The Importance of Perspective In Understanding the Flat Earth Model, part 3
From the booklet: The Sea-Earth Globe and its Monstrous Hypothetical Motions: or Modern Theoretical Astronomy
Note: Punctuation and grammar is as in the original.
THE THREE POLE TRICK
We have been authoritatively assued that the curvature of water can be proved by three poles, and a notable incident is referred to on the Bedford Canal, Cambridgeshire.
“If three poles of exactly the same height e placed in a line, the middle one always appears higher than the other two outer ones….if a telescope be sited along the first to the third pole, the top of the middle pole will appear above the line joining the tops of the outer two.” Elm. Phys., by R.A. Gregory, F.R.A.S.
The above paragraph is vague and specious. What is meant by sighting the telescope “along” the first pole to the third? Is it here the trick comes in? The third pole, being farthest off, will appear perspectively smaller; and the first will not be seen at all if the glass be laid “along” the top of it. The telescope should be placed at some distance away from the first pole, when the line of sight would be found running along the level tops of each pole. Refer to figures 14 and 15. the line of sight from A to C is ot parallel to a line of tangential at A; but it ought to be if there be no trick of collimation in the telescope.
But suppose pole B seems higher than C. shift the glass “along” B, and add a fourth pole at D, equally high and distant. Now pole C “will always” appear higher than pole B; so that C is both lower and higher than B! Which is absurd, as Eculid says.
When the noted wager was tried on the Bedford Canal, the lens should have been turned half-way round to test whether there was any “trick” in the telescope; but J. Hampden was not sufficiently sharp. Sire A. R. Wallace was doubtless honest, but the glass may have tricked him! Through a friend I sent him a challenge to shew in print HOW the bet was won, promising to reply courteously; but to me he never replied. Hence of that incident we may write R.I.P. But I retain copies of the official photographs taken at the time, in case any other globite cares to pick up my glove.
My friend “Parallax” (Dr. Rowbottam) had tried many experiments on that canal between 1838 and 1862; and after the bet affair he again went and carefully tested the water for six miles, with various powerful telescopes. He found the surface perfectly level, as before; and his experiments have several times been published, but never refuted. Yet the canal is still there!
For proof “How they cook science,” see the London Daily Chronicle, Jan. 14th, 1893.
The above figure 15B illustrates the supposed curvature when, as is often the case in clear weather, a great extent of sea surface is visible looking in opposite directions, say 25 miles each way. This should give a dip of 420 feet on each side. If the sea were globular, the curvature of its surface ought to be plainly visible, especially from a balloon, for a sweep of 50 miles, looking both ways; but no such curvature has ever been seen, even for longer stretches, but only one vast and uniform level, rising perspectively to the eye-line. See figure 15B and compare it with any good sea-scape. Fig. 15A shews what ought to be seen from a balloon (E) if the sea were globular.