CH.

D A M IEN ’S

FRENCH IN
R E V IS E D

THESYSTEM .

EARTH.

THREE MONTHS!
V ol.

E D IT IO N , 1902.

III.

Nos. 37 & 38.
A U G U ST AMD SE P TE M B E R .

IFe have much pleasuie in recommending the above woi'k.
T he booklet contains the three thousand words, and idioms,
which are most used in ordinary conversation ; sufficient toenable you to talk French all your life ; no fossil philologicalpeculiarities, but French as it is actually spoken in France.
Grammar underlies each group of examples, and we think
this a cleverly condensed method of teaching the Frenchlanguage.
T he Author of French in Three M onths also gives Lessons
in Conversational French to adults, at
128, C R O M W ELL ROAD, LO N D O N , S.W. ;
AND

64,

RO SSLV N

H IL L ,H A M PSTEA D ,N.W.

Friends of the Ed. of this Magazine can testifj- to his ability
and agreeable way of teaching.

The Magnetic Nerve Invigorator Co.,JO N A TH A NNICHOLSON,

33 , Budge Row, Cannon Street,LONDON, E.G.

Price of Appliances £1 is., £2 2s., & £3 3s.
Instalm ents may be arranged.

C E L E S T IA L

PH EN O M EN A .

The following article will form a reply to several enquirers.
“ The heavens declare the glory of God.” In spite of“ the fool ” having “ said in his heart, there is no God,” theabove statement, which forms the opening words of the 19th
Psalm, is an admirable fact,* which;^can be grasped andappreciated by all classes and kinds of God-fearing men andwomen.
“ And the firmament showeth His handiwork.” Thesewords are as true now as they were when they were writtenby the Sweet Psalmist of Israel hundreds of years ago.
The Psalmist goes on to say : “ Day unto day uttereth
speech, and night unto night showeth knowledge.” Let us
listen to the “ speech ’ uttered, and profit by the “ know­
ledge ” shown daily.
“ T here is no speech nor language vv'here §ieir voice is
not heard,” yet the heavens speak not in an unknown ton­gue, nor to any one nation, but the significance 6f what
they declare may be understood by enlightened men ofvarious nationalities ; and without the gift or the cultivationof tongues.
“ Their line (or rule) is gone out through all the earth,and their words to the end of the world.” This shows thatthe heavenly bodies have influence, power or “ rule >’ allthrough the earth.
“ In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun.’’These statements harmonize with the statem ents made inliie beginning of Inspired W rit, viz. : that the sun andmoon are “ two great lights ” which were made by theCreator to give light upon the earth—and to rule over the
day and over the night, and divide the light from the dark­
ness—and also to be for signs and for seasons and for days
and j-aaFS.”

C E L E S T IA L P H E N O M E N A .
243

CELEvSTIAL PHENOME^vlA.

The Book of Job is supposed by many students not only
to be the oldest book in the Bible, but the oldest book inexistence.
Different stars, and constellations are referred to and namedin it by names which are familiar to us, and it is evident
that the knowledge of pure astrology (which was originally
one and the same thing as astronomy) has been handed
down to us from the Creator, through Adam and Seth.
Josephus informs us that to the antediluvians we are indebted
for very much that is known on this subject.
H e states that Adam was instructed by the Creator Him­
self who ordered Seth to write the rudim ents of the know­
ledge regarding the heavenly bodies which He had imparted
to Adam upon perm anent tables of stone, which Josephus
says he had himself seen.
And these tables included a tabulation of eclipses.
T he path of the moon is like the path of the sun—aspiral—and when the moon’s path crosses that of the sun,there is an eclipse, if both bodies are in conjunction.
W e believe that knowledge relating to the stars as “ signs”
has to some extent ceased, or been perverted.
The sign of the “ Star in the E a s t” was understood bywise men, or Magi, when our Lord was born on earth {Matt.
ii. 9). Since then we have no inspired record of men being
guided by the s ta rs ; but it is quite possible that a deeper
knowledge may be imparted to faithful followers of the Truth
respecting God’s W orks in Creation.
W hen we study the W ord of God, and consider the perfectorder of the universe, we cannot help perceiving a perfectand divine precision underlying all visible things created ;and an invisible power behind the scenes, directing andgoverning the whole.
Even the weakest of sin-crippled
human intellect can scarcely fail to see the Creator’s careof, and provision for. His creatures, if they only study His
Works. Our Lord told us that the hairs of our heads arenumbered, as also are the stars in heaven above.
But in addition to this we have the sure testim ony ofInspired W rit in Isa. xl. 26, wherein the prophet by powerof the Holy Spirit says :“ Lift up your eyes on high, and see who hath createdthese, that bringeth out their host by number. H e calleth
them all by n am e; by the greatness of His might, and243

for that He is strong in power, not one is lacking.’’ (R.v.)
The p s a lm is t a ls o s t a t e s t h a t “ H e t e ll e t h the n u m b e r o f
t h e s t a r s ; H e g i v e t h t h e m a ll t h e ir n a m e s .” — / ’j.c x lv ii .4 ( 'R .V .)The heavens are described in Scripture as “ spread out
as a canopy or tent ”—and so do they appear.
The outstretched heavens above appear a “ dome,”
To everyone on earth, where’er he roam.
In the beginning it appears that Draco was the Polar star,
the change having taken place “ owing to the slow recessionof what is calledthe pole of the heavens. T he same move­
ment which has changed the relative positions of these twostars has also caused the constellation of the Southern Cross
to become invisible in northern latitudes. T he Southern Cross
was just visible in the latitude of Jerusalem at the time of thefirst coming of our Lord. Since then, through the gradual
recession of the Polar star, it has not been seen in Northernlatitudes.” See The Witness o f the Stars, by Dr. E. W.
Bullinger.*
The sun takes his course through the Heavens, passing
through the twelve signs of the Zodiac, or about one signfor each month.
The sun’s path through the constellations is called theecliptic.
But there is also an annual difference, because
the sun does not come back exactly to the same spot in thesign when he commences the year, but a little behind. If
the fixed stars daily revolved around the earth at exactly
the same rate of speed as the sun (which they do not), andif the sun started at exactly the same place each succeeding
year, the signs would correspond with the months, and cal­culations regarding star motions would be simplified.
The sun passes through the twelve signs every year, but
in consequence of the slow precession of the equinoxes the
sun commences the year in the same sign for centuries.
The celestial equator is the sun’s path around the heavens,at the vernal or the autumnal equinox, and if it were poss­ible to stand in the centre of this great circle, the stars andsun and moon would appear to move around without♦ Published by Massvs. E.yre & Spottiswoocle, Great New Street.

244

11.
Ii

■I

245

C E L E S T IA L PH EN O M EN A.

Q E L E S T rlA L P H E N O M E N A .

ever rising or setting. But both north and South of theequator the stars rise and set obliquely. On the equator
they appear to rise and set at right angles to the spectator.
The points where the two great circles cross each other,or intersect, are called the equinoctial points and the slow
and gradual movement of these points is termed the “ pre­cession of the equinoxes.”
The relative speeds and various motions of the heavenly
bodies are governed by their various heights and declinations.
“ The more rapidly a star or planet revolves, and the higher
its distance from the earth, and the greater its distance fromthe centre of revolution, and vice versa, the more slowly astar goes around and above the earth, and the less is its
height above the earth and the less its distance from thecentre of revolution. Thus their velocities are proportionate
to their heights, and to their distances from the North Cen­tre.” But to make their daily circles “ Zetctes ” states t h a t :the whole of the “ eth^r,” or whatever other name we liketo give to the subtle matter above our atmosphere whichfills all the space between the earth’s plane surface and thefirmamental vault of heaven—and in which all the heavenly
bodies are contained and move, the whole substance of thissubtle fluid is in a state of flux, like a great stream continu­
ally going around the polar centres, and carrying all theheavenly bodies with it at various heights, according to theirdifferent densities, all being light and comparatively small
bodies. But this flux is not like an ordinary stream where
all the currents flow at the same general level and rate, nor
is it like those stream s' which flow quicker in the middle
and slower at the sides, but rather, in shape at least, it issomething like the great Maelstrom, or whirlpool, off thecoast of Norway ; that is, like a great funnel with the tube
or hole pointing downwards through which the mighty cur­rent flows into unknown subterranean, or submarine regions.
This explains also the action of the dipping needle.
A correspondent owns that “ the sun appears to travel ina darly circle around the heavens, but this is only an opticaldelusion and that it is really the earth that is moving.”
Now with all due respect to the one who makes the above
statem ent ; in reply to his query as to how we can disprovethis. I should like to ask him and others of the same mind
if they can prove that the apparent motion of the heavenly

bodies is n»ot real. Experim ental tests have been made tosee if the earth has any motion, and no motion such as is
assumed by the astronomers has ever been discovered. W hy
then should we not believe that the “ ap p a re n t” motion of
the heavenly bodies is real ? W e want something better
than the unfounded assumptions of modern astronomers. We
can see the heavenly bodies move, and being only compara­tively small bodies of light revolving round and above theearth in the great ethereal stream, it is to us much morereasonable to believe that these ‘ lights” are in motion circling
over the earth, as they appear to do, than to believe that aponderous body, like the earth, weighing millions upon mill­ions of tons should be suspended in space like a feather; rush­
ing away through “ space” in its so-called orbit, and tumbling
topsy turvey, carrying us all head over heels in its regularand periodical revolutions while tearing away forever roundthe sun ! It is absurd and we cannot believe it.
This then is our reply for the present to correspondents
who merely affirm that “ flthough the sun appears bo travela daily circle it is only an optical delusion.”W e have given proof that the delusion is on the otherside. It has been proved in The Earth, by mathematical
calculations as well as by the evidence of our senses, thatthe sun is neither large enough nor high enough to light
all the earth at one time but only about one half of it. And
this is not only owing to the comparatively small size of thesun, but as has been shown by “ Zetetes,” it is also owing
to the fact that when the rays of the sun strike our atmos­
phere they are refracted, or bent out of a straight path ; andwhen by perspective the sun goes sufficiently far off fromany particular locality its rays are deflected by the atmos­
phere so that they do not reach the earth at all, and darkness
ensues. This is a wise provision of the Creator that whendarkness comes over the earth, the creatures of His power
being only of limited strength may take their nightly repose
and be refreshed with sleep. T he sun still going his dailyround lights up other parts of the earth far distant from us
and comes round next morning to wake us with his brightand cheering rays. Thus again do the “ h a v e n s declare
the glory of God and the firmament showeth His handiwork.”(to be coniimted.)

246

m an ’s

M AN’S

placpj

PLA CE

in

IN

the

THE

u n iv e r se .

U N IV E R S E .

(continued from p. 210).
PA R T II.
VVe have hitherto been concerned chiefly with the ideal
universe of the New Astronomy, for which we have foundno adequate proof offered in fact.
The heading of Mr.
Wallace’s paper would have been more harmonious with his
subject had it been “ Man’s Place in the theoretical Universeof the Astronomer.” But it is M an's Place in T H E Uni­verse; so that we have a right to expect the Universe ot
Fact and not a Universe of Fiction. This is a very different
thing ; yet the Fiction is generally assumed and the Fact
quietly ignored, as though there were no question about it.
Y et Mr. W. is credited in some departm ents of science asa keen observer of facts. W hy then does he reason here ona hypothetical basis ? If men will reason so, and start out
on the basis of a fictitious universe, thej- are likely to go
wrong, not only with respect to “ Man’s P lace” therein, butalso with respect to man’s proper nature.
Those who look upon the Universe as a conglomerationof blind or evolutionary forces, unconsciously acting on
matter, cannot offer man anything better than a final anda fatal dissolution. Their philosophy is a kind of physicalfatalism, over the portals of which may be inscribed— “ Allhope abandon, ye who enter here.” Grant Allen, writingof the so-called Laws of Nature, says :“ They take no heed of man or man’s deserving,
Reck not what happy lives they make or mar.
Work out their fatal will unswerved, unswerving,
And know not what they are ! ”

W hat a dismal outlook for man on this hypothesis ! But
I am glad to note that Mr. W. does not seem to accept thisblank outlook of physical fatalism. H e says he takes “ theview of those who believe in some intelligent Cause at theback of this universe, some creator or creators, some designer
or designers.”
This, while it renders hope possible for man, is not satis­
factory.
It is neither clear nor philosophical. W e needm a n ’s

place

in

the

247

u n iv er se.

something for faith to rest upon better than “ some Intelli­gent cause,” even though it have a capital “ I.” W e need
an Adequate Cause; and that cause must be One, not aplurality, for the Universe is one. But Theosophy teaches
that men may be their own “ creators,” their own saviours,
and the “ designers ” of their own salvation and destiny ;hence the plurals are deftly inserted in the above quotation.
H ere we have the “ gods many and lords many ” of the apos­
tle’s day. But as Paul says :— “ To us (primitive Christians)
there is but O N E GOD, the Father, of whom are all things,
and we in Him ; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are
all things, and we by him. Howbeit there is not in every
man that knowledge.”— i Cor. viii. 6. This is the simple
but grand creed of primitive Christianity, “ howbeit there is
not in every man this knowledge,” and even Grant Allen,
whom Mr. W'. quotes, says :“ The purely m onotheistic conception of a single supreme God, theCreator and upholder of all things, had been reached centuries before
the birth of the Man Jesus. Christianity borrowed from Judaism this con­cept,and,hum anly speaking, proceeded to spoil it by its addition of the Son
and Holy G host.”

Mr. Allen in his doctrine of Evolution fails to discriminate
between a pure and primitive Christianity, which held to the
grand conception of One only God who created the Universe,
and a subsequent and corrupted form of Christianity which
added on the pagan doctrine of a Trinity of three equaland co-eternal personal Gods. But, nevertheless, I commend
to Mr. W .’s notice what Mr. Allen acknowledges is a “ sub­lim e” conception ; and I submit that the prophets of Israel,
the teachers who gave us this “ magnificent concept”— evencenturies before the birth of that unparalleled Man who
claimed to be (not God, but) the Son of God—these teachers,
I say, must be worthy of our respectful attention in regard
to what they have to say, both of the Universe at large andman’s little place in that Universe.
T h e EARTHas

A D A PTED

forL IF E .

U nder this heading Mr. Wallace has made some good
points to show that the earth alone is fit for human hab­248

m a n ’s

place

in

t i -i e

u n iv er se .

itation. But his frequent reference to the earth as a “ planet,”with other astronomical fictions detracts somewhat from theirvalue. H e discusses the adaptability of “ other planets ”
for the development of organic life. It is of course with him“ development ”— evolution— for creation as revealed in the
Bible is out of the question in his articles. Y et if there
be anything tangible behind the “ magnificent concept ” ofthe Jewish teachers, Mr. W. m ust own that such Creation
was not only possible but highly probable. However, we
will briefly notice his reasons for thinking that the earth
alone is adapted for life ; and that the required conditions
can be found “ on no other planet.”
These conditions refer to the presence of an atmosphere,suitable tem peratures, and the presence and circulation ofplenty of water. W e need water, of course at a temperaturesomewhere between the freezing and boiling points ; so that
it would not do to be too far off the sun, like Neptune, or
too near like Mercury.
If all the waters of the earth were frozen we should die ;and if they approached boiling point it would be equally
detrimental ! T he tem perature of “ space,” we are told, is“ about— 273° C., while that of the sun is about 9,000" C,”
According to this it must be pretty warm near the sun, yet
when we ascend a mountain, and so get nearer to that orb,
we find it is colder. This reminds us of the assertion of
the astronom er’s that we are about three millions of miles
nearer to the sun in winter than in summer ; as though it
were not always winter somewhere !
But to return to Mr. Wallace. H e realizes what a com­bination of favourable conditions must exist “ to preserve on
the surface of a planet a degree of heat which shall neverfor any considerable time fall below 0° C., or rise above,say 75° C.” And these narrow limits he proceeds to affirm“ must be continuously maintained, not for hundreds or
thousands only, but for millions, perhaps for hundreds ofmillions o f years.” (Italics, his.) T here you have i t !
“ H undreds of millions of years ” ! I should much like to
see the tabulation of some of these “ millions of years,”with the events on the earth answering thereto ; and someof the eclipses, or transits, in the heavens thrown in. How
these “ scientists ” talk, and write of millions of miles, andmillions of years ! O f course it looks big and “ scientific.”m a n ’s

place

in

the

u n iv e r se.

249

It is comforting, however, to know that we are ( i) at asuitable distance from the sun, that its rays may “ evaporate
sufficient water to produce clouds, rain, and a system ofriver circulation.” (2) T hat our “ atmosphere is of sufficient
extent and density ; ” and since this is supposed to be “ de­pendent on the mass of a planet,” Mars is “ unsuitable ” asa place to live in. W e think so too, and we must, therefore,
give up the expectation of any “ message from Mars.’’ We
Zetetics say the same, as I have said before ; and I am glad
to find at least one scientist on the side of Zetetics as regards
this planet. If Mars be unsuitable for life, as we think it
is, it must be extreme folly to expect “ messages ” therefrom.
I am also glad to find that Mr. W. says ;— “ T he want ofa satellite (like our moon) may alone render Venus quite
unsuitable for the development of high forms of life.” Itis, therefore, fortunate that we were not born on Venus.
L et us hope we never shall be ; though we may notice, in
passing, it is again, and everywhere, “ development,” orevolution, which Mr. W. advocates. And this assumes “ re­incarnation.” (4) The average depth of our ocean is further
said to be correct, being “ about thirteen times that of theland which rises above their level.” These oceans are“ level ” then, which we think is a good point in our favour ;and they help to keep up “ uniform tem peratures during thewhole period (‘ millions of years ’) of the development of life
upon the earth.” We are further informed that “ It is ex­tremely improbable that this remarkable condition obtains
in anyplanet.” W e think so too, “ extrem ely improb­a b le ” ! (5) Lastly, we are assured that the inhabitants ofthis “ planet,” the earth, have a sufficient and “ uninterrupted
supply of atmospheric dust,” How and why this is so isfully explained in Mr. W .’s W onderful Century; but as I
have not seen a copy of this wonderful work I cannot give
Zetetics the explanation. But speaking locally, and for thisseason of the year—summer— I can assure my readers thatin Leicester we do have an “ uninterrupted supply of at­mospheric dust ” ; and more, I think, than is needed for all
sanitary purposes.
How and why this is so I need notpause to explain ; however, it is consoling to know that
we are all well supplied in this re sp e c t; and this may
account in some degree for the fact that unvaccinated
Leicester not only has a low death rate but is more free250

FLO O D S A N D FLA T S.

FLO O D S A N D FLA TS.

from small-pox than many other towns.
Mr. Wallace
tells us that plenty of dust, with “ constant winds todistribute it,” is “ among the perm anent essentials of a
G LO BE fitted for the development of intellectual life.”
U nder the circumstances this is about the best proof wehave seen that the earth is a globe whirling through“ space,” and so causing plenty of dust to be flying about
everywhere. This may further explain why the astronomers
generally throw dust in our eyes when we seek for proof ofthe earth’s sphericity.
ZETETES.
{to be continued.)cannot be carried round but insists on making its own flood
there and then, on the instant, and in the exact compass andlocality which suits it.
Thus the grindstone shoots thewater off at the bottom because it is water flood and flat,and flatly refuses to alter its flat shape to suit the grind­stone, which is round.
You see flat and round deliberately fall out and the flat
flood falls flat because it will not fall any other way, turn you
the grindstone ever so wisely, so swiftly, so coaxingly, or
any other way you please.
Just so with the earth. It cannot turn and carry the oceansround with it, because the oceans are flood water, and on
the outside of it, like the water on the grindstone. Or theswimming bath at the bottom of the great wheel, and ofcourse the motion merely displaces the water or flood andcauses it to seek a fresh abiding place. If the earth turnedthen the same would occur with the oceans—they also would
be displaced, and would have to seek fresh abiding places.
The persistent rain of June has therefore done good workin affording ample proof by its numerous and more or lessdisastrous floods, that such floods must have local flats torest upon, and that such flats—as meadows and miles ofsubmerged country—m ust in their turn be stationary, andtotally the reverse of parts of a spinning and rotating earth.
No doubt the whole area of Great Britain has suffered fromthe heavy rainfall, and the inconvenient floods which havebeen caused by it, but certain localities are specially m en­tioned as heavily visited.
Royal W indsor always suffers severely on these occasions,and the races at Royal Ascot have also been seriously shornof their splendour.
It will, indeed, be strange if thesevisitations of rain and flood fail to exercise some correcting
influence on the minds of those loyal residents in the Royal
Borough who still persistently m aintain the rotation, andglobular shape of the earth, all of which is once more dis­
proved by these very floods of the month of June, 1903.
Not only has England been the flat recipient of this con­tinuous downpour, but the Continent has also made its lap
for a few drops, whilst even New York has stood still with
its umbrella on the stretch for fear it should be given thetrouble to dust.
Then earthquakes have also been alternating with the

FLO O D S

11
11.

AND

FLA TS.

Floods and Flats go tog eth er; and our month of June
has just afforded us most abundant proof of the above
aphorism in tremendous downpours of rain, which have con­verted whole villages into lakes, such that the roads havedisappeared and the inhabitants have been driven to thenecessity of getting about in boats.
This adds one more to the long list of proofs that theearth is at once flat and stationary. If you doubt this try
and make a flood on a pile of cannon shot, and see how
you get on. Or you may try the Great Wheel, placing animmense sponge bath at top in which you may even swima b o u t; then let the wheel be turned just a trifle, and lo !
away goes your lake at the top, and you may have a narrowescape from being swept down with the torrent of water out ofyour (till then) convenient swimming bath.
Perhaps you prefer to have your svvimming bath at thebottom of the wheel. If so, we turn the wheel in the fashionof a grindstone, and once more the water, or flood, is thrownout at a tangent, and yourself with it, and you may have time
to reflect why a grindstone disproves the rotation of theearth.
T he earth, you observe, is said to rotate and carry theoceans round with it ; but the grindstone throws it all off—
and why ? Simply because it cannot carry it round ofcourse, and also because water is that sort of stuff which

251

252

MORE A N T A R C T I C A .

showers, as if to make the whole visitation the more im­pressive. Several sharp shocks of earthquake have been felt
in Wales, and slight movements of the earth have been
experienced even in England proper, all pointing to thesame conclusion, v iz.: that the earth must be stationary, or
else the very slight shocks could not be felt at all. Thosein Wales were not slight, but very marked indeed, and as­
sumed quite a threatening aspect ; whilst the lesson theyteach is always one and the same, viz. : that the earth is fixedand stationary, but liable to be locally shaken—the faintest
trem our of which can be detected, and its direction usually
traced.
There are now certain instrum ents made which detect
earthquakes—no m atter how slight they may be—and it
follows as an argument, on the pianist side of the question,that these delicate instruments would be useless on a flashingand rotating globe.
It is necessary for the earth to bestationary in order to permit such delicate instruments toact.
All this would be impossible on a Swing-about, swaying,
and rotating globe.
St. Leonards-on-Sea.
E. M ID D L E T O N .

M ORE

A N TA RCTICA .

In their reports, it is rather strange such giants of navi­
gation, and close observers, as Captains Cook, Ross, W eddell,and others, do not mention having seen the sun at m idnight
during their voyages in the forbidding regions of the ex­treme south.
According to some recent hints in the press, such phe­nomena is stated as having been observed by the British
Antarctic Expedition, though it is only mentioned by theway, without expatiation ; if this is a Tact, pianists are quite
prepared with good evidence against the globular theory(see “ Zetetes ” lucid remarks on this point in past numbersof The Earth), though they have not the slightest necessity
to rel)' on the peculiar movements and appearance of the

MOR-E A N T A R C T I C A .

253

heavenly bodies, to prove their case up to the hilt, irrespec­tive of such phenomena.
In a notice on the relief ship of the expedition. The Sphereof May 30th, 1903, states: “ The M orning got away only
just in time, for on March 3rd she was jam med in newly
formed ice. On March 5th, at 2 a.m., the nights being dark,
she was surrounded by seventeen large icebergs and count­less smaller ones. It was like steering a bicycle through agraveyard full of tombstones with your eyes shut.”
There evidently was not much m idnight sun at this timeas the nights were dark, and, owing to the ice, navigation
was risky.
W hether such a sight as a m idnight sun
was observed on previous dates the account did not state.
U nder any circumstances pianists can with calmness wait forverified information on this point, as it is immaterial to theirposition, which must continue to strengthen with further
reliable investigation.
Recently, the press has been informing the public “ what
the Antarctic discoverers have done ; ” whether this is worth
the expense and lisk involved is a questionable point.
Zetetic philosophers know one thing such expeditions cannot
do, with all their undoubted courage and splendid appliances,and that is, prove the W orld a globe.
U p to the present, the knowledge of the southern regions
has advanced very little since the days of Captains Cook,Ross, and a few others, who had to tackle the work in ill
equipped vessels, and with very crude appliances ; but whentrum pets sound, learned (?) societies dispute and clatter, andconcentrated foods, with all the best apparatus, are provided
ad. lib., the thinking public expect a more enlightening
budget of information than some already to hand, as forexample ; “ Poplar, one of the ship’s cats after being accident­
ally injured, was thrown overboard twice without the desired
effect.” “ T he Parry mountains not existing, are purely
mythical ; ” like the globular theory (italics ours) ; “ Mount
Erebus was smoking splendidly.” “ We steamed 600 miles
along the Great Barrier ; ” i f this had been continued, theyshould soon have arrived at Enderby Land, and round thebottom o f a globe (italics ours). “ A t 79 deg. 35 min. south
the captain went up in a balloon, but could not see any
land.” “ All the dogs died.” “ W e wintered 400 miles
further south than anyone has done up to the present, having
reached 82 deg. 17 min. south.” “ Vince lost his life.”

255

MORE A N T A R C T IC A .

S T E L L A R MOTION.

But many are hopeful, when Capt. Scott comes home, hewill give the world something worth thinking on ; always
providing his notes are not allowed to be edited and garbled(like Capt. Cook’s) by a D.D. or some other globe-biassed
individual, in order to square them with their doomed theory.
I f the world be a globe, a carefully logged circumnavi­
gation in the extreme southern regions ought to be a verjsimple, rapid, and not over costly affair; the inner circle ofthe so-called scientific cult know this, and that such a test
will smash their pet theory, and so bring upon them theuniversal contem pt their position deserves. Any unbiassed
person will at once see there is something radically wrong
on looking at a school map or paste-board globe, and thenconsider that— on the authority of a southern ship-owner,and others—the actual logged distance of the direct westerly
course from H obart Town, Tasmania, to Durban, South
Africa, is quite 9,000 miles along the 45 par. of south lat.
T hink of this !
Many consider that the government was quite justified inhalting, before voting more extra funds for the present
British Antarctic Expedition, as enough money has alreadybeen expended to prove the main point, if the business had
been allowed to be carried out with the right motive, viz. :truth seeking. Again, many do not entirely agree with theusual relieving busiuess, which so many past Arctic Expedi­tions resolved themselves into. No one wishes brave men
to be lost for the sake of a little timely help, but too muchreliance should not be placed on such methods.
To saythe least of it, it is not business-like for Jim to be rash, andrely on being relieved by Bill, and then the latter to relyon the assistance of another expedition under Jack.
From a National, and right stand-point, all that is reallynecessary at present is an exact logged circumnavigation
at about 55° or 60° SouthThis would at once settle thefact, that the world is not a globe ; after which the globeprofessors could at their own expense and risk, make excur­
sions to these southern regions, to get frozen in, geologize
or fish through holes in the ice to their hearts’ content ;and the people would be well rid of them if they stopped
there.
The circumnavigation suggested would no doubt be a big
business', but not so big, fruitless, or costly, as that of being

frozen-in, and wintering so many miles nearer a non-existent
spot or point— called the South Pole—than anyone else,
beside risking health and losing life in the effort.
R EG ED D A .

254

STELLA R

M OTION.

Of all persons in the world Zetetics must not form hypo­theses-, or draw hasty conclusions ; or build up any theories
on what they observe. They are emphatically seekers whileothers are reasoners.
T he primer of astronomy prepared by the late Richard
Proctor for the London School Board commences with thewords ;“ Astronomy is a science whose facts are based
upon reasoning.”
Never was a truer word written as to what is called “ modern
astronomy.”
Never was a talser statem ent recorded if it refers to
any true “ science.”
Never was a sadder confession made by men who arrogate
to themselves the title of scientists.
“ F a c ts ” are facts, and “ reasoning” is reasoning.
A“ fact” is a thing done, vih\c\i no reasoning in the world canever affect or alter. “ Reasoning ” can be based on a fact ;but a “ fact ” can never be baser! on reasoning.
Science is the Latin Scientia which means knowledge.
It is what we know, apart from all reasoning. Hypothesisis the opposite of this, and is only w hat we think.
Zetetics must be careful to rem ember these elementary
truths ; and while they seek out facts, and observe them,and collect their data, they must not fall into the mistakeof “ astronomers ” and substitute their reasoning about thesefacts for the facts themselves.
Euclid furnishes us with a useful guide as to the obser­
vation of facts, or rather as how we should deal with themand reason about them.
W hen it cannot be proved that one thing is equal toanother, it has to be proved that the one cannot be greater.

257

S T E L L A R MOTION.

S T E L L A R MOTION.

and that it cannot be less than the other. Then the con­clusion is that it must be the same in size.
So with an observed fa c t; say the disappearance of ships
at sea. We must not say that it is caused by the globular
shape of the earth, because that is only assuming the very
thing that we are seeking to find out. It must be shown to
us that such disappearance could not be caused in any otherway. It has not been so shown, and therefore it proves
nothing ; and nothing is proved beyond the fa c t that ships
do disappear. That is a fact.
Now we, who are seeking for truth, contend that the dis­appearance of ships at sea may be cansed by other pheno­mena. It may be due to the laws of perspective. Or, there
may be other causes of which we are ignorant.
One thing is clear, and that is, that such disappearance
does not prove the rotundity of the earth, because it has
not been proved that there is no other explanation to begiven.
Or, take the tides. The fact as to the tides is observedby all.
But that they are caused by gravitation is notproved; unless and until it is proved that nothing else
could cause them.
Do not let us be drawn into the snare which besets astro­
nomers. They are tethered by their hypotheses, and cannever really discover anything, because whatever they ob­
serve it must be explained by their hypotheses. It is a caseof chose jugee, with them ; but that is contrary to the very
foundation of real science.
Or, take Eclipses. W e know w hat we see and nothing
more. By a careful observatton their cycles were known
ages ago, many centuries before modern astronomy was
dreamed ofW e know also, the popular explanation, that eclipses arecaused by the motions of the earth and its shape ; andtherefore the conclusion is drawn that the earth is a globe.
But this is the very thing which we are seeking to prove.
It is quite true if that be the only explanation that can begiven. But this is the very point in question.
Our position is that it has not yet been shown that thisis thereasoning that explains the phenomenon.
W’e should be just as illogical on our side if we said that
eclipses must be caused by the revolution of a dark satellite.

T hat would, of course, cause the phenomenon, therefore wesay this may be the cause.
But, nevertheless, we admitthat it is not proved. Eclipses do not prove that the earth
has a dark satellite ; but a dark satellite would cause eclipses ;but this is no proof that such a satellite exists, or that
eclipses are caused by it.
W e are Zetetics, or seekers, and of all people in the world
it is not for us to base our facts upon reasoning ; but toobserve our facts and collect our data, drawing no conclusions
until we have them all. W e must neither accept as proof
from others, or state it as from ourselves that such and suchmust be the explanation of a fact, until all other explanations
are exhausted and can be ruled out. Then we shall all beshut up to the only explanation that is left.
As Zetetics we cannot be called upon to explain anything,
we are seekers, and our very position protects us from any
demand that we shall or must explain any phenomena.
A bout the earth we do know many facts. Its motion has
never yet been proved!
But proofs innumerable, fromGeodesy to Ballooning, prove that it is so founded andestablished that it cannot be moved.
But when we “ consider the heavens >’ the case is different.
T here we observe that everything is in motion. W e observethat there is a great variety in these motions. There is the
motion of the sun, and the motion of the moon ; the motionof the planets. These latter are called asteres planates, or
wandering stars, because they have a peculiar motion of theirown. Astronomers speak of “ apparent motion ” and “ real
motion,” but this is assuming the very thing that has to be
proved. W e say that we believe the “ apparent ” motionis the “ real ” motion, and we must believe this until thecontrary be proved.
Then there is the motion of Comets ; the motion of the
fixed stars, rising in the east and setting in the w e s t; others
never rising and setting but revolving round a central star.
Do we know all about stellar motion yet ? Have we all
the data ? Is there nothing more to be learned ? May we
say we have all the facts and may sit down and reason about
them ?
Take for instance the motion of the stars in what is called
the South Pole. Our grievance is that we cannot get atthe facts. One writer says that the stars there do not rise

256

258

S T E L L A R MOTION.

and set, but that they revolve round a central point, as thestars revolve at the North Pole. Others, who are travellers,
speak of the Southern Cross rising and setting.
W hat are the facts ? This is the simple question that we
as Zetetics, seek to find out.
The writer once enquired of a friend in the South, andbegged hinn to watch the motions of the southern stars. He
put our letter in the newspaper there, instead of observing
for himself and for us ; and the following answer was given :“ Of course, it cannot rise or set, because the earth isa globe, having a southern Pole.” ,But this is the very thing we were seeking to find out,
which is thus quietly assumed ! And thus we are at present
shut up to and shut out from that which we are seeking tofind out.
Now, suppose, it shall be clearly shown that the stars in
the extreme south do have a different motion, and do revolve
round a common centre, as in the North. T hat would notprove either that the earth is a globe, or that it moves. It
would only prove that certain stars have that peculiar motion,different from other stars. It would not prove anything as
to the shape of the earth, unless and until it should be also
shown that the stellar motion in question could not arise
from any other cause.
This, of course, could not be shown.
We are anxious in this article to warn Zetetics not to fall
into the snare of astronomers, and be so ready to comeforward with their explanations. It is not for us to explain
but to seek.
Our opponents are only too eager to get us to give our
explanations of the phenomena, in order that they may deal
with ours as easily as we deal with and expose the falsityof theirs.
Do not let us come down from our high platform.
Do not let us leave our impregnable position. Do not
let us take off our strong armour and lay ourselves open tocertain defeat.
Let us be content to examine their observations, andexpose their false reasonings, while we continue our special
work and seek after the truth.

T

W H A T S A IT H A N D T E A C H E T H

H O L Y SC R IP T U R E .

W H A T S A IT H A N D T E A C H E T H
T H E H O L Y S C R IP T U R E S
CO N C ER N IN G T H E E A R T H AN D T H E

2 g9

SU N.

REFEREN CES.

T he Creator and M aker of the Earth, &c.—W hom ? O f
the earth,—G od: Gen. i. 9, 10; Isa. xlv. 12; Ps. cxv. 15.
O f the sun and moon,—God : Gen. i. 16.
As the potter knoweth what shape he mouldeth his clay,
so knoweth God, what shape H e maketh the earth.
THE

EARTH.

Its Shape is : ‘ circle ’—h a . xl. 22 ; ‘ ends ’—Isa. xl. 28,
xli. 5, xlii. 10, Job xxviii. 24, xxxviii. 13, Deut. xiii. 17,
Ps. xlviii. 10, Ixix. 13, cxxxv. f , Zech. ix. 13 four corners ’— Isa. xiii. 12, Ezek. vii. 2, Rev. vii. i ; *spread forth theearth ’—Ps. cxxxvi. 6 ; ‘ stretched out the heavens as a cur­tain {^Ps. civ. 3) and spreadeth them out as a te n t'—Isa. xl.
22 ; ‘ the heavens and stretched them forth,...spread abroad
the e a rth ’—Isa. xlii. 5, xliv. 24, Ps. civ. 2, Jer. li. 15.
A globe, ball, or sphere has NO ‘ ends,’ being all roundalike ; nor ‘ corners,’ only quarters without corners ; neither
can it be spread out. N or ‘ the heavens which are above
the earth,’—Ps. ciii. ; ‘ heaven,...the earth beneath,’— Ex.
XX. 4 ; be stretched out as a curtain, or spread out like atent. Having an 'en d ,'—Ps. xix. 6 ; Isa. xiii. 5. If theearth was either a globe, ball, or sphere, the heavens would
surround it with no end, instead of being stretched or spread
above it with end.
A. H. W EST.

Owing to vaiious causes many interesting items, including
letters, accounts of meetings, lectures, &c., are unavoidably
held over, and w ill be dealt with in our next issue.
The three questions submitted by M r. H. Lock, and which
the Ed. would have particularly wished to answered, w illalso be replied to in our next number.

26 o

DO ES T H E

D O ES

THE

EARTH

EARTH

ROTATE.

ROTATE ?

I have received a June copy of Past and Future, editedby Mr. J. B. Dimbleby. In it the editor has a reply to myarticle in the June issue of The Eaj'th, headed “ The Rotationof the Earth, and How to Observe It.”
Mr. Dimbleby refers to The Earth as “ a monthly in sup­port of a flat and motionless earth.” H e says that he has
no wish “ to engage in controversy with a class of persons
who love the W ord of God.” I can say that I reciprocate
the kindly feeling intimated in this remark ; but I would
remind Mr. Dimbleby again, as I have said before, that m ymotto is “ Principles not men.” I have no feeling against
Mr. Dimbleby personally ; nor have I any personal feelingagainst any man, whether it be the Pope of Rome, Mr. Pigott
Brigham Young, or Dr. Teed (Koresh), because I differ fromtheir religious beliefs— mere individual men, I judge not,nor condemn in my mind— I dare not do so. But doctrines
false, and practices absurd—these I must not only condemn,but, with every force I can summon to my-aid, I must fightagainst them, and strive to crush them.
W e think that Mr. Dimbleby is unwittingly doing theBible considerable damage in the minds of men with regard
to Cosmogony. But I repeat again, that my contention isagainst his errors and inconsistency as a writer on Bible
subjects, and not against him personally.
In answering my article which appeared in The Earth weshould have thought Mr. Dimbleby would have given hisreaders more proof of supposed motions. I offered him spacein The Earth if he could give me one good proof of theearth’s axial or orbital motion.
He has not accepted thatoffer. Dare he make me a similar offer, to publish in his
paper an argum ent against the earth’s supposed motions ?
I shall see. ,We have admitted m atter in The Earth from his supporters,
would he admit in Past and Future m atter from myself andmy supporters ? If his position be true, and unimpeachable,
he should not be afraid of it being discussed fairly andopenly. Because if he is right he could show it ; and if I
and my supporters are right in believing in a motionless
earth, then he is doing a grievous wrong in supporting the

DO E S T H E E A R T H

ROTATE ?

261

editor of The Clarion, and infidel science as taught in theglobular theory of the earth.
Mr.Dimbleby owns that the astronomy of the ChronologicalObservatory cannot easily disprove my position, and that of
all Zetetics, viz, : that God “ hath founded the earth on its
bases that it cannot be rem oved; ” and therefore it ismotionless. But, nevertheless, Mr. Dimbleby thinks thatthe “ British Chronological Association can do it on thequestion of tim e.”
But we fail to see what the question of time has to dowith the shape of the earth, and the motions of the sun,moon, and planets. These motions are the same whatever
theory we hold about the shape of the earth. Mr. Dimbleby
should know this. In fact he does know it, for he admitted
as much in the year 1897 A .D . (5895^ A .M .), when he pub­lished the ninth edition of his book of Past Time. On page
129 of this book he says that to whatever system of astronom
is believed it .would not affect the question on Chronology.
U nder the'head, Three Systems of Astronomy, he says :“ Although there are three svsteims, none of them affect astronomical
Chronology, which can be claimed by each. The first is held at the ob­servatories, namely, that the earth is spherical, rotating on an axis, andtravelling round a siaiioimty sun in 365J days.”

He then refers to the Zetetic system, and to a third sys­
tem which teaches that the earth is a globe immovable withthe sun revolving around it. Now if these three systems ofastronomy make no difference as to the question of Chron­ology, why does Mr. Dimbleby try to persuade his readersthat his chronology disproves a motionless earth ? He says :“ The disproval of a motionless earlh cannot be so well determined by theold system of astronomy at the Greenwich observatory, built upon a sub­sidiary Christian era.
It is a natural and scientific system taught by the
British Chronological and Astronomical Association, and which is the sameastronomy as th it of the ancient Egyptians and Babylonians, that lucidly
settles ihe controversy by proving that the earth both rotates and has anannual motion round the sun. Unfortunately the old (?) school of Astro­
nomy invented at the Greenwich Observatory has had no knowledge of theastronomical period of 649 years used by the ancients.”

If Mr. Dimbleby has any evidence that “ lucidly se ttle s”
this controversy we should be glad if he would produce it.
H e says that, “ there are two zodiacs, one annually made by

262

DOES T H E E A R T H R O T A T E ?

the earth travelling round the ecliptic of 360°, and the other,a large one made by the apparent motion of the sun on acircle of 648 years.” This is a novel and interesting wayof trying to prove the motion of the earth, to say nothingof the “ apparent motion of the sun,” which of course hethinks is not real, making a second Zodiac ! If our readers,or his readers can see herein a proof of the earth’s motions
they must have keener perception than we have.
However, we give them the proofs for what they are worth.
The editor of Past and Future further says, that theEgyptians believed in a “ revolving earth,” as they called
it ; but he has not quoted any Egyptian writer giving thisas his belief. W e doubt if he can do so. But even if hecan, surely merely “ belief” is not evidence of fact ? But
Mr. Dimbleby says we have “ strong evidence of this by theway in which every 30 years they (the Egyptians) celebrated
by a festival the entering of the earth into another of thetwelve signs of the Zodiac.’’And, he adds : “ these astronomical festivals will not coin­cide with the apparent solar zodiac in which the sun seems
to move.” ' (Italics ours).
This seems a strange way of proving the earth’s motions !
We should like very much to attend any festival where wem ight see the “ entrance of the earth into another of thetwelve signs,” whether of the “ ecliptic zodiac ” or that othersolar one which he says is only “ apparent.’’ However “ ap­parent ” it may be to Mr. Dimbleby he has failed to makethis proof apparent to us.
Mr. Dimbleby makes this further assertion respecting theEgyptians :“ Their numerous records of this motion of the earth round the ecliptic
is a most conclusive proof that they believed in a moving eartli, and the factthat these records are always numerically correct from the date of Creation
is evidence that the early Egyptians obtained their knowledge from the Adamic
line of patriarclis.’’Now we challenge Mr. Dimbleby to give us from Egj-ptianheraldry one instance of a “ record ” of the earth’s motion
round the Ecliptic. I do not think he can give us one ; andthat, moreover, he has drawn on some fancy for what hethinks is evidence. He first assumes the question at issue
and then gives it as “ proof” of what he wants us to believe.

S T R E T C H E D O U T UPON T H E W A T E R S.

263

But we do not believe it. And even if the Egyptians“ believed ” in a moving earth, I should still want reliable
proof of the motion. T hat is, we should want proofs thatare not opposed to the evidence of our senses, nor in discordwith the Bible.
But Mr. Dimbleby has not even given his readers proofof the “ belief” of the Egyptians, much less of the motionsof the earth, as is proved by the system of the great Ptolemy.
T he Ptolemaic system taught that the earth was not only
motionless, but the centre of the universe, the sun and stars
revolving around it. So that we challenge Mr. Dimbleby’s
assertions on every point. Moreover, if he would take itkindly, as it is kindly meant, we should advise him to takeup some book on logic, and study it w ell; he would then be
likely not only to keep the premise of his “ proofs ” moreclear from the petitio principii, which now so frequently
vitiates his arguments, but also save himself from spending
the rest of his valuable life in building upon a “ sandy” andfalse basis of pagan Scripture contradicting origin.
The globular theory undoubtedly is a cleverly constructed
platform for showing off mathematical calculations, but if wevalue the truth we shall gladly make any and every sacrifice
for its sake.

STRETCH ED

OUT

UPON

THE

W A T E R S .”Bv E. H. R IC H E S , LL.D ., F.R.A.S.,
Member o f the “ Lo7ido7i- M athematical Society"late Cantab, etc.
{continued from p. 223.)W e will now pass on to the consideration of the wellknown illustration in support of the rotundity of the earth,namely : observing a ship sailing directly towards the horizon.
As has been stated, at a certain distance from the observer,
the hull of the ship will gradually disappear from his view ;and when that is quite out of sight, it will be observed thatthe masts will also disappear in a similar way.

264

S T R E T C H E D O U T UPON T H E W A TE RS.

Now, it will readily be perceived that the mode of dis­appearance would happen in the event of the surface, on
which th e ship is sailing, being an arc— in fact, in no otherway could the ship disappear; but by a short considerationof the case, we may be led to question whether or not thissame mode of disappearance of the ship might occur if thesurface on which the ship is sailing be a PLA NE,
T he following fact has been noted, namely ; th at a ship
lost to view under the circumstances just mentioned, hasbeen seen after its disappearance by the observer using a
powerful telescope. T he whole of the ship has thus beenbrought back to sight. M ight one argue frcHn this, thatthe ship was lost to sight because it was so far advanced along
the convex arc that the surface of the water came between
the ship and the sight of the observer ? Those who main­
tain that this experim ent is a proof of the rotundity of theearth, would tell us so. If it is, what is to be said to theship’s being brought back to view again by means of thetelescope ?
Optics tell us that any object travelling from us (as theship in the above instance) would disappear in a similarway, in the case of the surface between us and the object
being -s. plane. If an observer standing at the end of a longstreet observe the rows of gas lamps on either side, and theirapparent diminution of size as the distance increases, he will
see that those nearly lost to view in the extrem e distancewill present to him nothing but their tops, the lower portions
being quite lost to view. If a train be watched closely as
it travels from an observer, the wheels and lower parts of thecarriages will disappear before the top of the train will doso.
Briefly, then, the following fact may be stated, namely ;that the lower part of any object travelling away toward’s
the observer’s horizon, will disappear first, and the top partwill be last in view. T his holds good on water as on land,and so must in necessity hold in the case of a ship at sea
hastening towards the horizon, which does appear in theexact m anner described.
A question thus suggests itself,
namely : Is the mode of disappearance of the ship at thehorizon any proof of the rotundity of the earth ?
Mr. Glaisher, whose name is so well in connection withballoon ascents for purposes of scientific discovery, has

S T R E T C H E D O U T UPON T H E W A T E R S.

2.65^

aflfirmed that even at the greatest distance from the earth towhich he has gone, he always found that “ the horizon
appeared on a level with the car ; ” and in the London Journalof July, 1857, the following interesting reference to balloon
ascents may be found ; “ The chief peculiarity of the view
from a balloon at a considerable elevation, was the altitudeof the horizon, which remained practically on a level withthe elevation of two miles, causing the surface of the earth
to appear concave instead of convex, and to recede during
the rapid ascent, whilst the horizon and the balloon seemed
to be stationary.”
This curious fact of the concave appearance of the surfaceof the earth, as seen from a balloon at an altitude of two
miles, is worthy of note, and appears to be difficult of sol­ution when considered by one unacquainted with optics. How
is it that a sphere or globe of large dimensions when viewed
in space at a distance of two miles or less, loses its naturalform and assumes that of a concave surface to the eye ofthe observer ? It seems natural to suppose that the earth
being of the form of a globe, its surface as viewed from aballoon would appear just the opposite (namely : convex)
from what has been affirmed unanimously by all aeronauts.
Philosophy tells us, that the surface of the earth (land andwater) is the opposite to a plane, namely ; that it is convex ;still it can be seen that it is possible to bring forward argu­
ments in favour of the earth’s surface being a plane, andalso that those argum ents generally supposed to support
the theory of the earth’s rotundity are really no arguments
in its favour but decidedly against it. It is not my intention
to consider any more of the experiments that have been
made than I have, but will simply leave my brief and some­what rough explanatory statements of the same to theconsideration of the reader.
In the face of modern philosophy it would be a bold thingfor one to say that the theory of Newton’s disciples is a
mistake, and to affirm that there is enough proof to showthat the surface of the earth is a plane, and that there is no
proof whatever of its being a globe.
If one were boldenough to advance such a theory men would smile, and thechances are that the man who did advance the same would
be ridiculed. Only those who have studied astronomy cantell into what a vast sea of hazy doubt one is often plunged ;

266

I

i:i

T H E E A R T H ’ S O B SE R V A T O R Y .

and results so bewildering are arrived at, that one is almost
led to doubt any known theory whatever.
On page 392, volume ii. of Extracts fro m the Works ofJohn Weslef, may be found the following; “ T he more I
consider them, the more I doubt of all systems of astronomy.
I doubt whether we can with certainty know either the dis­
tance or m agnitude of any star in the firm am ent; else why
do astronomers so immensely differ, even with regard to
the distance of the sun from the earth ? some affirming it
to be only 3, and others 90 millions of miles.”This extract is of some interest, in th at W esley was wellup in the astronomy of his day ; and methinks he but re­echoes the sentiments of many even of the present day.
The word “ speculation ” might fairly be applied to many
portions of the Newtonian philosophy. To use plain lan­
guage, it may be said that, after all, the earth may not bea globe.

A ll cdmmunicaiions a n d enquiries respecting this M agazine a n d the teaching it
upholds, and a ll questions a n d matter f o r insertion, should be addressed to
E .A .M .B ., I I , Gloucester Road, Kingston H ill.

“ THE

EARTH ’S ”

OBSERVATORY.

The E d. does not necessarily endorse statements made under the headings o f “ The
Earth's Ohserzratoty,'’ Letters, etc., unless signed E d. The Earth.

\n I'ne Illustrated London News o i June 27th and July 4th, there are somebeautiful photo views in connection with the Discovery expedition by Lieut.
Sliackleton, with description o f the southern regions, showing the course of the
Discovery, with a map on the globular system—adapted from Jioss' Quadranto f the Antarctic. The account bears out all that Zetetics have advanced, but
the map is misleading, viz. : on the 4th Feb., 1902, the Discovery was, accord­
ing to the map in longitude 165 W est, and on the 9th the vessel had sailed
and got icebound in longitude 167 East, (W hat latitude were they in ? And inwhat direction did they travel in getting from long. 165 W to long. 167 E . ?
—E d.) a difference of 28 degrees, and which on the Plane Earth would be at theleast 72 miles to a degree, or 2,000 miles, which would be impossible for asailing vessel to accomplish anywhere on the ocean. But if this earth is a globe
there would be about 18 miles to a degree, or 500 miles, which could be accom­
plished. (U tterly impossible to travel 500 miles in icebound seas, such as they
were in.— Ed.)THE

E A R T H ’S O BSERV A TO RY .

267

“ TH<E RO M A N CE O F S C IE N C E .”A Lecture delivered at the Congress Hall, Clapton, by L a t^ E. A. M. Blount.
Reported by Jonathan Nicholson, E ditor of Vitality and Health Culture.
T he Congress H all is a magnificent building seating some 6,000 people ; onrare occasions it is filled, such as a visit from General Booth or some of theleading lights ®f the Salvfllion Army. To see it so well attended on a weeknight, as it was upon the visit of Lady Blount, means that the lecturer or her
subject had created a sensation, for usually Salvationists are exceptionally con­servative upon unknown matters.
The m eeting had been well boomed by Major Orsborn and his able staff ofofficers,so that it was most gratifying to them to see so appreciative an audience.
T he opening song, accompanied by the Congress H all Brass Band, breathed
out hopes of salvation to every soul in the building ; this was followed byprayer, and then her ladyship was Introduced (receiving a magnificent reception).
To Salvationists the globosity contravention is gibberish. They have beentaught at school ti e earth is a globe, and have never given it a thought other­wise than that it is a flying mass, so that the lecture given quite knocked themoff their legs, opening a new line of thought.
H er ladyship took in the situation at a glance ; she saw she had a mixed
audience. There rubbing shouldeis, were the most up-to-date men and womenof the day, an«ious to get all they could from the subject, while the honest
brown faces of the daily toiler listened with rapt attention and took it all in.
The subject is an interesting one to those who think. The Salvationist ista«.ight the need of thinking for himself and not to depend upon the brains ofothers. Perhaps this had som ething to do with her ladyship’s magnetic influence
upon the whole of that vast assem bly; any way she was a success in every
sense of the word.
Lady Blount speaking to the following effect, said ;The magnificence of the W orks of God contained in the whole universe afford
inexhaustible pleasure and profit when the survej’or is in harmony wiith, andcontrolled by, a prayerful desire fbr truth and knowledge.
But our knowledge of God’s CreativeW orks should be in harmony with God’s
own account of H is Creation as given in H is Inspired Word.
M isrepresentation of God’s Creative Works, and the facts of Nature having
been ignored by so-called “ scientists,”(her true principles attacked and derided,)h as.been the cause of thousands of men and women, possessed of more thanordinary mental capacities giving up the teaching of the Holy Scriptures andthus losing the great benefit which they might have derived from the teaclling■ of God’s revealed Word.
Scieflce-mongere have, in order to give their Scripture-contradicting science a.
footing, been compelled to deny the Word of the living God, and this not only
verbally, but they have done so frequently in their written works !
Prayerful study of Nature, and all visible phenomena, guided by Holy W rit
w'ill of necesBity raise the liiuman mind to thoughts of the Creator,and increasing
faith in Him and in H is W ord will lead to a higher condition “ as seeing
Him who is visible.”
The lecturer dwelt long upon the absurdity of the whirling globe theory, andshowed that not only is it opposed to the teaching aC the Bible but that it
unreasonably contradicts the facts of Nature. For instance, the “ m iraculous”
power of gravitation is simply a fabulous conception, invented to pull all andeverything to a supposed centre by a force supposed to be equal to the quantityof m atter in a body, without any known cause :This power of such fame,“ Gravitation ” by name,
Pounced down on the atoms whilst strewing ;But further back gaze
O ’er eternity’s maze.
W hat before was good gravity doi»g.

268

T H E E A R T H ’S O B S E R V A T O R Y .

Pagan, scriptiwe-contradicting “ science ” is flooding the world, and we arederided for not accepting the imaginary gravity device upon the bare word anti
assumption of such men as Sir Isaac Newton, and crediting him with knowing
more than the Creator Himself.
True science, founded upon fact and reason, of course exists, but much now
presented to us as true science, including the Nebula hypothesis, is simply thatwhich is described in the Scriptures as, “ science falsely so-called.”
After giving the history, nature, and origin of the globe theory ; and several
proofs that water is level, and speaking of the (so-called) “ centrifugal ” motionof the earth,” which according to astronomers makes the earth fly away fromthe sun, and the “ centripetal ” or centre seeking, which they say “ tends liowards
the sun, the lecturer pointed out that these opposing forces would tend to nulli­fy each other.
Lady Blount gave a number of practical proofs against the veracity of theglobular theory. She stated that from a vessel midway between Kingston Pierand Holyhead, which are 60 miles apart, lighthouses can be seen which would
be many feet below the horizon, after deducting the height of the lighthouses
and the height of the observer, and therefore could aot be seen if the earth
was a globe. Also, the sun rising and setting at sea always shows a straight
line, as if a piece was cut off the bottom of it, but if the earth were a globe theline would be somewhat of a crescent shape— “ This is a good proof that theearth is not a globe,” said the lecturer, because it is the same when the sun’s
diam eter is magnified with a powerful telescope. This caused an objector, at a
recent meeting, who said the curvature was too small to be seen with the naked
eye, to collapse, as it is patent to all that a good telescope would magnify thecurvature and thus makje it visible if it were there.
Lack of space prevents giving in detail all that was brought forward regarding
ships at sea, the laws of perspective, mathematics, etc. But regarding the latterthe lecturer said : “ Mathematics are of excellent use when employed about
their proper objects, under the control of a logical mind ; but they were neverintended to rob those of highest mental capacities of common sense, for the
purpose of filling the less gifted and uncultured mind with wonder.”But many learned men seem to be deficient in true logic, as was Professor
Yule Oldham who stated that there was a six feet rise in three miles from theplace where you stand. A six feet rise on a ball is a fallacy ! I t should be a
six fe e t fa ll.
Pythagoras had been the first to introduoe the sea and earth globe theory
into Europe, after a long sojourn in the East, and the general introduction ofthese false ideas had been the cause of the rise of modern scepticism and infidel­
ity. Men, such as the Ed. of The Clarion, now e^ist who through the influenceof modern science (which they regard as being infallible) dare to make suchassertions as the following :— “ I will show that the ancient Jewish God, Jeho­vah, was utterly incapable of conceiving a scheme of creation so magnificent as
scienc* has revealed. For it is to human labour, and to human science, andnot to divine inspiration that we are indebted to the expansion and elevation of
our ideas of the universe, and its Creator.” — Ed. of The Clarion.
So the sceptic thinks that the universe of the Bible and its Creator are far too
inferior for him, therefore he invents, as he thinks, a greater universe, and somakes him self a greater Creator.
But I will quote no more of such blasphemy. Let us i»ay that the one who
penned it may yet learn th a t—
“ Man shall not live alone by h/ead,But bv each word that God has said.”

T H £ E A R T H ’ S O B SE R V A T O R Y .

O B JE C T IO N S

BY O P P O N E N T S TO ST A T E M E N T S
T ^ £ E A R T H , N o.s 35 & 36.

IN

P. 230-231 : V. A. W raight didn’t spin his bowl long enough. P. 236, para.
7 : “ Zenith stars would set in the plane of the observer’s position.” Rather
obscure \ but anyhow, one has only to experiment with a globe and candle tofind that the what the stars would do on the globular theory is just what they
do do.
Reply to above.—We think that you fail to see clearly on this subject, becausesome of our leading Zetetics have proved most satisfactorily that if a globe re­volving in front of stars, sun, and moon, was a fact, they would undoubtedly
rise and set in the plane of the observer. They could not do otherwise.
P. 238 : “ All olijjcts below the eye-line vanish into the eye-line.” No, they
don’t. Stand on a clifl' top when the eye-line is level with the mast-head of aship. As the ship recedes the masts do not vanish first. I have pointed thisout about ten times ; no Zetetic has answered it yet.
Reply.—Again it seems you are in a fog. The m ast-head is on a level withthe eye you say. T hen how can it vanish into the eye-line ? Will you kindly
give me the elevation of your eye, and that of the object, or objects, you lookat above sea level ?

Explain how the phases of the moon are accounted for on the plane-earth
theory ; and also about the eclipses.
Reply.—No man living can give a positive explanation of the cause of thephases and eclipses of the moon ; but we suggest the following. The moon’s
phases may be caused by the illum inated part of the moon being turned awayfrom us and towards the sun, so that we cannot see the whole of the illuminatedface of the moon. W hen we only see half the moon’s illuminated face we say itis the first quarter, referring principally to the quarters of the month.
Eclipses
may be caused by some semi-transparaiit dark body passing between us and themoon. But what that body is, whether gaseous or solid no one can tell. It is
certainly not the shadow of the earth, as popularly supposed. As the lights areabove the earth(',the earth’s shadow (if it has one) cannot possibly fall upwards.

I have found The E arth very interesting and instructive hitherto but it is be­
coming more so. T hanking you much for your last communication, and its
A. W.
valued contents.
All your writings interest me immensely, and I feel so refreshed after readingthem.
'
H E R M A N N W ARZAW IAK.
I was present at your large m eeting in the park, and I regarded it as a won­
derful sight to behold thousands of men so thrillingly interested with the truth
as to stand for near two hours without a sign of weariness. You also held the
deep attention of your aiKlience, of about 1,000 at the Congress Hall. They
seemed spell-bbuiTd !

i.\ ‘ iCH.

D A M IE N ’S

FRENCH IN
R E V IS E D

SYSTEM .

THE

THREE MONTHS!

EARTH.

E D IT IO N , 1902.

We have much pleasuie in recommending the above work.

V o l . Ill,

No.s. 39 & 40.
OCTOBER AND NOVEM BER.

T he booklet contains the three thousand words, and idioms,
which are most used in ordinary conversation ; sufficient toenable you to talk French all your life ; no fossil philologicalpeculiarities, but French as it is actually spoken in France.
Grammar underlies each group of examples, and we think
this a cleverly condensed method of teaching the Frenchlanguage.
T he A uthor of French in Three Mottths also gn es Lessons
in Conversational French to adults, al
128, C R O M W ELL ROAD, LO N D O N , S.W . ;
AN D

64,

RO SSLY N

H IL L ,H A M PSTEA D ,N.W.

Friends of the Ed. of this Magazine can testify to his ability
and agreeable way of teaching.

The Magnetic Nerve Invigorator Co.^JO N A TH ANNICHOLSON,

22, Budge Row, Cannon Street,LONDON, E.C.

Price of Appliances £1 Is., £2 2s., S £3 3s.
Instalm ents may be appanged.

C E L E S T IA L PH EN O M EN A .
By Lady Blount.
(continued from p. 245).
THE

M ID N IG H T

S U N — N.

AND

S.

“ The Sun and Moon Stood Still.”—Hab. iii. 11.
The sun’s motion is not only a fact according to the Holy
Scriptures, but also a fact which is self-evident to our senses
without any artificial aid. Tully says that the sun is called
Sol because it is the “ only ” heavenly body of that magni­
tude, and because when it rises it puts out all the other orbs
and “ only ” appears itself. Both common sense and ex­perience verify this statement, which is in accord with thefirst chapters of Genesis, wherein we read ; “ God made two
great lights, the greater light to rule the day.”It seems an undeniable fact that the m idnight sun is seenin the southern hemisphere (so-called), for we have it on nomean authority, viz. ; the Perth, W.A., Astronomer Royal,
the testimony of the crew of the Belgica, and the whole
exploring party on board the Discovery, that it is thus seenin the South as it is in the North.
Mr. Ernest Cook states in the last letter which I received
from him, that, “ the m idnight sun ought to be seen in the
middle of summer (D ecem ber)....... at all places south oflatitude 66^ S. As a m atter of fact there is no known
habitable land in the Antarctic regions, so we hear nothing
about it, but I read only a few days ago an account of the
exploring vessel, the Discovery, I think it is called, wherein
it was stated that the ciOw played cards on deck at m idnightwith the sun shining down upon them on Christmas Eve.”
This corresponds precisely with the accounts which
we received here in England.
In more than one report it