The general proposition that human “prehistory” is a) shaped by cataclysms and b) largely unknown and/or misinterpreted? Yes.
Velikovsky regarded his “Ages in Chaos” series as his opus magnum (and I wholeheartedly agree), and while I have no trouble with “Worlds In Collision”, Dr V would have been much more successful had he referred to the latter only vaguely; “Ages In Chaos” (and the underlying “Theses for the Reconstructon of Ancient History”) might have been the reigning paradigm by now, despite the hatred of Jews found throughout academe’.
Ultimately, “Worlds In Collision” isn’t as important a work, even if it were 100 percent accurate. The calumnys directed at WiC and at its authors are not accurate, to be charitable. The rise of secular catastrophism comes directly from its pages, and in the sciences, closet readers of it avoided (and still avoid) discussion of its contents, while continuing to lay the groundwork which will lead to much broader acceptance.