, was roundly ridiculed.

He noted the same time period, the same planetary anomalies and supposed almost the exact same cause, yet for decades and decades he was made out to be absolutely crazy for saying these things. Now we talk about the "late-early bombardment" as if it has always been the standard line, when you would be chucked out of your academic job for believing in this stuff only a short time ago.