CH EA P ED ITIO N .

T h e fo llo w in g E x t r a c t w a s ta k e n fro m the “ B irm in g ­h a m W eek ly M e rc u r y ” o f F e b r u a r y ISth , 1890, a n d m u s t
h a v e been first p u b lish e d v e ry so o n a fte r th e exp erim en t
on th e B e d fo rd C a n a l, w h e n t h a t P r o fe s s o r frau d u len tly
a p p r o p r ia te d th e s u m o f £ 1 ,0 0 0 , on th e g r o s s ly fa lse plea
th a t he h a d p ro v e d a c u r v a t u r e on s ix m ile s o f the su r ­fa c e - w a te r o f th a t C a n a l.
“ An Engineer of Thirty Years Standing” writes to a magazine in1874 quoting the following sentences as the result of his experiencein the construction of railways, more especially :—“ I am thorou^lily
acquainted both with the theory and practice of civil engineering. How­ever bigoted some of our professors may be in the theory of surveying
according to the prescribed rules, yet it is well known amongst ua thatsuch theoretical measurements are incapable of any practical illustration.
All our locomotives are designed to run on what may be regarded as tnie
levels or flats. There are, of course, partial inclines or gradients here andthere, but they are always accurately defined, and must be carefully tra­versed. But anything approaching to ‘ eight inches in the mile, increasing
as the square of the distance,’ could not be worked by any engine that wasever yet constructed. Taking one station with another all over Englandand Scotland, it may be positively stated that all the platforms are on thesame relative level. The distance between the eastern and western coa.st»of England may be set down as three hundred miles. If the prescribedcurvature was indeed, as represented, the central stations say at Rugby or
Warwick, ought to be close upon three miles higher than a cord drawn
from the two extremities. If such was the case, there is not a driver or
stoker within the kingdom that would be found to take charge of the train.
As long as they know the pretended curve to be mere theory, they do nottrouble themselves about what may be stated in the tables of the geo­
graphers. But we can only laugh at those of your readers and others who
seriously give us credit for such venturesome exploits, as running trains
round spherical surfaces. Horizontal curves on levels are dangerous
enough; vei tical ones would be a thousand times worse, and, with ourrolling stock constructed as at present, physically impossible. There areseveral other reasons why such locomotion on iron rails would be as im­practicable as carrying the trains through the air.”— Sckveyor.
Ju st

P u b l i s h e d , i n M o n o c e o m e , A SKETCH OF TH E WORLD AS
A CIR C U LA R P L A N E ; SHOWING SOUTHERN ICEBBKGS, Size, 15
by 15. Price, 2Jd.

ONE HUNDRED PROOFS
THAT

the : e a r t hzs

NOT A GLOBE.
33eO ica,tecL to S?,ICX 3:.A .I^X 3

E»ca..

“ Tlw Greatest Astronomer oi the Age.”B y W M. CA.Tir*E]SrTEIl,
Referee fo r John Hampden, Ssg., in the Cel^ated Scientific Wager, in 1870;
Author of 'Common Sense’ on Astronomy, (London, 1866;) Proctor'>
Pktnet Earth; WaUace'i WoTuierful Water; The
BdutKm of the Da^, &c,, &e.

“UPRIGHT, DOWNRIGHT, STRSIGHTFORWIRD.

aA Shilling's worth o f P a p ers ( various) sent on receipt o f Seven Stamps,
and a larger assortment for Thirteen.

BALTIMORE:
P R iN T E D

A ll C o m m u n ic a tio n s m a y be a d d r e s s e d to the Secretary ,3, P a r k S tre e t, C roy d on , S u rre y .

F E B ., 1895.

AND P U B L IS H E D BY T H E A U T H O R ,No. 71 Chew Street.
1885.

| ) n t r 0 ilw t t o n *» PARALLAX,” the Pounder ot the “ Zetetic” philosophj[, is dead; and it now becomes the duty of those,
especially, who knew him personally and who laboredwith him in the cause of Truth against Error, to begin
anew the work which has been left in their hands.
Dr. Samuel B. Rowbotham finished his earthly laborsin England, the country of his birth, December 28rd,
1884, at the age of 89. He was, certainly, one of themost gifted of men; and', though his laboTB as apublic lecturer were confined within the limits of the
British Islands, his published 'work is known all over
the world and is destined to live and be republishedwhen books on the now popular system of philosophy
will be considered in no other light than as bundlesof waste paper. For several years did “ Parallax"
spread a knowledge of the facts which form the basisof his system without the slightest recognition fromthe newspaper press until, in January, 1849, thepeople were informed by the WilU Independent that
lectures had been delivered by “ a gentleman adopting
the name of ‘Parallax’, to prove modern astronomy
unreasonable and contradictory,” that “ great skill”
was shown by the lecturer, and that he proved him­
self to be “ thoroughly acquainted with the subject in all its bearings.”
Such was the beginning—but the end will not be so easily described.
The Truth will always find advocates—men who care not a snap of
their fingers for the mere opinion of the world, whatever form it may
take, whilst they know that they are the masters of the situation and that
Reason is King I In 1867, “ Parallax” was described as “ a paragon of
courtesy, good temper, and masterly skill in debate.” The author of thefollowing hastily-gotten-up pages is proud of having spent many a pleasanthour in the company of Dr. Samuel Birley Rowbotham.
A complete sketch of the “ Z e te tic P h ilo so p h y ” is impossible in asmall pamphlet; and many things necessarily remain unsaid which,perhaps, might have been touched upon, but which would to some extent
have interfered with the plan laid down—the bringing together, in a
concise form, “ One Htjndbed P boofs t h a t t h e E a r th is N o t a
G lobe.” Much may, however, be gathered, indirectly, from the argumentsin these pages, as to the real nature of the “ Earth”—“ the dry land”—on
which we live and of the heavenly bodies which were created FOR US.
The reader is requested to be patient in this matter and not expect a floodof light to burst in upon him at once, through the dense clouds of opposi­tion and prejudice which hang all around. Old ideas have to be gotten ridof, by some people, before they can entertain the new ; and this will espe­
cially be the. case in the matter of the Sun, about which we are taught, by
Mr. Proctor, as follow s: “ The globe of the Sun is so much larger thanthat o f the Barth that no less than 1,250,000 globes as large as the Barthwould be wanted to make up together a ^ obe as large as the Sun.”
Whereas we know that, as it is demonstrated that the Sun moves aroundover the plane Earth, Its size is proportionately, and necessarily, less. We
can then easily understand that D ay and Night, and the Sea»on», are brought
about ^ the Sun's daily circuits around in a course concentric with the North,diminishing in their extent to the end o f June, and increoMng until the end oj
December, the equatorial region being the area covered by his mean motion.

If, then, these pages serve but to arouse the spirit of enquiry, the author
will be satisfied.

Baitim,ore, Maryland, U. 8, A., August, 1885.

ONE HCNDEEB PEO O IS

,

THAT

EAETH IS NOT A GIOBE.
I f man uses the senses wliicli God has given him, he gains know­
ledge; if he uses them not, he remains ignorant. Mr, R. A. Proctor,
who has been called “ the greatest astronomer of the age,” says:“ The Earth on which we live and move seems to be flat.” Now, hedoes not mean that it seems to be flat to the man who shuts his eyes in
the face of nature, or, who is not in the full possession of his senses;
no, but to the average, common sense, wide-awake, thinking man.
He continues: “ that is, though there are hills and valleys on its
surface, yet it seems to extend on all sides in one and the same gen­eral level.” Again, he says: “ There seems nothing to prevent us
from travelling as far as we please in any direction towards the circle
all round us, called the horizon, where the sky seems to meet thelevel of the Earth.” “ The level of the E arth ! Mr, Proctor knowsright well what he is talking about, for the book from which we takehis words, “ Lessons in Elementary Astronomy,” was written, he tells
ua, “ to guard the beginner against the captious objections which havefrom time to time been urged against accepted astronomical theories.”
The things which are to be defended, then, are these “ accepted astron­
omical theories I” I t is not truth that is to be defended against the as­
saults of error—Oh, no; simply “ theories,” right or wrong, because
they have been “ accepted!” Accepted! Why, they have been ac­
cepted because it was not thought to be worth while to look at them.
Sir John Herschel says: “ We shall take for granted, from the outset,
the Copernican system of the world.” He did not care whether it
was the right system or a wrong one, or he would not have done that:
he would have looked into it. But, forsooth, the theories are ac­
cepted, and, of course, the men who have accepted them are tlie men
who will naturally defend them if they can. So, Richard A. Proctor
tries his hand; and we shall see how it fails him. His book was pub­lished without any date to it a t all. But there is internal evidence
which will fix that matter closely enough. We read of the carryingout of the experiments of the celebrated scientist, Alfred li. Wallace,to prove the “ cdnvexitj” of the Burfuce of stiuiding water, which ex­periments were conducted in ilarch, 1870, for the purpose of winning
Five Hundred Pounds from John Hampden, Esq., of Swindon, Eng­land, who had w'agered that sum upon the conviction that the said
surface is always a level one. Mr. Proctor says: “ The experiment
was latoiy tried in a very amusing way.” In or about the year Z870,
then, Mr. Proctor wrote his book; and, instead of being ignorant of
the details of the experiment, he knew all about them. Ana whether
the “ amusing” part of the business was the fact that Mr. Wallace

4

ONE HUNDRED PROOFS.

wrongfully claimed the five-linnclred pounds and got it, or that Mr.
Hampden was the victim of the false claim, it ia hard to say. The“ way” in which the experiment was carried out is, to all intents andpurposes, just the way in which Mr. Proctor states that it ‘'can betried.” He says, however, that the distance involved in the experi­
ment “ should be three or four miles.” Now, Mr. Wallace took up
six miles in his experiment, and was unable to prove that there iy
any “ curvature,” though he claimed the money and got it; surelj
it would be “ amusing' for anyone to expect to be able to show
the “ curvature of the earth” in three or four miles, as Mr. Proctor
suggests! Nay, it is ridiculous. But “ the greatest astronomer of
the age” Says the thing can be donel And he gives a diagram:“ Showing how the roundness of the Earth can be proved by meansof tnree boats on a large sheet of water.” (Three or four miles.)But, though the accepted astronomical theories be scattered to thewinds, we charge Mr. Proctor either that he has never made theexperiment with the three boats, or, that, if he has, the experiment
did NOT prove what he says it will. Accepted theories, indeed!
Are tney to be bolstered up with absurdity and falsehood ? Why, if
it were possible to show the two ends of a four-mile stretch ofwater to be on a level, with the centre portion of that water bulged
up, the surface of the Earth would be a series of four-mile curves 1
But Mr. Proctor says: “ We can set three boats in a line on thewater, as at A, B, and 0, (Fig. 7). Then, if equal masts are placed inthese boats, and we place a telescope, as shown, so that when we lookthrough it we see the tops of the masts of A and 0, we find the top of
the mast B is above the line of sight.” Now, here is the ^ i n t : Mr.
Proctor either knows or he ought to inow that we shall n o t findanything of the sort! I f he has ever tried the experiment, he knowsthat the three masts will range in a straight line, just as common sense
tells U8 they will. If he has not tried the experiment, he should have
tried it, or have paid attention to the details of experiments by those
who have tried similar ones a score of times and again. Mr. Proctor
may take either horn of the dilemma he pleases: he is j pst as wrong aa
a man can be, either vfoy.
He mentions no names, but he says: “ Aperson had writ1«n a book, in which he said that he had tried suchan experiment as the above, and had found that the surface ofthe water
was w / curved.” That person was “ P a b a l l a x , ” the founder of the
Zetetic Philosophy. He continuest “ Another person seems to havebelieved the first, and became so certain that the Earth is flat as towager a large sum of money that if three boats were placed as in Fig.
7, the middle one would not be above the line joining the two others.'
That person was John Hampden. And, says Mr, Proctor, “ Unfor­
tunately for him, some one who had more sense agreed to take his
wager, and, of course, won his money.” Now, the “ some one who
had more sense” was Mr. Wallace. And, says Proctor, in continua­
tion; “ He [Hampden?] was rather angry; and it is a strange thingthat he was not anwy with himself for being so foolish, or with theperson who said he nad tried the experiment (and so led him astray),
but with the person who had won his money I” Here, then, we seethat Mr, Proctor knows better than to say that the experiments con­EAETH IS NOT A GLOBE.

5

ducted by “ P a b a l l a x ” were things of the imagination only, or thata wrong account had been given of them ; and it would be TV’ell if heknew better than to try to make his readers believe that either one or
the other of these things is the fact. But, there is the Old Bodford
Canal now; and there are ton thousand places where the experiment
may be tried! Who, then, are the “ foolish” people: those who “ be­lieve” the record of experiments made by searchers after Truth, or
those who shut their eyes to them, throw a doubt upon the record,charge the conductors of the experiments with dishonesty, never con­duct similar experiments themselves, and declare the result of such
experiments to be so and so, when the declaration can be proved to befalse by any man, with a telescope, in twenty-four hours f
Mr, Proctor:—The sphericity of the Earth CANNOT be provedin the way in which you tell us it “ can’’ be! We tell you to takeback your words and remodel them on the basis of Truth. Such care­less misrepresentations of facts are a disgrace to science—they are thedisgrace of theoretical science to-day 1 Mr. Blackie, in hia work on“ Self Culture,” says: “ All flimsy, shallow, and superficial work, infact, is a lie, of which a man ought to be ashamed.”That the Earth is an extended plane, stretched out in all directions
away from the central North, over which hangs, for ever, the North
Star, is a fact which all the falsehoods that can be brought to bear
upon it with their dead weight will never overthrow: it is God’s
Truth the face of which, however, man has the power to smirch allover with his unclean hands. Mr. Proctor says: “ We learn from as­tronomy that all theseideas, natural though they seem, are mistaken.”Man’s natural ideas and conclusions and experimental results are,then, to be overthrown by—what! By “ astronomy?” By a thing
without a soul—a mere theoretical abstraction, the outcome of the
dreamer ? Never I The greatest astronomer of the age is not the man,even, who can bo much as attempt to manage the business. “ Wefind,” says Mr. Proctor, “ that the Earth is not flat, but a globe; notfixed, but in very rapid motion; not much larger than the moon, andfar smaller than the bun and the greater number of the stars.”First, then, Mr. Proctor, tell us h o w you find that the Earth is notflat, but a globe! It does not matter that '“ we find” it so put downin that conglomeration of suppositions which you S e e k to defend: thequestion is. What is the evidence of it?—where can it be obtained?
“ The Earth on which we live and move seems to be flat,” yon tell u s:wh«re, then, is the mistake? If the Earth seem to be what it is not,how are we to trust our senses ? And if it is said that we cannot doso, are we to believe it, and consent to be p\jt down lower than thebrutes? No, sir: we challenge you, as we have done many times be­fore, to produce the slightest evidence of the Earth’s rotundity, fromthe world of facts around you. You have given to us the statement
we have quoted, and we have the right to demand a proof; and if
this is not forthcoming, we have before us the duty of denouncing theabsurd dogma as worse than an absurdity—a s a f r a u d —and as afraud that flies in the face of divine revelation! Well, then, Mr.
Proctor,'“m demanding a proof of the Earth’s rotundity (or the frankadmission of your errors), we are tempted to taunt you as we tell you

ONE HUHDRED PE 00F8.

that it is utterly out of your power to produce one; and we tell you” ' you do- not'dare■'lift up your fingthateven to) lift
finger to point us to the socalled proofs in______________of
the school-books ofthe
the day,day, forforyo
you inow themeasure______________of absurdity of which they are composed, and how disgraceful it la toallow them to remain as false guides of the youthful mind!
Mr. Proctor: we charge you that, whilst you teach the theory of the
Earth’s rotundity and mobility, you kxow that it is a plane; and hereis the ground of the charge. In page 7, in your book, you give a di­agram of the “ surface on which we live,” and the “ supposed globe”—the supposed “ hollow globe”—of the heavens, arched over the said
surface. Now, Mr. Proctor, you picture the surface on which we livein exact accordance with your verbal description. And what is that
description ? We shall scarcely be believed when we eay that we giveit just as it stands: “ The level of the surface on which we live.”
And, that there may he no mistake about the meaning of the word“ level,” we remiml you that your diagram proves that the level thatyou mean is the level of the mechanic, a plane surface, and not the“ level” of the astronomer, which is a convex surface! In short,your description of the Earth is exactly what you say it “ seems tobe,” and, yet, what you say it is not: the very aini of your bookbeing to say so! And we call this the prostitution of the printing)ress. And it is all the evidence that is necessary to bring the chargelome to you, since the words and the diagram are in page 7 of yourown book. You know, then, that Earth is a Plane—and bo do we.
Now for the evidence of this grand fact, that other people may know
it as well as you; remembering, from first to last, that you havenot dared to bring forward a single item from the mass of evidence
which is to be found in the “ Zetetic Philosophy,” by “ Parallax,” awork the iniluence of which it was the avowed object of your own
book to crush 1—except that of the three boats, an experiment which
you have never tried, and the result of which has never been known,
by anyone who has tried it, to be as you say it is!
1. The aeronaut can see for himself that Earth is a Plane. The
appearance presented to him, even at the highest elevation he has everattained, is that of a concave surface—this being exactly what is to
be expected of a surface that is truly level, since it is the nature oflevel surfaces to appear to rise to a level with the' eye of the ob­server. This is ocular demonstration and proof that Earth is nota globe.
2. Whenever experiments have been tried on the surface of standing
water, this surface has always been found to be level. If the Earthwere a globe, the surface of all standing water would be convex. Thisis an experimental proof th at Earth is not a globe.
3. Surveyors’ operations in the construction of railroads, tunnels,
or C a n a ls are conducted without the slightest “ allowance” being
made for “ curvature,” although it is tau^^ht that this so-called
allowance is absolutely necessary! This is a cutting proof that
Earth is not a globe.
4. There are rivers that flow for hundreds of miles towards thelevel of the sea without falling more than a few feef—notably, theNile, which, in a thousand miles, falls but a foot. A level expanse

EAETH IS NOT A GLOBE,

7of this extent is quite incompatible with the idea of the Earth’s “ con­vexity.” It is, therefore, a reasonable proof that Earth is not a globe.
5. The lights which are exhibited in lighthouses are seen by navi­
gators at distances at which, according to the scale of the supposed“curvature” given by astronomers, they ought to be many hundredsof feet, in some cases, down below the line of sight 1 For instance:
the light at Cape Hatteraa is seen at such a distance (40 miles) that,
according to theory, it ought to be nine-hundred feet higher above
the level of the sea than it absolutely is, in order to be visible I Thisis a conclusive proof that there is no “ curvature,’’ on the surface ofthe sea—“ the level of the sea,”—ridiculous though it is to be under
the necessity of proving it at a ll: but it is, nevertheless, a conclusive
proof that tne Earth is not a globe.
6. If we stand on the sands of the sea-shore and watch a ship ap­
proach us, we shall find that she will apparently “ rise”—to the extent
of her own height, nothing more. If we stand upon an eminence,the same law operates still; and it is but the law of perspective, whichcauses objects, as they approach us, to appear to increase in size until
we see them, close to us, the size they are in fact. That there is noother "rise” than the one spoken of is plain from the fact that, nomatter how high we ascend above the level of the sea, the horizon rises
on and still on as we rise, so that it is always on a level with the eye,though it be two-hundred miles away, as seen by Mr. J. Glaisher, ofEngland, from Mr. Coxwell’s balloon. So that a ship five miles away
may be imagined to be “ coming up” the imaginary downward curveof the Earth’s surface, but if we merely ascend a hill such as Federal
Hill, Baltimore, we may see twenty-five miles away, on a level withthe eye—^that is, twenty miles level distance beyond the ship that we
vainly imagined to be “ rounding the curve,” and “ coming u p !”This is a plain proof that the Earth is not a globe.
7. VIf we take a trip down the Chesapeake Bay, in the day-time, we
may see for ourselves the utter fallacy of the idea that when a vessel
appears “ hull down,” as it is called, it is because the hull is “ behind
the water:” for, vessels have been seen, and may often be seen again,presenting the appearance spoken of, and away—far away—beyond
those vessels, and, at the same moment, the level shore line, with
its accompanying complement of tall trees, towering up, in perspective,
over the heads of the “ hull-down” ships! Since, then, tne idea will
not stand its ground when the facts rise up against it, and it is a pieceof the popular theory, the theory is a contemptible piece of business,
and we may easily wring from it a proof that Earth is not a globe.
8. If the Earth were a globe, a small model globe would be thevery best—because the truest—thing for the navigator to take to sea
with hinu But such a thing as that is not known: with such a toy
as a guide, the marinei* would wreck his ship, of a certainty I This is
a proof that Earth is not a globe.
9. >As mariners take to sea with them charts constructed asthoueh
the sea were a level surface, however these charts may err as to tne
true form of this level surface taken as a whole, it is clear, as theyfind them answer their purpose tolerably well—^and only tolerably
well, for many ships are wrecked owing to the error of which w<*

i:

fT
8

ONE HUNDRED P E 00P 8,

speak—that the surface of tlie sea is as it is taken to bo, whether thecaptain of the ship “ supposes” the Earth to be a ghibe or anythingelse. Thus, then, we draw, from the common system of “ plane sail­ing,” a practical proof that Earth is not a globe.
10. That the mariners’ compass points north and south at thesame time ia a fact as indisputable as that two and two makes four;
but that this would be impossible if the thing were.placed on a globe
with “ north” and “ south’ at the centre of opposite hemispheres is afact that does not figure in the school-books, though very easily seen:
and it requires no lengthy train of reasoning to bring out of it a pointed
nroof that the Earth is not a globe.
11. As the mariners’ compass points north and south at one time,and as the North, to which it 's q.ttraf'ted. is that part of the Earth.situate where the North Star is in the zenith, it follows that there is
no south “ point” or ‘‘ pole” but that, while the centre is North, avast circumference must be South in its whole extent. This is a proof
that the Earth is not a globe.
12. As we hare seen that there is, really, no south point (or pole)
but an infinity of points forming, together, a vast circumference—theboundary of the known world, with its battlements of icebergs which
bid defiance to man’s onward course in a southerly direction—so there
can be no east or west “ points,’” just as there is no “ yesterday,” andno “ to-morrow,” In fact, as there is one point that is fixed (theNorth), it is impossible for any other point to be fixed likewise. Eastand west are, therefore, merely directions at right angles with a northand south line; and as the south point of the compass shifts round to
all parts of the circular boundary, (as it may be carried round the cen­tral North), so ths directions east and west, crossing this line, con­tinued, form a circle, at any latitude. A westerly circumnavigation,
therefore, is a going round with the North Star continually on theright hand, and an easterly circumnavigation is performed only when
the reverse condition of things is maintained, the North Star being
on the left hand as the jolirneyis made. These facts, taken together,
form a beautiful proof that the Earth is not a globe.
13. As the mariners’ compass points north and souih at one andthe same time, and a meiidian is a north and south line, it follows
that meridians can be no other than straight lines. But, since all
meridians on a globe are semicircles, it is an incontrovertible proof
that the Earth' is not a globe.
14. “ Parallels of latitude” only—6f all imaginary lines on thesurface of the Earth—are circles, which increase, progressively, fromthe northern centre to the southern circumference. The mariner’s
course in the direction of any one of th?sci concentric circlco is his
longitude, the degrees of which IHC s e a s e to euch an extent beyond
the equator (going southAvards) that hundreds of vessels have been
wrecked because of the false idea created by the nntruthfulness ofthe charts and the globular theory together, causing the sailor to becontinually getting out of his reckoning. With a map of the Earthin its true form all difficulty is done away with, and ships may be
conducted anywhere with perfect safety. This, then, is a very im­
portant practical proof that the Earth is not p globe.

EAETH IS NOT A GLOBE.

»

15. The idea that, instead of sailing horizontally round the Earth,sMps are taken down one side of a globe, then underneath, and arebrought up on the other side to get home again, is, except as a mere
dream, impossible and absurd 1 And, since there are neither impos­
sibilities nor absurdities in the simple matter of circumnavigation, it
stands, without argument, a proof that the Earth is not a globe.
16. If the Earth were a globe, the distance round its surface at,say, 45 “ degrees” south latitude, could not possibly be any greaterthan it is at the same latitude north; but, since it is found by navi­
gators to be twice the distance—to say the least of it—or, double thedistance it ought to be according to the globular theory, it is a proof
that the Earth is not a globe.
17. Human beings require a surface on which to live that, in its
general character, shall be l e v e l ; and since the Omniscient Creator
must have been perfectly acquainted with the requirements of His
creatures, it follows that, being an All-wise Creator, He has met
them thoroughly. This is a theological proof that the Earth is nota globe.
18. The best possessions of man are his senses; and, when he uses
them all, he will not be deceived in his survey of nature. I t is only
when some one faculty or other is neglected or abused that he is de­luded. Every man in full command of his senses knows that a levelsurface is a flat or horizontal one; but astronomers tell ns that thetrue level is the curved surface of a globe! They know that man
requires a level surface on which to live, so they give him one in namewhich is not one in fact! Sincc this is the best that astronomers,
with their theoretical science, can do for their fellow creatures—de­ceive them—it is clear that things are not as they say they are; and,in short, it is a proof that Earth is not a globe.
19. Every man in his senses goes the most reasonable way to work
to do a thing. Now, astronomers (one after another—^following aleader), while they are telling us that Earth is a globe, are cutting
off the upper half of this supposititious globe in their books, and, in
this way, forming the level surface on which they describe man asliving and moving! Now, if the Earth were really a globe, thiswould be just the most unreasonable and suicidal mode of endea­
voring to show it. So that, unless theoretical astronomers are allout of their senses together, it is, clearly, a proof th at the Earth ia
not a globe.
20. The common sense of man tells him—if nothing else told him—^that there is an “ up” and a'^dow u” in nature, even as regards theheavens and the earth; but the theory of modern astronomers neces­sitates the conclusion that there is not: therefore, the theory of theastronomers is opposed to common sense—^yes, and to inspiration—and this is a common sense proof that the Earth is not a globe.
21. Man’s experience tellB him that he ia not constructed like theflies that can live and move upon the ceiling of a room with as muchsafety as on the floor: and since the modern theory of a planetary
earth necessitates a crowd of theories to keep company with it, and oneof them is th at men are really bound to the earth by a force which
festena them to i t " like needles round a spherical loadstone,” a10

OITE HUNDRED PEOOFS,

theory perfectly outrageous and opposeil to all human experience, itfollows that, unless we can trample upoii common aense and ^ o r e
the teachings of experience, we have an evident proof that the Earthis not a globe.
22. God’s Truth never—no, never—requires a falsehood to help it
along. Mr. Proctor, in his “ Lessons," says: Men “ have been able
to go round and round the Earth in several directions.” Now, in
this case, the word “ several” will imply more than two, tinquestionably; whereas, it is utterly impossihle to circumnavigate the Earth inany other than an easterly or a westerly direction j and the fact
is perfectly consistent and clear in its relation to Earth as a Plane,
Now, since astronomers would not be so foolish as to damage a goodcause by misrepresentation, it is presumptive evidence that their cause
is a bad one, and—a proof that Earth is not a globe.
23. If astronomical works be searched through and through, there
will not be found a single instance of a bold, unhesitating, or manly
statement respecting a proof of the Earth’s “ rotundity.” Proctor
speaks of “ proofs which serve to show . , th at the Earth is not flat,”and says that man “ finds reason to think that the Earth is not flat,”and speaks of certain matters being “ explained by supposing” that
the Earth is a globe; and says that people have “ assured themselvesthat it is a globe;” but he says, also, that there is a “ most complete
proof that the Earth is a globe:” just as though anything in the world
could possibly be wanted but a proof—a proof that proves and set­tles the whole question. This, however, all the money in the UnitedStates Treasury would not buy; and, unless the astronomers are allso rich that they don’t want the cash, it is a sterling proof that the
Earth is not a globe.
24. When a man speaks of a “ most complete” thing amongst sev­
eral other things which claim, to be what th at thing is, it is evident
that they must fall short of something which the “ most coniplete”
thing possesses. And when it is known that the “ most complete”
thing IS an entire failure, it is plain that the others, all and sundry,
are worthless. Proctor’s “ most complete proof that the Earth, is a
globe” lies in what he calls “ the fact” that distances from place toplace agree with calculation. But, since the distance round the Earthat 45 “ degrees’’ south of the equator is twice the distance it would
be on a globe, it follows that what the greatest astronomer of the age
calls “ a fact” is NOT a fact; that his “ most complete proof’ is a mostcomplete failure; and that he might as well have told us, at once,
that he has n o p r o o f to give us at all. Now, since, if the Earth bea globe, there would, necessarily, be piles of proofs of it all roundus, it follows that when astronomers, with all their ingenuity, areutterly unable to point one out—to say nothing about picking one
up—that they give us a proof that Earth is not a globe.
25. The surveyor’a plana in relation to the laying of the firstAtlantic Telegraph cable, show that in 1665 miles—from Valentia,
Ireland, to St. John’s, Newfoundland—the surface of the ictlantic
Ocean is a l e v e l surface—not the astronomers' “ level,” eitherl
The authoritative drawings, published at the time, are a standing evi­
dence of the fact, and form a practical proof that Earth is not a globe.

IJ

EARTH ISnot

A GLOBE.

11

26. If the Earth were a globe, it would, if we take Valentia to be
the place of departure, curvate downwards, in the 1665 miles acrossthe Atlantic to Newfoundland, according to the astronomers’ own ta­
bles, more than three-hundred miles; but, as the surface of the A t­
lantic does not do so—the fact of its levelness having been clearly
demonstrated by Telegraph Cable surveyors,—it follows that wehave a grand proof that Earth is not a globe.
27. Astronomers, in their consideration of the supposed “ curva­
ture” of theEarth, have carefully avoided the taking of that view of thequestion which—if anything were needed to do so—would show its
utter absurdity. I t is this:—If, in ste p of taking our ideal point of
departure to be at Valentia, we consider ourselves at St. John’s, the1665 miles of water between us and Valentia would just as well“ curvate” downwards as it did in the other case 1 Now, since thedirection in which the Earth is said to “ curvate” is interchangeable—
depending, indeed, upon the position occupied by a man upon its sur­face—the thing is utterly absurd; and it follows that the theory is anoutrage, and that the Earth does not “ curvate” at a ll:—an evident
proof that the Earth is not a globe.
• 28. Astronomers are in the habit of considering two points on the
Earth’s surface, without, it seems, any lim it as to the distance that lies
between them, as being on &level, and the intervening section, eventhough it be au ocean, as avast “ hill”—of water I The Atlantic ocean,in taking this view of the matter, would form a “ hill of water’’ morethan a hundred miles high 1 The idea is simply monstrous, and could
only be entertained by scientists whose whole business is made up ofmaterials of the same description: and i t certainly requires no argu­
ment to deduce, from such “ science” as this, a satisfactory proof that
the Earth is not a globe.
29. If the Earth were a globe, it would, unquestionably, have thesame general characteristics—no matter its size—as a small globe that
may be stood upon the table. As the small globe has top, bottom,
and sides, so must also the large one—no matter how large it be.
But, as the Earth, which is “ supposed” to be a large globe, has nosides or bottom as the small globe has, the conclusion is irresistiblethat it is a proof that Earth is not a globe.
30. If the Earth were a globe, an observer who should ascend above
its surface would have to look downwards a t the horizon (if it bepossible to conceive of a horizon at all under such circumstances) evenas astronomical diagrams indicate—at angles varying from ten tonearly fifty degrees below the “ horizontal” line of sight! (It is justas absurd as it would be to be taught that when we look at a man fullin the face we are looking down a t his feet 1) But, as no observer inthe clouds, or upon any eminence on the earth, has ever had to do so,
it follows that the dia^am s spoken of are imaginary and false; thatthe theory which requires such things to prop it up is equally airy anduntrue; and thatwe have a substantial proof that Earth isnotaglobe.
31. If the Earth were a globe, it would certainly have to be aslarge as it is said to be—twenty-five thousand miles in circumference.
Now, the thing which is called a “ proof” of the Earth’s roundness,
iuid which is presented to children at school, is, that if we stand on!| / J•> ■I12ONE HUNDRED PROOFS.
e a r t h istte sea-shore we may see the ships, as they approach ns, absolutely“ coming up,” and that, as we are able to seethe highest parts of theseships first, it is because the lower parts are “ behind the earth’s curve.”
Now, since, if this were the case—that is, if the lower parts of theseships were behind a “ hill of water” at all—the size of the Earth, in­dicated by such a curve as this, would be so small that it would only
be big enough to hold the people of a parish, if they could get all
round it, instead of the nations of the world, it follows that the idea
is preposterous; that the appearance is due to another and to somereasonable cause; and that, instead of being a proof of the globularform of the Earth, it is a proof that Earth is not a globe,
33. I t is often said that, if the Earth were flat, we could see allover it I This is the result of ignorance. If we stand on the levelsurface of a plain or a prairie, and take notice, we shall find that thehorizon is formed a t about three miles all around us; th a t is, theground appears to rise up until, a t that distance, it seems on a levelwith the eye-line or line of sight. Consequently, objects no higher
than we stand—say, six feet—and which are a t th at distance (three
miles), have reached the “ vanishing point,” and are beyond the sphereof our unaided vision. This is the reason why the hull of a ship disrppears (in going away from us) before the sails; and, instead of there
being about it the faintest shadow of evidence of the Earth’s rotundity,
it is a clear proof th at Earth is not a globe.
33. If the Earth were a globe, people—except those on the top—would, certainly, have to be “ fastened” to its surface by some meansor other, whether by the “ attraction” of astronomers or by some other
undiscovered and undiscoverable process 1 But, as we inow that we
simply walk on its surface without any other aid than that which isnecessary for locomotion on a plane, it follows that we have, herein,a conclusive proof that Earth is not a globe.
34. If the Earth were a globe, there certainly would be—if we
could imagine the thine to be peopled all round—“ antipodes;”“ people who,” sayS the dictionary, “ living exactly on the opposite
aide of the globe to ourselves, have their feet opposite to ours:”—people who are hanging heads downwards whilst we are standing
heads u p ! But, since the theory allows us to travel to those partsof the Earth where the people are said to be heads downwards, andstill to fancy ourselves to be heads upwards and our friends whom
we have left behind us to be heads downwards, it follows that thewhole thing is a myth— a dream—a delusion—and a snare; and,instead of there being any evidence at all in this direction to sub­stantiate the popular theory, it is a plain proof that the Earth is /not a globe.
*
85.
If we examine a true picture of the distant horizon, or thething itself, we shall find that it coincides exactly with a perfectly
straight and level line. Now, since there could be nothing of the kindon a globe, and we find i t to be the case all over the Earth, it is a
proof that tire Earth is not a globe.
36.
If we take a'^joumey dovm the Chesapeake Bay, by night,
we shall see the “ light” exhibited at Sharpe s Island for an hour
before the steamer gets to it. We may take up a positioa ou the deck1

n o t a globe.

13

so that the rail of the vessel’s side will be in a line with the “ light” andin the line of sight; and we shall find that in the whole journey thelight will not vary in the slightest degree in its apparent elevation.
But, say that a distance of thirteen miles has been traversed, the as­tronomers’ theory of *• curvature” demands a difference (one way or
the other!) in the apparent elevation of the light, of 112 feet 8 inches I
Since, however, there is not a difference of 112 hair’s breadths, wehave a plain proof th at the water of the Chesapeake Bay is not curved,
which is a proof that the Earth is not a globe.
37. If the Earth were a globe, there would, very likely, be (fornobody knows) six months day and six months night at the arctic andantarctic regions, as astronomers dare to assert there is:—for their
theory demands i tl But, as this fact—the six months day and six
months night—ia nowhere found but ia the arctic regions, it agrees
perfectly with everything else that we know about the Earth as aplane, and, whilst it overthrows the “ accepted theory,” it furnishes
a striking proof that Earth is not a globe.
38. When tjie Sun crosses the equator, in March, and begins tocircle round the heavens in north latitude, the inhabitants of highnorthern latitudes see him skimming round their horizon and forming
the break of their long day, in a horizontal course, not disappearing
again for six months, as he rises higher and higher in the heavens
whilst he makes his twenty-four hour circle until June, when hebegins to descend and ^oes on until he disappears beyond the horizonin September. Thus, in the northern regions, they have that which
the traveller calls the “ midnight Sun,” aa he sees that luminary at atime -k/hcn, in his more southern latitude, it is always midnight. If,then, for one-half the year, we may see for ourselves the Sun making
horizontal circles round the heavens, it is presumptive evidence that,for the other half-year, he is doing the same, although beyond theboundary of our vision. This, being a proof that E arth is a plane,is, therefore, a proof that the Earth is not a globe.
89. Wehave abundance ofevidence that the Sunmoves dailyroundand over the Earth in circles concentric with the northern region overwhich hangs the North S tar; but, since the theory of the Earthbeing a globe ia necessarily connected with the theory of its motion
found the Sun in a yearly orbit, it falls to the ground when we bringforward the evidence of which we speak, and, in so doing, forms a
proof that the Earth is not a globe.
40. The Suez Canal, which joins the Red Sea vrith the Mediter­
ranean, is about one hundred miles long; it forma a straight and levelsurface of water from one end to the other; and no “ allowance” forany supposed “ curvature” was made in its construction. It is a clear
proof that the Earth is not a globe.
41. When astronomers assert that it is “ necessary” to make “ al­lowance for curvature” in canal construction, it is, of course, in order
that, in their idea, a level cutting may be had for the water. How
flagrantly, then, do they contradict themselves when they say that the
curved surface of the Earth is a “ true level 1" What more can theywant for a canal than a true level? Since they contradict themselvesin such an elementary point as this, it is an evidence that the whole

1402fE HUNDEED PROOFS

tting is a dehision, and we have a proof that the Earth is not a glote,
42. It is certain that the theory t)f the Earth’s rotundity and thatof its mobility must stand or fall together. A proof, then, of its im­mobility is virtually a proof of its non-rotundity. Now, that the
Earth does not move, either on an axis, or in an orhit round the Sunor anything else, is easily proven. If the Earth went through spaceat the rate of eleven-hundred miles in a minute of time, as astronomers
teach 138, in a particular direction, there would unquestionably b e adifference in the result of firing off a projectile in that direction andin a direction the opposite of that one. But a s, in fact, there is not
the slightest difference in any such case, it is clear that any alleged
motion of the Earth is disproved, and that, therefore, we have a proof
that the Earth is not a globe.
/
43. The circumstances which attend bodies which are caused
merely to fall from a great height prove nothing as to the motion or
stability of the Earth, since the object, if it be on a thing that is inmotion, will participate in that motion; but, if an object be thrown
upwards from a body at rest, and, again, from a body in motion, thecircumstances attending its descent will be very different. In theformer case, it will fall, if thrown vertically upwards, at the placefrom whence it was projected; in the latter case, it will fall behind—the moving body from which it is thrown will leave it in the rear.
Now, fix a gun, muzzle upwards, accurately, in the ground; fire off a
projectile; and it will fall by the gun. If the Earth travelled elevenlundred miles a minute, the projectile would fall behind the gun, in
the opposite direction to th at of the supposed motion. Since, then,this is ifoT the case, in fact, the Earth’s fancied motion is negatived,
and we have a proof that the Earth is not a globe,
44. I t is in evidence that, if a projectile be fired from a rapidly
moving body in an opposite direction to that in which the body isgoing, it will fall short of the distance at which it would reach theground if fired in the direction of motion. Now, since the Earth issaid to move at the rate of nineteen miles in a second of time, “ fromwest to east,” it would make all the difference imaginable if the
gun were fired in an opposite direction. But, as, in practice, there
is not the slightest difference, whichever way the thiug may be done,
we have a forcible overthrow of all fancies relative to the motionof the Earth, and a striking proof that the Earth is not a globe.
45. The Astronomer Royal, of England, George B, Airy, in his
celebrated work on Astronomy, the “ Ipswich Lectures,” says: “Jupiteris a large planet that turns on his axis, and why do not we turn?”
Of course, the common sense reply is: Because the Earth is not aplanet 1 When, therefore, an astronomer royal puts words into ourmouth wherewith we may overthrow the sujiposed planetary natureof the Earth, we have not far to go to pick up a proof th at Earthis not a globe.
46. I t has been shown that an easterly or a westerly motion isnecessarily a circular course round the central North, The only northpoint or centre of motion of the heavenly bodies known to man isthat formed by the North Star, which is over the central portionof the outstretched Earth, When, therefore, astronomers tell us of

EARTH IS NOT A GLOBE.

15

a planet taking a westerly course round the Sun, the thing is as mean­
ingless to them as it is to us, unless they make the Sun the northern
centre of the motion, which they cannot do I Since, then, the motion
which they tell us the planets have is, on the face of it, absurd; andsince, as a matter of fact, the Earth can have no absurd motion atall, it is clear that it cannot be what astronomers say it is—a planet;
and, if not a planet, it is a proof that Earth is not a globe-.
47. _In consequence of the fact being so plainly seen, by everyone
who_ visits the sea-shore, that the line of the horizon is a perfectly
straight line, it becomes inipossible for astronomers, when they attempt
to_convey, pictorially, an idea of the Earth’s “ convexity,” to do sowith even a shadow of consistency; for they dare not represent thishorizon aa a curved line, so well known is it that it is a straight one I
The greatest astronomer of the age, in page 15 of his “ Lessons,” gives
an illustration of a ship sailing away, “ as though she were rounding
the top of a great hill of w a t e r a n d there—of a truth—is the straightand level line of the horizon clear along the top of the “ hill’’from one
side of the picture to the other 1 Now, if this picture were true in all
its parts—aad it is outrageously false in several—it would show that
Earth is a cylinder; for the “ hill” shown is simply up one side of thelevel, horizontal line, and, we are led to suppose, down the other I
Since, then, we have such high authority as Professor Eichard A.
Proctor that the Earth is a cylinder, it is, certainly, a proof that theBarth is not a globe,
48. In Mr. Proctor’s “ Lessons in Astronomy,” page 15, a ship isrepresented as sailing away from the observer, and it is given in fivepositions or distances away on its journey. Now, in its first position,
its mast appears above the horizon, and, consequently, higher thanthe observer’s line of vision. But, in its second and third positions,representing the ship as further and further away, it is drawn higher
and still higher up above the line of the horizon! Now, it is utterly
impossible for a ship to sail away from an observer, under the. condi­
tions indicated, and to appear as given in the picture. Consequently,
the picture is a misrepresentation, a fraud, and a disgrace. A ship
starting to sail away from an observer with her masts above his line ofsight would appear, indisputably, to go down and S t i ll lower down
towards the horizon line, and could not possibly appear—to anyone
with his vision undistorted—as going in any other direction, curved
or straight. Since, then, the design of the astronomer-artist is to show
the Earth to be a globe, and the points in the picture, which would
only prove the Earth to be cylindrical if true, are uox true, it follows
that the astronomer-artist fails to prove, pictorially, either that the
Earth is a globe or a cylinder, and that we have, therefore, a reason­
able proof that the Earth is not a globe.
49. I t is a well-known fact that clouds are continually seen moving
in all manner of directions—^yes, and frequently, in different directions
at the same time—from west to east being as frequent a direction as
any other. Now, if the Earth were a globe, revolving through spacefrom west to east at the rate of nineteen miles in a second, the clouds
appearing to us to move towards the east would have to move quicker
than nineteen milee in a second to be thus seen; whilst those which

16

17

OKE HTJNDEED PROOFS,

EARTH IS KOT A GLOBE.

appear to be moving in the opposite direction would have no neces­sity to be moving at all, since the motion of the Earth wonlil be morethan sufficient to cause the appearance. But it only takes a little
common sense to show us that it is the clouds that move just as they
appear to do, and that, therefore, the Earth is motionless. We have,then, a proof that the Earth is not a globe.
60. We read in the inspired book, or collection of books, called
T h e B ib l e , nothing at all about the Earth being a globe or a planet,from beginning to end, but hundreds of allusions there are in its pages
which could not be made if the Earth were a globe, and which are,therefore, said by the astronomer to be absurd and contrarjr to what
he knows to be true I This is the groundwork of modern infidelity.
But, since everyone of many, many allusions to the Earth and theheavenly bodies in the Scriptures can be demonstrated to be abso­
lutely true to nature, and we read of the Earth being “ stretched out”
“ above the waters,” as “ standing in the water and out of the water,”of its being “ established that it cannot be moved,” we have a store
from which to take all the proofs we need, but we will just put down
one proof—^the Scriptural proof—^that Earth is not a globe.
51. A “ Standing Order” exists in the English Houses of Parlia­
ment that, in the cutting of canals, &C., the datum line employed
shall be a “ horizontal line, which shall be the same throughout thewhole length of the work.” Now, if the Earth were a globe, this“ Order” could not be carried out: but, it is carried out: therefore,
it is a proof that the Earth is not a globe.
<.
52. I t is a well-known and indisputable fact that there is a far
greater accumulation of ice south of the equator than is to be foundat an equal latitude north: and it is said that at Kerguelen, 50 de­grees south, 18 kinds of plants exist, whilst, in Iceland, 15 degrees
nearer the northern centre, there are 870 species; and, indeed, all
the facts in the case show that the Sun’s power is less intense atplaces in the southern region than it is in corresponding latitudes
north. Now, on the Newtonian hypothesis, all this is inexplicable,
whilst it is strictly in accordance with the facts brought to light by
the carrying out of the principles involved in the Zetetic Philosophy of“ Parallax.’ This is a proof that the Earth is not a globe.
53. Every year the Sun is as long south of the equator as heis north; and if the Earth were not “ stretched out’ as it is, infact, but turned under, as the Newtonian theory suggests, it would
certainly get as intensive a share of the Sun's rays south as north;but the Southern region being, in- consequence of the fact stated,
far more extensive than the region North, the Sun, having to com­plete his journey round every twenty-four hours, travels quicker as
he goes further south, from September to December, and his influence
has less time in which to accumulate at any dven point. Since,
then, the facts could not be as they are if the E aith were a globe,
it is a proof that the Earth is not a globe,,54. The aeronaut is able to start in his balloon and remain forhours in the air, at an elevation of several miles, and come down again
in the same county or parish from which he ascended. Now, unlessthe Earth drag the balloon along with it in its nineteen-miles-a-

second motion, it must be left far behind, in space: but, since balloons
have never been known thus to be left, it is a proo^that the Earthdoes not move, and, therefore, a proof that the Earth is not a globe.
55. The Newtonian theory of astronomy requires that the Moon“ borrow” her light from the Sun. Now, since the Sun’s rays are hot
and the Moon’s light sends with it no heat at all, it follows that the
Sun and Moon are “ two great lights," as we somewhere read; that
the Newtonian theory is a mistake; and that, therefore, we have a
proof that the Earth is not a globe.
56. The Sun and Moon may often be seen high in the heavens at
the same time—^the Sun rising in the east and the Moon setting in thew est— the Sun’s light positively putting the Moon’s light out by sheer
c o n tr a s t! If the accepted Newtonian theory were correct, and theMoon had her light from the Sun, she ought to be getting more of it
when face to face with th at luminary—if it were possible for a sphereto act as a reflector all over its face I But as the Moon’s light pales
before the rising Sun, it is a proof that the theory fails; and this gives
us a proof that the Earth is not a globe.
57. The Newtonian hypothesis involves the necessity of the Sun,in the case of a lunar eclipse, being on the opposite side of a globular
earth, to cast its shadow on the Moon: but, since eclipses of the Moon
have taken place with both the Sun and the Moon above the horizon,
it follows that it cannot be the shadow of the Earth that eclipses theMoon; that the theory is a blunder; and that it is nothing less than aproof that the Earth is not a globe.
68.
Astronomers have never agreed amongst themselves about arotating Moon revolving round a rotating and revolving Earth—^this
Earth, Moon, planets and their satellites all, at the same time dashing
through space, around the rotating and revolving Sun, towards theconstellation Hercules, at the rate of four millions of miles a dayl
And they never will: agreement is impossible 1 With the Earth aplane and without motion, the whole thing is clear. And if a straw
will show which way the wind blows, this may be taken as a pretty
strong proof that the Earth is not a globe.
59. Mr. Proctor says: “ The Sun is so far off that even movingfrom one side of the Earth to the other does not cause him to be seen
in a diflerent direction—at least the difference is too small to be mea­
sured,” Now, since we know that north of the equator, say 45 degrees,
we see the Sun at mid-day to the south, and that at the same distancesouth of the equator we see the Sun at mid-day to the north, our very
shadows on the ground cry aloud against the delusion of the day andgive us a proof that Earth is not a globe.
60. There is no problem more important to the astronomer thanthat of the Sun’s distance from the Earth. Every change in the esti­
mate changes everything. Now, since modern astronomers, in theirestimatesof this distance, have gone all the way along the line of figuresfrom three millions of miles to a hundred and four millions—^to-day,the distance being something over 91,000,000; it matters not how
much: for, not many years ago, Mr. Hind gave the distance, “ accu­
rately,” as 95,370,000!—it follows that they don’t know, and that it
is foolish for anyone to expect that they ever will know, the Sun’s

18

EAETH IS NOT A GLOBE.

OKE HUNDEED PEOOP8,

distance 1 And since all this peculation and absurdity is caused by
the primary asaftrtiption tbat Eartli is a wandering, heavenly body,and is all swept away by a knowledge of the fact th at Earth ia aplane, it is a clear proof that Earth is not a globe.
61. It is plain that a theory of measurements without a measuringrod is like a ship without a rudder; that a measure that is not fixed
not Jikely to be fixed, and never has been fixed, forms no measuring!
rod at all; and that as modern theoretical astronomy depends upon
the Sun’s distance from the Earth as its measuring-rod, and the dis­
tance is not known, it is a system of measurements without a measuring-rod—a ship without a rudder. Now, since it is not difEcult toforesee the dashing of this thing upon the rock on which Zetetic as.
tronomy is founded, it is a proof that Earth is not a globe.
62. It is commonly asserted th at “ the Earth must be a globe be­cause people have sailed round it.” Now, since this implies that we
can sail round nothing unless it be a globe, and the fact is well known
that we can sail round the Earth as a plane, the assertion is ridicu­
lous, and we have another proof that Earth is not a globe.
63. I t is a fact not so well known as it ought to be that when aship, in sailing away from us, has reached the point at which her hull
is lost to our unaided vision, a good telescope will restore to our view
this portion of the vessel. Now, since telescopes are not made bo
enable people to see through a “ hill of water,” it is clear that thehulls of ships are not behind a hill of water when they can be seen
through a telescope though lost to our unaided vision. This is a
proof that Earth is not a globe.
^
64. Mr. Glaisher, in speaking of his balloon ascents, says: “ Thehorizon always appeared on a level with the car.” Now, since we
may search amongst the laws of optics in'vain for any principlethat would cause the surface of a globe to turn its face upwards
instead of downwards, it ia a clear proof that the Earth is not a globe.
65. The Rev. D. Olmsted, in describing a diagram which is sup­posed to represent the Earth as a globe, with a figure of a man sticking
out at each side and one hanging head downwards, says; “ We should
dwell on this point until it appears to us as truly up,”—in the direc­
tion given to these figures as ij; does with regard, to a figure which hehas placed on the top! Now, a system of philosophy which requires
us to do something which is, really, the going out of our minds, by
dwelling on an absurdity until we think it is a fact, cannot be asystem %ased on God’s truth, which never requires anything of thekind. Since, then, the popular theoretical astronomy of the day re­quires this, it is evident that it is the wrong thing, and that thisconclusion furnishes us with a proof that the Earth is not a globe.
66. It is often said that the predictions of eclipses prove astron­omers to be right in their theories. But it is not seen that this proves
too much. I t is well known that Ptolemy predicted eclipses for
six-hundred years, on the basis of a plane Earth, with as muchaccuracy as they are predicted by modern observers. If, then, the■predictions prove the truth of the particular theories current a t theame, they just as well prove one side of the question as the other,and enable us to lay claim to a proof that the Earth is not a globe,la

67. Seven-hundred miles is said to be the length of the great
Certain it is that, when this canal was formed, no“ allowance” was made for “ curvature.” Yet the canal is a fact
without it. This is a Chinese proof that the Earth is not a globe.
68. Mr. J. N. Lockyer says: “ Because the Sun seems to rise in
the east and set in the west, the Earth really spins in the opposite di­rection; that is, from west to east.” Now, this is no better thanthough we were to say—Because a man seems to be coming up thestreet, the street really goes down to the man! And since true sciencewould contain no such nonsense as this, it follows that the so-called
science of theoretical astronomy is not true, and, therefore, we have a
proof that the Earth is not a globe.
69. Mr. Lockyer says: “ The appearances connected with the risingand setting of the Sun and stars may be due either to our earth beingat rest and the Sun and stars travelling round it, or the earth itself
turning round, while the Sun and stars are at rest.” Now, since true
science does not allow of any suqh beggarly alternatives as these, itis plain that modern theoretical astronomy is not true science, andthat its leading dogma is a fallacy. We have, then, a plain proof that
the Earth is not a globe.
. 70. Mr. Lockyer, in describing his picture of the supposed proofof the Earth’s rotundity by means of ships rounding a “ hill of water,”uses these words:—“Diagram showing how, when we suppose the earth
is round, we explain how it is that ships at sea appear as they do.”This is utterly unworthy of the name of Science! A science that be­gins by supposing, and ends by explaining the supposition,v is, frombeginning to end, a mere farce. The men who can do nothing better
than amuse themselves in this way must be denounced as dreamers
only, and their leading dogma a delusion. This is a proof that Earthis not a globe.
71. The astronomers’ theory of a globular Earth necessitates theconclusion that, if we travel south of the equator, to see the North
Star is an impossibility. Yet it is well known this star has been seen
by navigators when they have been more than 20 degrees south of theequator. This fact, like hundreds of other facts, puts the theory toshame, and gives us a proof that the Earth is not a globe.
72. Astronomers tell us that, in consequence of the Earth’s “ ro­tundity,” the perpendicular walls of buildings are, nowhere, parallel,
and that even the walls of houses on opposite sides of a street are notstrictly so 1 But, since all observation fails to find any evidence of
this want of parallelism which theory demands, the idea must be re­nounced as being absurd and in opposition to all well-known facts.
This is a proof that the Earth is not a globe.
73. Astronomers have made experiments with pendulums whichhave been suspended from the interior of high buildings, and haveexulted over the idea of being able to prove the rotation of the Earthon its “ axis,” by the varying direction taken by the pendulum overa prepared table underneath—asserting that the table moved roundunder the pendulum, instead of the pendulum shifting and oscillating
in different directions over the table! But, since it has been foundthat, as often as not, the pendulum went round the 'vrong way for the

Canal, in China.

20

EAKTH IS NOT A ©LOBE.

21

ONE HUNDRED PE 00P8.

“ rotation” tteory, chagrin has taken the place of exultation, and wehave a proof of the failure of astronomers in their efforts to substan­tiate their theory, and, therefore, a proof that Earth is not a globe.
74. As to the supposed “ motion of the whole Solar system inspace,” the Astronomer Eoyal of England once said: “ The matter isleft in a most delightful state of uncertainty, and I shall be very glad
if anyone can help us out of it.” But, since the whole Newtonian
scheme is, to-day, in a most deplorable state of uncertainty—for,
whether the Moon goes round the Earth or the Earth round the Moon
has, for years, been a matter of “ raging” controversy—it follows that,root and branch, the whole thing, is wrong; and, all hot from theraging lurnace of philosophical phrensy, we find a glowing proof that
Earth is not a glotje.
75. Considerably more than a million Earths would be required tomake up a body like the Sun—the astronomers tell us : and more than
53,000 suns would he wanted to equal the cubic contents of the star
Vega. And Vega is a “ small star 1 And there are countless mil­lions of these stars I And it takes 30,000,000 years for the light of
Bom e of these stars to reach us at 12,000,000 miles in a minute!
And, says Mr. Proctor, “ I think a moderate estimate of the age of the
Earth would he 600,000,000 years! “ Its weight,’’ says the same in­dividual, “ is 6,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 tons I” Now, since nohuman being is able to comprehend these things, the givin^of themto the world ia an insult—an outrage. And though they have all arisen
from the one assumption that Earth is a planet, instead of upholding
the assumption, they drag it down by the weight of their own absurd­
ity, and leave it lying in the dust—a proof that Earth is not a globe.
76. Mr. J. E. Young, in his work on Navigation, sarys: “ Although
the path of the ship is on a spherical surface, yet we may represent
the length of the path by a straight line on a plane surface.”(And plane sailing is the rule.) Now, since it is altogether impos­
sible to “ represent” a curved line by a straight one, and absurd
to make the attempt, it follows that a straight line represents astraight line and not a curved one. And, since it is the surface of
the waters of the ocean th at is being considered by Mr. Young, it
follows that this surface is a straight surface, and we are indebted
to Mr. Young, a professor of navigation, for a proof that the Earth is
not a globe.
77. “ Oh, but if the Earth is aplane, we could go to the edge andtumble over!” is a very common assertion. This is a conclusion thatis formed too hastily, and facts overthrow it. The Earth certainly is,^ust what man by his observation finds it to be, and what Mr. Proctor
limself says it “ seems” to be—flat; and we cannot cross the icy bar­rier which surrounds it. This is a complete answer to the objection,
and, of course, a proof that Earth is not a globe.
78. “ Yes, but we can circumnavigate the South easily enough,"
is often said—^by those who don't know. The British Ship Challenger
recently completed the circuit of the Southern region—indirectly, tobe sure—but she waa three years about it, and traversed nearly 69,000
miles—a stretch long enough to have taken her six times round on theglobular hypothesis. This is a proof that Earth is not a globe.

Y9. Tlie remark is common enough that we can see the circle of
the E a r th if we cross the ocean, and that this proves it to be round.
j}ow, if ■we tie a donkey to a stake on a level common, and he eats thegrass all arnund him, it is only a circular disc that he has to do with,not a spherical mass. Since, then, circular discs may be seen any­w here —as well from a balloon in the air as from the deck of a ship, orfrom the standpoint of the donkey, it is a proof that the surface of theE a rth is a plane surface, and, therefore, a proof that the Earth is nota globe,80. It is “ supposed,” in the regular course of the Newtonian theory,that the Earth is, in June, about 190 millions of miles (190,000,000)
away from its position in December. Now, since we can, (in middle
north latitudes), see the North Star, on looking out of a window thatfaces it—and out of the very same corner of the very same pane ofglass in the very same window—all the year round, it is proof enoughfor any man in his senses that we have made no motion at all. I t is a
proof that the Earth is not a globe.
81. Newtonian philosophers teach us that the Moon goes roundthe Earth from west to east. But observation—man’s most certain
mode of gaining knowledge—^shows us that the Moon never ceases tomove in the opposite direction—from east to west. Since, then, weknow that nothing can possibly move in two, opposite directions at
the same time, it is &,proof that the thing is a big blunder; and, inshort, it is a proof that the Earth is not a globe.
82. Astronomers tell us th at the Moon goes round the Earth inabout 28 days. Well, wemaysee hermaking her journey round, every
day, if we make use of our eyes—and these are about the best things
we have to use. The Moon falls behind in her daily motion as com­pared with that of the Sun to the extent of one revolution in the time
specified; but that is not making a revolution. Failing to go as fastas other bodies go in one direction does not constitute a going roundin the opposite one—as the astronomers would have us believe 1 'And,
since all this absurdity has been rendered necessary for no other pur­pose than to help other absurdities along, it is clear that the astron­omers are on the wrong track; and it needs no long train of reasoning
to show th at we have a proof that the Earth is not a globe.
83. I t has been shown that meridians are, necessarily, straightlines; and that it is impossible to travel round the Earth in a northor south direction: from which it follows that, in the general accept­
ation of the word “ degree,”—the 860th part of a circle—meridians
have no degrees; for no one knows anything of a meridian circle orsemicircle, to be thus divided. But astronomers epeak of degrees oflatitude in the same sense as those of longitude. This, then, is doneby assuming that to be true which is not true. Zetetic philosophy
does not involve this necessity. This proves that the basis of thisphilosophy is a sound one, and, in short, is a proof that the Earth is
not a globe.
84. If we move away from an elevated object on or over a plain
or a prairie, the height of the object will apparently diminish as we
do so. Now, that which is sufficient to produce this effect on a small
scale is sufficient on a large one; and travelling away from an elevated22

ONE HUNDRED PEOOPS.

object, no matter bow bigh, over a level surface, no m atter tow fwill cause the appearance in question—the lowering of the obie^’
Our modern theoretical astronomers, however, in the case of thapparent lowering of the North Star as we travel southward, assertthat it is evidence that the Earth is globular! But, as it is clear thatan appearance which is fullr accounted for on the basis of known
facts cannot be permitted to figure as evidence in favor of that whichii? only a supposition, it follows that we rightfully order it to standdown, and make way for a proof that the Earth is not a globe.
85. There are rivers which flow east, west, north, and south_that
is, rivers are flowing ia all directions over the Earth’s surface, and at
the same time. Now, if the Earth were a globe, some of these risers
would be flowing up-hill and others down, taking it for a fact that
there really is an “ up” and a “ down” in nature, whatever form she
assumes. But, since rivers do not flow up-hill, and the globular
theory requires that they should, it is a proof that the Earth is not a
globe.
86. If the Earth were a globe, rolling and dashing through ‘‘space"at the rate of “ a hundred miles in five seconds of time,” the waters ofseas and oceans could not, by any known law, be kept on its surface—
the assertion that they could be retained under these circumstances
being an outrage upon human understanding and credulity! But as
the Earth—that is, the habitable world of dry land—is found to be“ standing out of the water and in the water” of the “ mighty deep,”
whose circumferential boundary is ice, we may throw the statementback into the teeth of those who make it and flaunt before their faces
the flag of reason and common sense, inscribed with—a proof that the
Earth is not a globe.
87. The theory of a rotating and revolving earth demands a theory
to keep the water on its surface; but, as the theory which is given forthis purpose is as much opposed to all human experience as the'one
whicli it is intended to uphold, it is an illustration of the miserable
makeshifts to which astronomers are compelled to resort, and affords
a proof that the Earth is not a globe.
88. If we could—after our minds had once been opened to thelight of Truth—conceive of a globular body on the surface of whichhuman beings could exist, the power—no matter by what name it becalled—that would hold them on would, then, necessarily, have to be
so constraining and cogent that they could not live; the waters of theoceans would have to be as a solid mass, for motion would be impos­
sible. But we not only exist, but live and move; and the water ofthe ocean skips and dances like a thing of life and beauty I This is
a proof that the Earth is not a globe.
89. I t is well known that the law regulating the apparent decreasein the size of objects as we leave them in the distance (or as they leaveus) is very different with luminous bodies from what it is in the caseof those which are non-luminous. Sail past the light of a small lamp
in a row-boat on a dark night, and it will seem to be no smaller whena mile off than it was when close to it. Proctor says, in speaking of
the Sun: “ his apparent size does not change,”—far off or near. And
then he forgets the fact I Mr. Proctor tells ns, subsequently, that^ if

EAETH IS NOT A GLOBE.

■)

23

the traveller goes so far south that the North Star appears on the ho­
rizon, “ tbe Sun should therefore look much larger’— if the Earthwere a plane 1 Therefore, he argues, “ the path followed p n n o t haveteen the straight course,”—but a curved one. Now, since it is nothingtiut common scientific trickery to bring forward, aa an objection to
stand in the way of a plane Earth, the non-appearance of a thing•ffhich has never been known to appear at all, it follows that, unlessthat which appears to be trickery were an accident, it was the only
course open to the objector—to trick. (Mr. Proctor, in a letter to the•‘English Mechanic” for Oct. 20,1871, boasts of having turned a re­cent convert to the Zetetic philosophy by telling him that his argu­
ments were all very good, but that “ it seems as though [mark thela n g u a g e !] the sun ought to look nine times larger in summer.”A n d Mr. Proctor concludes thus: “ He saw, indeed, that, in his faithja ‘ Parallax,’ he had ‘ written himself down an ass.’ ”) Well, then:trickery or no trickery on the part of the objector, the objection is ac o u n te rfe it —a fraud—no valid objection at all; and it follows that thesystem which does not purge itself of these things is a rotten system,a n d the system which its advocates, with Mr. Proctor at their head,w ould crush if they could find a weapon to use—the Zetetic philosophyof “ Parallax”—is destined to live I This is a proof that the Earth is
not a globe.
90. “ Is water level, or is it not ?” was a question once asked of anastronomer. “ Practically, yes; theoretically, no,” was the reply.
Now, when theory does not harmonize with practice, the best thing to
do is to drop the theory. (It is getting too late, now, to say “ So muchthe worse for the facts!”) To drop the theory which supposes a curved
surface to standing water is to acknowledge the facts which form thebasis of Zetetic philosophy. And since this will have to be done—
sooner or later,—it is a proof that the Earth is not a globe.
91. “ By actual observation,” says Scbcedler, in his “ Book of
Nature,” “ we know that the other heavenly bodies are spherical,
hence we unhesitatingly assert that the earth is so also.” This is afair sample of all astronomical reasoning. When a thing is classed
amongst “ other” things, the likeness between them must first be pro­ven. It does not take a Schoedler to tell us that “ heavenly bodies”
are spherical,but “ the greatest astronomer of the age” will not, now,dare to tell us that T h e E a e t h is—and attempt to prove it. Now, sinceno likeness has ever been proven to exist between the Earth and theheavenly bodies, the classification of the Earth with the heavenly
bodies is p re m a tu r e — unscientific—false 1 This is a proof that Earthis not a globe.
92. “ There is no inconsistency in supposing that the earth does
move round the sun,” says the Astronomer Royal of England. Cer­
tainly not, when theoretical astronomy is all supposition together I
The inconsistency is in teaching the world that the thing supposed isa fact. Since, then, the “ motion’’ of the Earth is supposition only-—
since, indeed, it is necessary to suppose it at aM.—it is plain that it isa fiction and not a fact; and, since “ mobility” and “ sphericity” standor fall together, we have before us a proof that Earth ia not a globe.
93. *We have seen that astronomers—to give us a level surface on

24

25

ONE HUNDBED PEOOFS.

EAUTH IS NOT A OLOBE,•which to live—have exit off one-half of the “ globe” in a certain picture in their books. [See page 6.] Now, astronomers haring done
this, cue-half of the substance of their “ spherical theory” is given npl
Since, then, the theory must stand or fall in its entirety, it has really
fpjlen when the half is gone. Nothing remains, then, but a plane
Earth, which is, of course, a proof that the Earth is not a globe.
94. In “ Cornell's Geography” there is an “ Illustrated proof of
the Form of the Earth.” A curved line on which is represented a shipin four positions, as she sails away from an observer, is an arc of 72
degrees, or one-fifth of the supposed circumference of the “ globe”—
about 5,000 miles. Ten such ships as those which are given in the
picture would reach the full length of the “ arc,” making 500 miles as
the length of the ship. The man, in the picture, who is watching theship as she sails away, is about 200 miles high; and the tower, fromwhich he takes an elevated view, a t least 500 miles high. These are
the proportions, then, of men, towers, and ships which are necessary
in order to see a ship, in her different positions, as she “ rounds thecurve" of the “ great hill of water” over which she is supposed to besailing; for, it must be remembered that this supposed “ proof” de­pends npou lines and angles of vision which, if edarged, would stillretain their characteristics. Now, since ships are not built 500 miles
long, with masts in proportion, and men are not quite 200 miles high,
it is not what it is said to be—a proof of rotundity—but, either anignorant farce or a cruel piece of deception. In short, it is a proof
that the Earth is not a globe,
95. In “ Cornell’s Intermediate Geography,” (1881) page 12, is an“ Illustration of the Natural Divisions of Land and Water.” Thisillustration is so nicely drawn that it affords, at once, a striking proof
that Earth is a plane. It is true to nature, and bears the stamp of
no astronomer-artist. I t is a pictorial proof that Earth is not a globe.
96. If we refer to the dia^am in “ Cornell’s Geography,” page 4,
and notice the ship in its position the most remote from the observer,
we shall find that, though it is about 4,000 miles away, it is the same
size as the ship th at is nearest to him, distant about TOO miles I Thisis an illustration of the way in which astronomers ignore the laws ofperspective. This course is necessary, or they would be compelled tolay bare the fallacy of their dogmas. In short, there is, in this matter,a proof that the Earth is not a globe,
97. Mr. Hind, the English astronomer, says; “ The simplicity
with which the seasons are explained by the revolution of the Earthin her orbit and the obliquity of the ecliptic, may certainly be adduced
as a strong presumptive proof of the correctness”—of the Newtonian
theory; “ for on no other rational suppositions with respect to therelations of the Earth and Sim, can these and other as well-known
phenomena, be accounted for.” But, as true philosophy has no “ sup■KJsitions” at all—and has nothing to do with “ suppositions”—and;he phenomena spoken of are thoroughly explained by facts, the“ presumptive proof” falls to the ground, covered with the ridicule itso richly deserves ; and out of the dust of Mr. Hind’s “ rational sup­positions” we see standing before us a proof that Earth is not a globe.
^ 98. Mr, Hind speaks of the astronomer watching a star as it is“ c a rrie d across the telescope by the diurnal revolution of the Earth.”

Now, this is nothing but downright absurdity. No motion of theE a r th could po.ssibly carry a star across a telescope or anything else.
If the star is carried across anything at all, it is the star that moves,
not the thing across which it is carried] Besides, the idea that theE a rth , if it were a globe, could possibly move in an orbit of nearly
600,000,000 of miles with such exactitude that the cross-hairs in atelescope fixed on its surface would appear to glide gently over a star“ jriillions of millions” of miles away is simply monstrous; whereas,
with a FIXED telescope, it matters not the distance of the stars, though
we suppose them to be as far off as the astronomer supposes them to be;for, as Mr. Proctor himself says, “ the further away they are, the lessthey will seem to shift,” Why, in the name of common sense, shouldobservers have to fix their telescopes on solid Stone bases so that they
sh o u ld not move a hair’s-breadth, if the Earth on which they fix themmove at the rate of nineteen miles in a second? Indeed, to lelieye.
that Mr. Proctor’s mass of “ six thousand million million million tons”
is “ rolling, surging, flying, darting on through space for ever” witha velocity compared with which a shot from a cannon is a “ very
slow coach,” with such unerring accuracy that a telescope fixed on
granite pillars in an observatory will not enable a lynx-eyed astrono­
mer to detect a variation in its onward motion of the thousandth partof a hair’s-breadth is to conceive a miracle compared with which all
the miracles on record put together would sink into utter insignifi­
cance. Captain E. J. Morrison, the late compiler of “ Zadlceil’s Al­
manac,” says: “ We declare that this ‘motion’ is all mere ‘bosh’ ;and that the arguments which uphold it are, when examined with aneye that seeks for T K U T H o n ly , mere nonsense, and childish absurdity.”
Since, then, these absurd theories are of no use to men in their senses,
and since there is no necessity for anything of the k in d in Zetetic phi­losophy, it is a “ strong presumptive proof”—as Mr. Hind would say—that the Zetetic philosophy is true, and, therefore, a proof that Earthis not a globe.
99. Mr. Hind speaks of two great mathematicians differing only
fifty-five yards in their estimate of the Earth's diameter. Why, Sir
John Herschel, in his celebrated work, cuts OS' 480 m il3 S of the samething to get “ round numbers 1” This is like splitting a hair on one
side of the head and shaving all the hair off on the other I Oh,“ science!” Can there be any truth in a science like this? All theexactitude in astronomy is in Practical astronomy—not Theoretical.
Centuries of observation have made practical astronomy a noble art
and science, based—as we have a thousand tim.es proved it to be—on
a fixed Earth; and we denounce this pretended exactituile on one sideand the reckless indifference to figures on the other as the basest trash,and take from it a proof that the “ science” which tolerates it is a false—instead Of being an “ exact”—science, and we have a proof that the
Earth is not a globe,
100, The Sun, as he travels round over the surface of the Earth,brings “ noon” to all places on the successive meridians which hecrosses: his journey being made in a W'esterly direction, places east of
the Sun’s position have had their noon, whilst places to the west of the

"n-TT26

OKE HUNDRED PE 00F8.

Sun’s position have still to 'get it. Therefore, if we travel easterly,
we arrive at those parts of the Earth where “ time” is more advanced*
the watch in our pocket has to be “ put on,” or we may be said to“ gain time,” If, on the other hand, we travel westerly, we arrive atplaces where i t is still “ morning,” the watch has to be “ put back,’’
and it may be said that we “ lose time.” But, if we travel easterly so
as to cross the 180th meridian, there is a loss, there, of a day, which
will neutralize the gain o f a whole circumnavigation; and, if we travel
westerly, and cross the same meridian, we experience the gain of aday, which will compensate for the loss during a complete circumnavi­
gation in that direction. The fact of losing or gaining time in sailinground the world, then, instead of being evidence of the Earth’s “ ro­tundity,” as it is imagined to be, is, in its practical exemplification, an
everlasting proof that the Earth is not a ^lobe.
“ And what then ?” What then I No intelligent man will ask the
Mestion; and he who may be called an intellectual man will know
m at the demonstration of the fact that the Earth is not a globe is the
grandest snapping of the chains of slavery th a t ever took place in theworld of literature or science. The floodgates of human knowledge
are opened afresh and an impetus is given to investigation and dis­covery ^where all was stagnation, bewilderment and dreams J Is it
nothing to know th a t infidelity cannot stand against the mighty rushof the living water of Truth that must flow on and on until the world
shall look “ up” once more “ to Him th a t stretched out the earth•bove the waters”—“ to Him that made great lights;—the Sun torule by day—the Moon and Stars to rule by night ?” Is it nothing
to know and to feel that the heavenly bodies were made for man, andthat the monstrous dogma of an infinity of worlds is overthrown forever? The old-time English “ Family Herald,” for July 25, 1885,
says, in its editorial, that “ The earth’s revolution on its own axis wasdenied, against Galileo and Copernicus, by the whole weight of the
Church of Eome.” And, in au article on “ The Pride of Ignorance,”
too 1—the editor not knowing that if the Earth had an axis to call its“ own”—which the Church well knew it had not, and, therefore, could
not admit—it would not “ revolve” on i t ; and that the theoreticalmotion on an axis is that of rotationj and not revolution I Is it nothing
tokiiowthat “ thewhole weightof the Church of Rome" was thrown in
the right direction, although it has swayed back again like a gigantic
penduKim th at will regain its old position before long ? Is it nothing
to know that the “ pride of ignorance” is on the other eide? Is it
nothing to know that, with all the Bradlaughs and Ingersolls of theworld telling ns to the contrary—Biblical science is true ? Is it no­thing to know th at we are living on a body a t rest, and not upon aheavenly body whirling and d a tin g through Bpace in every conceiv­
able way and with a velocity utterly inconceivable ? Is it nothing toknow that we can look stedfaetljr up to Heaven instead of having noheaven to look up to a t all ? Is it nothing, indeed, to be in the broad
daylight of Truth and to be able to go on towards a possible perfection,
instead of being wrapped in the darkness of error on the rough ocean ofLife, and finding ourselves stranded a t last—God alone knows where ?
Baltimore, Maryland, U. S. A., August, 1885.

YHE EARTH’S EOTUNDITY AND MOBILITY TAUGHT-

A. D. 1893!
If white paper could blush, it would surely turn pink,
When it read what is put o’er its face in black ink
For the purpose of teaching poor children to think!

SHIPS “ GOING DOWN ! ”
Do you think you could see, now, a ship going down
O’er the earth, if it were like a “ ball ? ’
Do you think that the “ proof” of the schools is a proof
That will stand fast, or go to the wall ?
Do you think if four inches means five thousand miles,
That a ship should be half-an-inch lon^?
That a man, looking out at the ships “ going down,”
If a hundred miles high, would be wrong?
But the man and the ships and the tower and the view
Are all monstrously out of proportion;
And the thing is a FRAUD! and ’tis well that you knew
How to size-up the school-book distortion!
KICK IT OUT OF YOUR WAY I
Just a word to the wise:—Find a proof, if you can,That the earth is “ a globe,” and stand up like a m an;
Give your reason fair play; don’t be fooled any longer;
Put your foot on the fraud: you ’11 feel better and stronger
For the earth does NOT turn upside down every day;And the theory is FALSE!—kick it out of your way.
Kick it out of your way, being sure of the fact
That the Lord of the earth well knew how he would act:
And we read how He made it-^again and again—" Stretched out on the waters ! ”—’tis sureljr a plane.
If the earth were a sphere, turning o’er ev ry day,
Then The Bible is false: kick it out of your way 1“ WHY, Y E S!”
What a rush and a roar there must be, to be sure,As the earth travels round and turns over and o’erl
Do you hear it? 0, nol
What a splash and a dash, with the oceans all round i1^
Which could ne’er be kept on—though the schools thus ezponnd it!
Do you see it? 0, no!
What a shake and a quake, as she tears on her way’Mid the planets and stars—^just for ever and aye!
Do you feel it? 0 , nol
What a beautiful theory—so telling and grand I
Against Reason and Scripture:—’<is writ in the sand!
Do you think so ? W h y ,Y E 8 l

98

OKE HUNDRED PROOFS.

FACTS F £ ’-B*S'?7/S'THEORIES.
“ 0, Sam ! here's a fellow, now, wants us to learn
T hat the earth is no planet or ball! ’’“ Well, the ‘Cranks’ are alive—they must all have a turnWe sliall drive them, ere long, to the w all!”’'* But, I say I have we Mt any proof we can show
That the earth travels round, like a planet ? ”
Why, the ships coming u p / th a t’s the proof, don’t you know?
I should think, cau’t be beaten, now, can i t? ”
“ Oil, you mean, ’tis a proof that the earth is a sphere !
Well, th a t's knocked on the head pretty badly!
And a little sound sense will, now, make it q^uite clear—
That we ’ve all been imposed upon, sadly jFor, water is level;
if this is true.
Then, it certainly cannot be curved!
And a spherical ocean, however true blue,
Was, by scieutist, never observed!
And I fancy the ‘ Cranks ’ are just going ahead,
And are not quite so easily routed!
For, with reason and facts they ’re provided, instead
Of the theories which soon will be scouted! ”• THE POWER OP TH E PRESS.
The Press can make a man believe, he’s standing on his head ;That, here, no “ rest” you may conceive, in grave or in your bed;That “ Earth ” is turning madly o’er, and staying not at a ll;
That “ up ” isand “ down ” is up, and that we ’re on a “ ball I”
That earth, thougk level in its form, is convex—that is, really I
Thus, “ convex ” must be level, and the books just state this clearly I
The Press has made the millions read, and done away with thinking:This is a truth all must concede—the fact ’tis no use blinking.
Now let the Press undo the wrong and let the Truth come out:
For printing is not worth a song when things are lied about!
There’s not a paper in the land will venture to expound
How 'tis the earth is proved a ball—for ever turning round:—Not one, if all the money in the Mint were laid before them:
The mem’ry of the Hundred Proofs on t ’other side would floor them !
A HUNDRED GOOD REASONS.
Turning heels over head people think that they go
Ev’ry day, on a ball or a planet!
T h a t’s a v e ^ fine notion; but, then, don’t you know,
You will find it is FALSE, if you scan it 1
Ju st be straight up and down and demand that a proof
Shall be given before you believe i t ;But, alas! you will find that the thing can’t be done,
For the scientists only conceive it.
Turning o’er every day—^flying 'round every year—
Just to bring day and night and the seasons.
Is the maddest of all human thoughts, it is clear,
And condemned for a hundred good reasons.

EARTH 18 NOT A GLOBE.

09

HOW MUCH LONGER WILL IT BE ?
The fashion is that, now, we ’re taught w hat’s settled by the schools:
And, surely, we cannot be aught but educated fools!
jjow long before the people say: “ Just teach my boy the truth /j ’or theories of the devil born are not the th in p for youth! ”
One SiMndred Proofs that Earth ia Not a Q lwe '—a ball, a planet—
Oondeiuus the scientific lot, and can’t be answered— can i t f
There is not one—nor high nor low— who dares attack this work;

Or one who makes a manly show—content the truth to shirk!
The age in which we live is one that stands condemned already ;Au 1 everything th a t’s to be done must be for money—steady !
The pulpit, press, and platform, each, is fighting for the cash;
And just one-half of what they teach is but delusive trash!
Tlie people seem as though they dare not speak the truth at all—In fear that, in the public mind, they from their perch would fall!
8o, on it goes, and, we are taught with supposition, purely;_ [surely.
And youthful minds are trapped and caught, and soon they ’11 rue it,
For truth must gain the day at last, and only will prevail;
Then will our teachers stand aghast—and tell a difi'erent tale 1
ABSURD THEORY!
If E arth ’s a globe with people living ’round it,
I ’d like to know what keeps ’em on—confound it I
’T is said that “ gravitation ” keeps us “ sticking,”
And ’tis no use against the theory kicking I
P ’rhaps not: for that which stands, though self-accused,’Twere folly to assail—’t were iorce abused.
The thing’s a dream: in fact, there’s nothing in it—
A farce—a fraud—’tis seen in half-a-minute:—*If on a “ ball ” we were so tightly held.
To overcome that force we’d be compelled
In every move we made:—upon my word,
The thing is most outrageously absurd !
NO PROOF TO BE HAD,I t has never been proved that “ the Earth ” is a “ ball,"
And there is not a proof to be bad, sir;
And if one could be found at the scientists’ call,With delight th ey ’d be pretty well mad, s ir!
For to-day they are dumb, and the blush o’er their brow
Shows the pickle they ’re in to be strong, e ir:
And they dare not come out, for they know well enoughThat their theories are all in the wrong, sir !
They’ve been up in the clouds looking after “ the Earth,”
But they ne’er could find out it was round, sir;
And it will not be long ere they ’11 have to confess
T hat their theories are under the ground, sir I
For the people are getting the “ One Hundred Proofs"
That the earth is a plane, after all, sir ;And ’twere well that you joined them, to learn for yourself
That 'tis naught like a planet at all, sir I

100

ONE IIUKDEED PROOFS.

WHEN TH E MAN HAS TIME I“ Oh, no,” said he, “ you could not make«ie think the earth’s a plane
If you could bring a thousand proofs, and then the same again ! ” ’“ Indeed! then I suppose you have some evidence to show
That your belief—tJiat earth’s a globe—is what we ought to know.”“ 0, pshaw 1 don’t every book speak out and tell the truth about it ?
And who am I that I should come and go to work and doubt i t ! ”“ And who are you? well, I supposed you were a man of sense,
And that you would demand, to-day, some striking evidence—
8ome fact—not mere assumption—that the earth is like a ‘ ball! ’I thought you liked to use your brains, and have a proof at call! ”“ A proof! why there’s ‘ a million proofs,’ as Wilford Hall decided;
And strange it is on such a point the people are divided.
A proof! ’tis true I haven’t one that I can bring to mind:
Come in again—I 'm busy now—I ’ll see what I can find ! ”/,“ EAETH A GLOBE.”
Stamp it out I stamp it o u t! ’t is a villainous fraud,
And it poisons the mind—sends the reason abroad.
Keep your reason at home and make use of the boon,
For it comes from your Maker, who ’11 take it back soon.
Oh, you don’t want to think, and the mind it is naught.
So you eat and you drink and fine clothes can be bought.
And your soul is at rest as the earth “ travels round,’Ju st because in the school-books the story is found I
And, your children ? are they in this fraud, then, to revel ?
With the shocking conclusion, they’re taught of the devil?
Take the Word th a t’s inspired—and you know where to find it—
And you’ll see that the earth is a fixture: then, mind i t !
’T is “ established ” for ever and “ cannot be ” moved;
And th a t’s what, to-day, honest science has proved.
TH E SCIENTIFIC WAGER OF 1870.
Oh, I wonder where Wallace is—called Alfred Russel;—Is he not somewhere 'round about—ofif on the hustle ?
How serene he appears—ever after the day
When he took H a m p d e n ’s money and banked it away.
But i t ’s only skin-deep—for he must have a “ heart;”
And he knows that he lost, in that wager, his part.
And he knows that the least he can now say about it
Will the soonest be mended!—for many, now, doubt it.
Don’t you know what it was? Why, that water was curved
In the space of six miles—and that this he observed !
Bat he found it was L E V E L , and he dare not say nay
Though he seems unconcerned—as he travels away.
But he knows to a certainty, water is F L A T ,And he ne’er would, again, take a wager like that,
Though the Five Hundred Pounds were thrown into his h a t!
Baltimore, Maryland, U. 8. A., March, 1893.
[End of the Thirteenth Edition of the “ One H undeed P e o o f s . ’ J

EARTH IS NOT A GLOBE.

101

OTJR OPPONENTS’ WAYS AND MEANS.
I t is a very striking fact that not a single quotation from the pagesof the “ 0. H. p.” that has come before us in seven years is correct!
O f course, we are not alluding to cases in which the Proofs havebeen mentally digested and assimilated, but to those in which they
lie as a heavy load in the mental organism, giving birth to the night­
mare and other distressing symptoms. We thought when, in June
last, “ Enquirer,” in “ The Future,” quoted Proof 11 in the stylecom m on to all flat-earth opponents, he might, possibly, mend his
ways in time; but, after nearly twelve months, they are as crooked
as ever. (And when two most essential words and two commas wereo m itte d in so short a Proof as No. 11, we thought it a little roughaa well as crooked.) But our great satisfaction lies in the contempla­
tion of the fact that crooked ways and foul means always end in afull measure of . disaster, and the truth is eventually the. winner.
It is unnecessary to make any preliminary observations concerning
the following letter:—To the Editor of “ The Future:” Sir;—In your journal for April,
I find the following demand from “ Enquirer:”— " I call again for
the facts of that experiment.'' [Wallace’s experiment on the Bedford
Level.] Don’t you think, sir, that Alfred Russel Wallace would be
the man to ask for these facts ? But the truth is, he does not dare to
say a word about them, and never has dared to publish anything
relating to them I And, like the man in the backwoods who neversaw the deep blue sea—nothing but sky and woods—“ Enquirer ”
persistently cries, Show me the ocean: it has “ been carefully kept
back 1” Well, we have printed for 23 years concerning the “ ocean”
which “ Enquirer" is so anxious to see; let us bring it home to him;
and, if his cabin be swamped, he will have but himself to blame.
One thing, however, is strange—that, while he “ calls” for the ocean
in evidence, he evidently knows all about it, and has obtained his
information from those of whom he demands it! We didn’t fix thetime of “ Enquirer’s ” birth, or we would have had it occur twenty
years sooner, so that he might have been “ in the swim"'instead ofout of it. In 1871, the writer of this letter printed a pamphlet of 32
pages, with diagrams. Water Not Omvex, &c., Bemximtrated by Alfred
Russel Wallace, Esq., &c. These 32 pages give the whole particulars,even to a verbatim report of the discussion with Dr. Conlcner, referee
for Mr. Wallace. In 1875, Wallace's Wonderful Wcder was publishedby the same author, 18 pages; and, the same year, Proctor s ‘ Planet
Earth,' in which were strong charges against Mr. Wallace, and, to say
nothing about extensive newspaper correspondence, we come to the
One Hundred Proofs, &c., in 1885 and subsequently, in which Aeprime facts may be found. All this time, the supposed “ winner” of
the wager has been silent—yet we are charged with “ carefully”
keeping back evidence: which simply means that we are playing thefraud! Well, sir, we have brought the “ ocean” to “ Enquirer's”
very door, and ask him if he sees it now! W il l i a m C a e p e n t e k .
Baltimore, Md., Apr. 25,1898.
p. g.—Would it be right or wrong to say that Alfred Russel Wallace
has “ carefully kept bacK ”—everytiling ?
Wm. G.

rsa x x j

ADVEKTISEM ENTS.
SINCE 1 8 8 5 , the ‘ 'O f t B H u n d r e d P r o o f s ” bave appeared In twelve
successive editions, and reached 100 pages, (he extra matter being, as many
correspoudents have averred, more Interesting than the original. But, theappended matter was more or less antagonistic ; and it is not too much to
say that we have been asked a hundred times whether Professor G ilm a n ,of Johns Hopkins University, has answered the several letters which were
published, or accepted the Challenge, running through nearly all of thetwelve editions. Of course, we have to say, “ No I ” until it has becometiresome—for the mouths of ALL the professors are closed. And are we
to keep on, after 33 years at it, hammering at these hard heads? God for­bid 1 If, with more than ten thousand copies of the P b o o f b sold in thecity of Baltimore alone, the P k o p I iB show no Interest, why should we fightfor such people ? We have the satisfaction, as we retire from the fray, ofannouncing our greatest confidence in the advocacy of U. 6 . M o r r o w , Esq.,
Allegheny, Pa., who is the learned editor of the Herald of Glad Tidings,
and also in the efforts put forth by the staff of the Earth Review, London,
England. We will combat no more. We respectfully urge, however, that
authors find their own titles for their books—“ Theoretical Astronomy Ex­
amined aad Exposed” being the title of our own work, the copyright of. which was purchased by the late John Hampden, for one hundred pounds,
twenty-five years ago. One more request: if our poetry Is borrowed, do
not chop it up : only doggerel should come in for such treatment. Wm. C.

The EUREKA COLOR-PRINTING PROCESS,INVENTED BY

W IIv I^ IA M

C A R PE N T E R ,(Late of Greenwich, London, England, and at this time of Baltimore, Md.)
By means of this process, a FOUR color job

Is printed at the approximate Cost of One Impression only!
SEVENTY-FIVE PER CENT. SAVED.
All the possible number of combinations of the four colors used
are obtained as easily as one.
The worTc is done with one form and one making-ready.
TW O HUNDRED PRINTED DIR EC TIO N S SOLD IN S IX M O NTH S.

PEIO E T E N DOLLARS,“ An admirable idea.” —Andrews & Baptist, Richmond, Va.
“ The idea is a great one.” —Ketterlinus, Philadelphia, Pa.
“ Economical, practical, effective.” —Manning, Henderson.
“ A labor, time, and money saver.” —Blackburn, Atlanta, Ga.
“ The best thing of the kind 1 ever saw.” —Turner, Valdosta.
“ It is a time-saver, and, consequently, a money-maker.” —J . W. Hanlon, Witness Job Office, Ocala, Fla.
From more than 100 unqualified Testimonials.
A few copies of Carpenter’s “ SHORTHAND,” price 30c. bound.
Also, Carpenter’s “ FOLLY,” a Magazine of Facts,““
W. CARPENTER, 1316, N. Central Avenue, Baltimore, Md.
The Second “ cheap edition” of the 100 P r o o f s , Feb., 1895.

Is tl^e J^ewtonian .HstFonomj^ True?
G l a s g o w , ' 15th M a y .

SiK,—Your correspondent seems to think this a q u e s tio ti
entirely of flatness or convexity : whereas there are four sects of globists
all at loggerheads:—(i) The Ptolemaists, represented by J. Gillespie,o f D u m frie s , who suppose the “ earth ” globe a centre for the revolution
o f the sun, moon, and stars; (2 ) The Koreshans of America, who sup­pose the “ earth ” a hollow globe for us to live inside; ( 3) The New­tonian Copernicans, who suppose the sun a centre, keeping the planets
whirling in orbits by gravity; and (4) the Copernicans, who
suppose the planets to whirl round the sun, without the necessity ofgravity, Sir R. Phillips heading up this school.
However, here are a
few nuts especially for Copernican teeth :—Why are railways and canals
constructed without any allowance for terrestrial convexity ; and why doartists in marine views represent b y a straight line the horizon, whether
running east and west, or north and south ? How can all the vast con­tinents, with convexity only imaginary, along with the oceans, ttick
together to make a ball something like a little schoolroom globe, able towhirl on an axis only unaginary— that is, no axis at a ll; and though very
m any million tons in weight float light as alittlecork in ethereal fluid foundonly in Copernican brains 1 How can gravity, which no one can describe^,or prove, toss nineteen miles in a twinkling the great oceans and conti­
nents over the sun, and yet we are not accordingly killed outright, or evenconscious of any such horrible motion? Is not this pagan Aiistotelian
gravity only a disguised theory of heaviness, representing the m o o n as
falling i 6ft. per minute towards the earth, but somehow deflected into
an orbit ; also the “ earth ” as falling towards the sun, but likewise
deflected ? Why do astronomers difler so much as to the size of the“ earth ” and as regards distances of sun and stars ? Why believe
antiquated fables devised thousands of years ago by stick worshippets,.
such as Thales and Pythagoras, who foolishly believed the sun a g o d togovern all, and hence the centre of whirling worlds, instead o f the true
God, who has declared that “ the earth stands in and out the water,’and is so fixed that it never can move.— I am, &c.,
A. M 'I n n e s .
[All calculations of the earth’s size, and therefore of the distancesand magnitude of sun, moon and stars, depend wholly in the length ofa terrestrial degree. The land and sea are first supposed to unite into a sortof ball, shaped hke a turnip, orange orletnon, and then the circumferenceis divided into 360 parts called degrees,but not all equal,as is evident from
Newton’s supposition of ellipticity. Aristotle, about 300 B.C., said thatmathematicians fixed the globe’s circumference at 40,000 stadii (or 5 0 0 0of our miles). Fifty years afterwards, another Greek, Eratosthenes, firstdevised the plan of measurement still generally followed, that of deter­mining by celestial observations the difference of latitude between t« oplaces on the same meridian, and then measuring the earth’s distance
between them.
H e calculated the earth’s circumference to be 250,000
stadii (or about 32,000 of our miles). Various attempts have been madewithin the last three centuries to measure a degree, but with results so
unsatisfactory, up to this hour, that the International Geodetic Associa­
tion have lately resolved to hold a conference at Berlin during thesummer to consider this much vexed question. The common methodof measurement supposes the sky for the nonce a hollow globe corres-