MOTIONS OF EARTH

ZETETIC COSMOGONY:
OR
Conclusive Evidence
THAT THE WORLD IS NOT A
ROTATING—REVOLVING—GLOBE,
BUT
A STATIONARY PLANE CIRCLE.
By Thomas Winship
1899

 start here

(Post 20/47)

MOTIONS OF EARTH.

In "The Story of the Heavens," by Sir R. Ball, the following accounts of the motions of the earth-globe are given, page 3: "It became certain that whatever were the shape of the earth, it was at all events something detached from all other bodies and poised without visible support IN SPACE."

Page 6: "Ptolemy saw how this mighty globe was poised in what he believed to be the centre of the universe."

Page 7: "Copernicus PROVED that the appearances presented in the daily rising and setting of the sun and stars could be accounted for by the SUPPOSITION that the earth rotated."

Page 7: "The second great principle which has conferred immortal glory on Copernicus, assigned to the earth its true position in the universe. Copernicus transferred the centre to the sun, and he established the somewhat humiliating truth that our earth is merely a planet."

Page 87: "The discovery that our earth must be a globe isolated in space, WAS IN ITSELF A MIGHTY EXERTION OF HUMAN INTELLECT."

Page 517: "We know that the earth rotates on its axis once every day."

After all this unsound speculation, of which we know every line to be false, it is somewhat amusing to listen to another "Professor" of equal authority with the Astronomer Royal of Ireland.

Professor J. Norman Lockyer, in his "Astronomy," section iv., says:

"You have to take it as proved that the earth moves. Day and night are the best proofs that the earth does really spin. Without this spinning there could be no day and night, so that the regular succession of day and night is caused by this spinning. Hence the appearances connected with the rising and setting of the sun may be due, either to our earth being AT REST and the sun and stars travelling round it, or the earth itself turning round, while the sun and stars are at rest."

"Our earth" seems to give more trouble to "our astronomers" than all the heavenly bodies put together. If, as Professor Lockyer says, EITHER THE EARTH IS AT REST and the stars moving, or the stars at rest and the earth moving, how is it that the wise men of the observatories have never once attempted to ascertain data to prove whether it is the earth or the stars that move? How is it that they are content to go on year after year, labouring under what is at best but a supposition that the earth moves, WHEN THE PHENOMENA, ACCORDING TO THEIR OWN SHOWING, MAY BE AS WELL ACCOUNTED FOR either by the earth being at rest, and the sun and stars moving, or the sun and stars being at rest and the earth moving?   

In "Wonders of the Sun, Moon, and Stars," by R. Russell, it is stated that:

"The speed of the surface of the earth, in performing its rotations, is 1,526 feet per second. Great as that speed is, it is slow when compared to the earth's progress in its orbit, which is at the rate of 18 miles per second, or more than 65,000 miles per hour."

Then, in "The Story of the Heavens," page 429, we are informed by Sir R. Ball, that:

"Every half hour we are about 10,000 miles nearer to the constellation of Lyra . . . . . . the sun and his system must travel at the present rate for more than a million years before we have crossed the abyss between our present position and the frontiers of Lyra."

"Sun, Moon and Stars" A. Giberne, states that:

"It is the earth that moves, and not the sun; it is the earth that moves, and not the stars."

From these extracts the reader is given to understand by those who have made astronomy their life study and who therefore, ought to know, that IN ONE HOUR:

"The earth rotates over 1,000 miles, revolves around the sun, over 65,000 miles, and rushes through space towards the constellation Lyra, a distance of 20,000 miles."

The total rate of rotation, revolution and gyration, amounting to no less than 50,000 miles an hour.

This casts a total eclipse over all that Jules Verne ever wrote. Put together all the imaginary exploits in the air specially written to interest the young, add to this all the wonderful adventures of air-ships recorded in the "Daughter of the Revolution," and tack on to this all the wild and impossible things found in "current libraries of fiction," and I venture to say that the grand total will record nothing so utterly impossible or so supremely ridiculous as this modern scientific delusion of a globe spinning away in space in several different directions at the same time, at rates of speed which no man is able to grasp; with the inhabitants, some hanging heads down and others at various angles to suit the inclination.

Write down all the swindles that ever were perpetrated; name all the hoaxes you ever heard of or read about; include all the impostures and bubbles ever exposed; make a list of all the snares that popular credulity could ever be exposed to, and you will fail in getting within sight or hearing of an imposture so gross, a hoax so ingenious, or a bubble of such gigantic proportions as has been perpetrated and forced upon unthinking multitudes in the name of science, and as proved incontrovertible fact, by the expounders of modern astronomy.   

Again and again have their theories been combated and exposed, but as often have the majority, who do not think for themselves, accepted the popular thing. No less an authority in his time than the celebrated Danish astronomer, Tycho Brahe, argued that if the earth revolves in an orbit round the sun, the change in the relative position of the stars thus necessarily occasioned, could not fail to be noticed. In the "History of the Conflict between Religion and Science," by Dr. Draper, pages 175 and 176, the matter is referred to in the following words:

"Among the arguments brought forward against the Copernican system at the time of its promulgation, was one by the great Danish astronomer, Tycho Brahe, originally urged by Aristarchus against the Pythagorean system, to the effect that, if, as was alleged, the earth moves round the sun, there ought to be a change in the relative position of the stars; they should seem to separate as we approach them, or to close together as we recede from them. . . . . . At that time the sun's distance was greatly under-estimated. Had it been known, as it is now, that the distance exceeds 90 million miles, or that the diameter of the orbit is more than 180 million, that argument would doubtless have had very great weight. In reply to Tycho, it was said that, since the parallax of a body diminishes as its distance increases, a star may be so far off that its parallax may be imperceptible. THIS ANSWER PROVED TO BE CORRECT."

To the uninitiated, the words "this answer proved to be correct," might seem to settle the matter, and while it must be admitted that parallax is diminished or increased according as the star is distant or near, parallax and direction are very different terms and convey quite different meanings. Tycho stated that the direction of the stars would be altered; his critics replied that the distance gave no sensible difference of parallax. This may be set down as ingenious, but it is no answer to the proposition, which has remained unanswered to this hour, and is unanswerable.

If the earth is at a given point in space on say January 1st, and according to present-day science, at a distance of 190,000,000 miles from that point six months afterwards, it follows that the relative position and direction of the stars will have greatly changed, however small the angle of parallax may be. THAT THIS GREAT CHANGE IS NOWHERE APPARENT, AND HAS NEVER BEEN OBSERVED, incontestably proves that the earth is at rest—that it does not "move in an orbit round the sun."

That the earth does not "rotate on its axis" is proved by the fact that no observer on the surface of a globe could see half way round it, or for a distance of thousands of miles on either side of him, as he would require to do in order to see round a circle of 180°, to view the setting sun and the rising moon at one time.   

Sir Henry Holland, in his "Recollections of Past Life," says that:

"On 20th April, 1837, the moon rose eclipsed before the sun had set."

Now, on a globe of 25,000 statute miles equatorial circumference one has to be 24 feet above sea level to get a horizon of six miles, the "curvature" being 8" to the mile and varying inversely with the square of the distance.

We are thus taught to believe that what appears at all times of the day to be half a circle, or about 180°, is in reality only a few miles, as the earth rotates against the sun and thus deceives us. But the phenomenon of a lunar eclipse requires, according to astronomical doctrine, that the earth shall be exactly midway between sun and moon, to shut off the light of the sun and thus to darken the moon. These two "bodies" being then, according to the astronomer, opposite each other and the earth between, must each be 90°, or a quarter of a circle distant from an observer on the earth's surface—that is, half a circle from one to the other. So that what astronomy, on the one hand, teaches is only a few miles distant, the horizon, is thus seen to be, according to its own showing, half a circle, for the sun is at one side of one quadrant, and the moon at the other side of another. If, therefore, the observer be on the equator when the phenomenon occurs, he can see, according to astronomical measurement, over 6,000 miles on either side of him, east and west. If in north or south latitude, he would see correspondingly less, but thousands of miles in every case. But, on the other hand, according to the popular theory, he would have to be hoisted 4,000 miles away in space for such a thing to be possible. The fact of lunar eclipses having been observed when sun and moon were both above the horizon at the time of the eclipse, and thus that the observer pierced, with the unaided eye, a distance of thousands of miles on either side of him—about half a circle—proves that the earth does not rotate, and that it is not the globe of popular belief.

Sir Henry Holland further informs us that:

"This spectacle requires, however, a combination of circumstances rarely occurring—a perfectly clear eastern and western horizon, and an entirely level intervening surface, such as that of the sea, or the African desert."

It is this LEVEL INTERVENING SURFACE that defies all astronomical attempts to make it convex, and proves beyond the possibility of a doubt that the earth is an extended plane and not a globe.   

Furthermore, if the earth-globe rotates on its axis at the terrific rate of 1,000 miles an hour, such an immense mass would of necessity cause a tremendous rush of wind in the space it occupied. The wind would go all one way, and anything like clouds which got "within the sphere of influence" of the rotating sphere, would have to go the same way. The fact that the earth is at rest is proved by kite flying. The following from the "American Exporter" of November, 1897, illustrates this:

"Recently, a very interesting experiment was made in high kite flying at Boston, from the Blue Hill Observatory, when the highest altitude ever reached by a kite was obtained. The top kite reached a height of 10,016 feet above sea level, or 8,386 feet above the summit of the hill. . . . . . At the highest point reached the temperature was 38°, while at the ground it was 63°. . . . . . Above 5,000 feet the wind was from the west, while at the ground there was a southerly wind."

Astronomers are not agreed about the "depth" of the earth's atmosphere, but the lowest estimate is 45 miles. Therefore, everything within the atmosphere would be subject to the gale of wind produced by the mad whirligig of the rotating globe. When, however, we know that "above 5,000 feet the wind was from the west, while at the ground there was a southerly wind," the fact of the earth being at rest again dawns on us. How could there be two different directions of the wind at a distance of only 5,000 feet apart, if globular hypotheses are anywhere near the truth? Spin a top and it will be seen that the rotation of the top causes the air within its sphere of rotation to go all one way.

Let "imagination" picture to the mind what force air would have which was set in motion by a spherical body of 8,000 miles diameter, which in one hour was spinning round 1,000 miles, rushing through space 65,000 miles, and gyrating across the heavens 20,000 miles? Then let "conjecture" endeavour to discover whether the inhabitants on such a globe could keep their hair on? Talk about Jules Verne, he is not in it with the expounders of this "most exact of all the sciences."

A. E. Skellam says: "The following experiment has been tried many times, and the reasonable deductions from it are entirely against any theory of motion: A loaded cannon was set vertical by plumb-line and spirit-level and fired. The average time the ball was in the air was 28 seconds. On several occasions the ball returned to the mouth of the cannon, and never fell more than 2 feet from its base, as shown in Fig. 1 (figures omitted). Now, let us see what the result would be if the earth were a rapidly rotating sphere. The ball would partake of two motions, the one from the cannon, vertical, and the other from the earth, from west to east, and would arrive at B, Fig. 2; while it had been ascending, the earth, with the cannon, would have gone on to C. In descending it would have no Impulse from the earth's motion or from the cannon, and would fall in a straight line at C, but during the time it were falling, the earth, with the cannon, would have travelled on to D, and the ball would fall (allowing the world's rotation to be 600 miles per hour in England) more than two miles behind the cannon."