Science’s Quarrel With The Bible, Part 1

Posted on July 20, 2017 by revealed4you

Science’s Quarrel With The Bible, Part 1

Extracts from Lectures by Walter Rowton, Esq.

It is all very well for our philosophers to dismiss the Bible as having nothing to do with the technicalities of Science, but they have no right to take that course upon a merely superficial acquaintance with the Book they dismiss. I say “superficial acquaintance,” for hitherto our men of science have shewn only that. Which none of them at any time has learnedly grappled with the Bible case? The frequent assertion, “There is no case to grapple with,” simply proves my point; our men of theoretical science are not accomplished on that side of the subject, or they could not say so.

Not one of them apparently has studied the Book with anything like method. Grotesque explanations of isolated texts to square them with their theories they obviously oppose— these are plentiful enough; but exhaustive treatises in refutation of Bible Science as a systematic whole— where are they? The subjects upon which the Bible is said to speak incorrectly are four; The First Great Cause—the Origin of Man— Geology— Astronomy. Upon these, it is confidently affirmed that the Bible records are but traditional beliefs. But these four resolve themselves into one; for if the Cosmogony of the Bible, or Origin of the Universe, be true, the great pivot principle upon which turn the Philosopher’s First Cause, Darwinism, the “ periods” of Geology, and the elaborate calculations of Astronomy, collapses like a burst soap-bubble.

This, of course, is very startling, and we may well pause were we recommit ourselves to the truth of the Bible Cosmogony. I say recommit ourselves, for long ago, in deference to statements of the then scientific philosophers, that Cosmogony was virtually given up; and before reverting to it, not alone have we to dispose of Kepler’s and Galileo’s and Copernicus’ stated facts, consolidated by the speculations of Newton, Herschel, Tyndall and Proctor, but also we have to take into account the formidable difficulties, owing to the ways in which we stand pledged, of making a recantation. We are committed to Astronomy at variance with the Scriptures: we have surrendered more than Bible dates at the bidding of the Geologists; the theories of Herbert Spencer and Darwin have myriads of adherents amongst the cleverest and most influential of the age’s teachers and leaders; and a recoil from these latest and loftiest results of human reasoning and observation upon the old Bible Cosmogony, looks such a relapse from the zenith of civilization into almost aboriginal barbarism, that we may well hesitate ere consenting it should occur.

But here it is proper we should look for a little at the drift of those technical teachings which from time immemorial to this time have impugned the scientific accuracy of the Bible.

The most eminent living representative of the heathen philosophers, and at the same time the most honoured spokesman in the name of Science that England possesses, recently said— and his words, reproduced by all our newspapers, have been the well-learnt Science lesson of millions since; “Abandoning all disguise, the confession I feel bound to make is, that I prolong the vision backward across the boundary of the experimental evidence, and discern in that matter, which we in our ignorance have hitherto covered with opprobrium, the promise and potency of every form and quality of life,” And again: “All religious theories, schemes, and systems which embrace notions of cosmogony, or which otherwise reach into its domain, must, in so far as they do this, submit to the control of Science, and relinquish all thought of controlling it.”

This, of course, embraces the Bible Cosmogony, it therefore, must submit to the control of such principles as these. By that which calls itself Science, we are authoritatively directed to give up believing in the personal Creator of the Scriptures; to own only a possible First Cause: to accept the heathen atomic theory ; and to discern in “ matter—the promise and potency of every form and quality of life;” which, if there be a God, inevitably includes the life of God Himself. That the heavens declare the glory of God ; that the firmament showeth his handiwork; that God made man; that Creation, as biblically described took place, nay, that Creation as a special work occurred at all: all this we are summoned to surrender. And for what ? For the dear sake of a materialism which, when we fail— for aught that has ever been taught us to the contrary— shall receive us into as good as everlasting nothingness! “Survival of the fittest” — a blessed hope truly! for, as their times come, “ the fittest” did” as unavoidably as others. Everlasting dust and ashes, that appears our promised end; and who but is .speeding towards it? As in this life there is vastly more pain than pleasure, if there be indeed no afterwards, no day of reckoning, why does not science recommend suicide? Depriving us of our Bible hope, and giving us none other— by all means everlasting dust and ashes; and the sooner the better. Science has no right to devise schemes for prolonging life; with her views, it is the refinement of cruelty.

To be continued.

Posted in Bible and science, Old flat earth news | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

A Flat Earth Believer From Capetown

Posted on July 19, 2017 by revealed4you

A Flat Earth Believer From Capetown

Dear Sir,— I am very pleased to hear from you and thank you for papers sent. I may say that I have always questioned some of the teachings of astronomers but had not the means at hand to support any objection I wished to make. Now, however, the case is altered and I can see very clearly that a “plane” earth and that alone is compatible with Bible teaching. I am especially thankful that the means of proof are now within the reach of every man who knows the multiplication table and uses his eyesight — that precious, though abused, God given sense.

What puzzles me more than everything else is that common sense people have been so deluded as to believe in the fearful monstrosity that the earth is a whirling ball! I went to a lecture here a few weeks ago, by a gentleman from the Royal Observatory (near here). His advertised address was on “Glimpses of the Solar System,” illustrated by limelight views. He said he had had a good deal to do with astronomy, having been employed at Greenwich when a boy in connection with the Royal Observatory there. Well, this “ authoritative” lecture amused me most of all for the “blind credulity” it manifested the audience to be possessed of. I simply smiled and sometimes laughed at what I plainly saw were mere suppositions.

The lecturer fairly knocked the legs off his own theories by saying, “we may ASSUME, we may SUPPOSE,” etc.. He said, “the accepted theory of astronomy is true, at least, WE ASSUME IT TO BE TRUE!” I just laughed’ outright at such “science.” Well, the learned man went on, being considerably helped by the pictures. He said there were places on the moon which appeared to be the same as old craters on the lops of volcanoes, and showed a few of them.

“How wonderful!” an old lady behind me kept repeating. The next picture shown was a volcano with lots of smoke issuing from its summit. The man of figures, paused just long enough to give his audience time to hold their breath at seeing a picture of an actual volcano on the moon— and then said that the volcano of the picture was not on the moon—it was Vesuvius ! Well, well, the chagrin and disappointment caused by that statement plainly made it evident that—so far as I could see— everybody but myself believed the volcano to be on the moon’s surface! This serves to show the gullibility of human nature. The man of figures quietly smiled at his dupes. I should think so! (But as a flat earth man, these men of figures never smile. Ed. E. R.)

During the lecture he referred to the “flat earth” people, and said that until they could do what astronomers had done some spots on the sun) they would have lo be silent! Wonderful! exclaimed the lady behind me. After the lecture I wrote to the learned man and said, I was sorry he made reference to the “ flat earth” people without giving-them a chance of replying, and that if he would take the affirmative in the preposition “ that the earth is a revolving globe,” I would gladly take the negative on the same platform as his lecture was delivered. In his reply, he said, “ I have neither the ambition nor the leisure to join in such a discussion as you suggest, especially as from previous experience I well know its uselessness.”

Such a debate would have fairly roused Capetown, but, of course, a good situation is not to be so easily thrown away. If I had been allowed to ask a few questions at the lecture, I think one or two would have taken as long to answer as it would take a science lecturer ” to walk to his 93.000,000 to the sun.

Being an amateur navigator I am much interested in the truth of the earth’s planarity and would much like to get a chart on the natural principle if there are any to be had. I am at present living right east of Table Mountain, and therefore cannot determine where the Southern Cross sets; but should I go to live in the city I shall have great pleasure in observing it and reporting to you.

Now I must close, wishing you God speed in the propagation of truth.

Sincerely yours,

T. W.

Posted in Old flat earth news | Tagged | Leave a comment

Posing a question for Newtonian believers

Posted on July 19, 2017 by revealed4you

Posing a question for Newtonian believers

 

Works on Newtonian astronomy tell us that the planets, including our earth, revolve round the sun and also rotate on their axes from west to east, or from right to left.

The earth then, according to this theory, turns on its axis from west to east and revolves round the sun in the same direction.

Let the following diagram illustrate this:

Numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, the earth travelling in its orbit around  the sun. The earth is said to turn on its axis from right to left or from west to east; that is, from A to B, (No. 2).

It also revolves round the sun from right to left: that is, from 2 to 3. Since the sun is seen to rise in the east and set in the west, it travels, as viewed in this country, from left to right.

As the earth is supposed to rotate like a top in the direction from A to B, an inhabitant on the other side o f the “ globe ” could not see the sun until the earth turned round and brought him to A. He would then, from his position at A, see the sun rising on his right, that is, in the west; for, as we look at the sun, the west is on our right.

How is this, then? We know the sun rises in the east, that is, on our left; but according to the Newtonian theory, as illustrated by their own diagram, the sun rises in the west and sets in the east.

Surely this is a poser for Newtonians. Who among them can explain this contradictory theory?
Beta.

 

Posted in Old flat earth news | Tagged | Leave a comment

Talk on Gravitation, Part 3

Posted on July 18, 2017 by revealed4you

Talk on Gravitation, Part 3

Attraction is a Myth

The attraction of gravitation a myth ? Yes! a fabulous story, with no foundation in fact, though having an APPARENT support in some terrestrial phenomena. Many people imagine that gravitation is a word representing some discovered fact or force in Nature; but let them proceed to show us what fact or force, and they will discover their mistake. Gravitation was an invention, not a discovery; and a supposition necessitated by another hypothesis, viz; the globular theory. One was invented to support the other. Without gravitation the globular theory falls; and without the globular theory what would become of gravitation? I t would become less and lighter than our little molecule of hydrogen, and fly away into unknown and uncivilized regions.

“Parallax” proved the globular theory false, by the FACT that the surface of water is horizontal; and the investigator after truth, practically proves, that the theory of gravitation is utterly false, by a little molecule of hydrogen gas! No one can even tell us what gravitation is, or how it acts. Now, although we may not know what electricity is, or magnetism; we do know how they act.

As I showed in No. 2 Earth Review, Newton did not know how gravitation acts, or whether it really be attraction, or repulsion; that is, he did not know whether there is such a thing as attraction or not.

Where Newton failed to guess, what other mathematician dare try? If the inventor did not know, who amongst his pupils can tell? But they should first prove that gravitation does act before they attempt to explain how it acts.

The magnet is no proof of gravitation. Its power is selective and limited. It seems to attract steel and soft iron, but it will not draw stones and wood ! Gravitation is supposed to attract all bodies, even the stars. They are all supposed to be pulling hard at one another, yet they never get any nearer together. It is strange! But does the magnet really attract steel? The iron or steel goes towards the magnet, but is its motion caused by the attraction or the repulsion of some force? It may be carried by a magnetic current, not drawn by the magnet itself.

Newton confessed that the idea of bodies acting “ upon one another at a distance,” and “ without the mediation of anything else by and through which their action and force may be conveyed from one to the other,” is “so great an absurdity, that,” says he, “I believe no man, who has in philosophical matters a competent faculty of thinking, can ever fall into it.” Yet many do fall into this error. They are not flat earth believers. I stand on a bridge and I watch a log of wood coming down the stream towards the bridge. Is the bridge attracting the log from a distance? Yes, as much as ever the magnet attracts the soft iron! If there were a log by the bridge, the log would remain by it, as the iron remains attached to the magnet. If not, and if the arch under the bridge be sufficiently wide, the log would pass under and follow the stream. Then the bridge would seem to be repelling the log, like one “pole” of the magnet will repel the magnetic needle. Yet by such flimsy arguments and pretexts is the theory of attraction supported. No man in the world can define gravitation, nor tell how it acts; it is a tissue of philosophical speculations and falsehoods, unworthy of honest men and thinker’s, perhaps the most ingenious theory of gravitation ever proposed is that of Le Sage. He “imagines,” says Mr, J. E. Gore, “An infinite number of ultra mundane corpuscles of excessive minuteness, speeding through space in all directions, and with enormous velocities. Two bodies in this ocean of flying corpuscles screen each other from the molecular bombardment, and would consequently move together with a force varying inversely as the square of the distance.”

Upon which Professor Tait remarks:
“ It is necessary also to suppose that the particles and masses of matter have a cage like
form, so that enormously more corpuscles pass through them than impinge upon them; else the gravitation action between two bodies would not be as the product of their masses.”

Well might Sir John Herschel say:
“The hypothesis of Le Sage, which assumes that every point of space is penetrated at every instant of time by material particles sui generis, moving in right lines in every possible direction, and impinging upon the material atoms of bodies, as a mode of accounting for gravitation, is too grotesque to need serious consideration!”

What then must the poorer theories be? Readers, take your choice between common sense and reason, and theories “too grotesque to need serious consideration.”

*****

A Professor’s View of His Own Teaching

“The student of science will do well to bear in mind the words of a very eminent lecturer of physiology. The statements I have made to you gentlemen I have every reason to believe to be wholly untrue, but you must learn them, because if you do not, you will not be able to pass your examinations.” The Engineer, October 12, 1894.

Query: Is the father of lies, the father of the so-called sciences?

*****

News of Interest

Check out the News tab at the top of this page for a recent posting.

 

Posted in gravity exposed, Old flat earth news | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Talk on Gravitation, Part 2

Posted on July 17, 2017 by revealed4you

Talk on Gravitation, Part 2

  But we, dear reader, can also muse over apples. While so musing, I wonder why my apple makes no tremulous motion towards the moon, which is rising as I write, especially as she is now between the two “ ponderous and superior” planets. Mars and Jupiter, which are approaching towards conjunction. Ye t through the varying positions and relationships of the heavenly bodies, as they roll around the world and my apple, it remained on the shelf twenty-four hours perfectly stationary, as though no such tremendous forces were playing their mighty artillery upon it. They may try from their various vantage grounds, east or west, north or south, mid-heaven or sideways, yet the apple will not move. Yet a breath would have caused it to roll. There is no proof for flat earthers of universal attraction in this apple. But perhaps mine is different from Newton’s. It will not bow to fair Luna as she pulls it sideways, assisted by the two powerful giants, one on each side, attending her like guards, much less will it attempt to rise towards the mighty sun as he pulls with all his meridian power and glory. Its weight is the same throughout the twenty-four hours. No! friends. I must see an apple fall ” upwards before I can believe in solar gravitation. But a superficial thinker may object that the reason bodies only fall downwards to the earth is, because the earth being nearer than the sun, its force of attraction is the greater of the two. Is it ? Let us take another instance, which proves, not only that there is no such thing as terrestrial gravitation, or attraction, but which shows that this supposed power may be defied.

Gravitation Defined

In the science schools o f to-day our pupils are taught the atomic theory, namely: that all bodies consist of innumerable minute particles so small that they are invisible and cannot be further divided, or cut up, as their name, atoms, implies. These atoms, the gods of the scientist and evolutionist, may all be the same size, if we can attach size to such infinitely small things, or potentialities, but they have not all the same specific gravity or weight. Hydrogen, a kind of gas, is the lightest body known. Hydrogen may be obtained by a combination of sulphuric acid, zinc clippings, and water. As the gas bubbles up through the water we catch a little in a glass bottle, or a test-tube. We may fix our mind’s eye upon one molecule of hydrogen, and let all the others go free.

We work this molecule safely inside a small glass tube. It is the lightest body known upon the earth, and it is easier to pull about light bodies than heavy ones. Now, the theory of gravitation is that all the atoms in the earth and in the world are attracting, or pulling at this molecule of hydrogen; and that, being nearest to the earth, the latter will have the most power over it. We will not pause to show further the absurdity of this theory, and the infinite number of bonds and filaments our little

molecule must possess to be in pulling connection with all the atoms of the universe; but we will proceed to liberate it from the bottle, not from the bonds, and watch, with mental vision, its behaviour, on being so far set free. Now what course ought the molecule to take, if the theory of

our astronomical friends be true?

Clearly and rapidly downwards to the earth, pulled down unmercifully by ten thousand times ten million threads or gravitating cords. We turn the bottle neck downwards and draw the cork. The molecule of hydrogen ascends in the glass, and refuses to leave the bottle. Remember, every atom in the so-called “ globe” is pulling with all its might at our little molecule of hydrogen; yet It refuses to leave the jar! Turn the glass right side up, and now our molecule, really liberated, mounts up above the highest clouds, in complete defiance of the combined pull of all the gravitating forces in the “ globe.” It stands aloof from all the nonsensical “ forces,” or theories, of the astronomers, and mounts upwards and onwards in defiance of them. It defies, as we defy, all their metaphysical “reasoning” and jargon about gravitation. If bodies falling to the earth prove gravitation, what do bodies ascending from the earth prove? If the “globe” can pull at a distant body like the moon and make it “fall” through sixteen feet per second, why can it not pull at air, smoke, clouds, gases and things close at hand, and make them all lie down in layers upon its surface? The conclusion is evident; a force that cannot overcome a little helpless molecule of hydrogen, is no force at all. The apple was too much for it, and so is the molecule.

Bodies rise or fall, according to their inherent density, or weight, and they remain at rest whenever and wherever they attain their equilibria. This is reasonable, because it is natural; yet at the same time it is utterly opposed to the fanciful speculations of the scientists, who darken counsel with words without knowledge. In the whole wide world there is no such thing as the astronomer’s “attraction of gravitation.” I challenge any of them to prove it. I will, in conclusion, proceed to show that their idea of attraction is a myth.

To be continued

Posted in Gravity, Old flat earth news | Tagged , | Leave a comment

A Talk on Gravitation, Part 1

Posted on July 16, 2017 by revealed4you

A Talk on Gravitation, Part 1

What is gravitation?

  We are told a that gravitation exists throughout the universe is the reason why the smallest things fall down, such as a pebble to why planets remain in their orbits. Yet, scientists say we know very little about it. So, let’s explore this subject of gravitation in more detail.

But a difficulty meets one at the outset. How am I to write “something” about nothing? I cannot create, as some erroneously suppose the world was made, out of nothing. Paul says the things which are seen were not made out of “phenomena,” or things which do appear; but he nowhere teaches that they came out of absolutely nothing, except invisibility. Now, “Gravitation” has been created, not only out of invisibility, but out of nothing, except the vain imaginations of astronomical minds. I t was not “discovered,” but invented; and I shall proceed to prove that there is no such thing as the “attraction of Gravitation” in God’s universe, and that the phenomena supposed to countenance the theory are capable of other and more natural interpretations.

Of course, I speak of “Gravitation” in the astronomical sense of a universal power in all bodies, celestial and terrestrial, to attract, or pull one another together, with forces directly in proportion to their masses, and inversely as the squares of their distances. So that terrestrial attraction and phenomena will be seen to be only a small part of this question of Universal Gravitation. The former we may explain by weight and currents; but the latter we utterly deny. Let us try, in the first place, to realize what is meant by, and implied in the astronomical theory of gravitation, and its Universal Attraction.

According to this idea, every body in the universe, however large or small, has the power, by some means or other, to attract, or pull towards itself, every other body in the universe, however near or distant. Yea, not only is every body supposed to have this power, but the power is said to be in actual operation every moment of time for ever. So that, if I hold an apple in my hand, it is connected with, and pulling at all the apples in the world; all the pears and plums, all the trees, gardens, walls, houses, all the stones, rocks, rivers, and mountains; yea, and every separate drop of water in the ocean, and every grain of sand on the sea shore. And these are all pulling at the apple. Yet it remains passively on my hand, while I study gravitation, or decide whether I will eat the apple now, or leave it for further experimentation. This apple ought to dance about, or at least to show some symptoms of the awful internal struggles going on within it. Perhaps it has learned the art of appearing passive, an art which some astronomers seem to acquire, and to keep a quiet and serene countenance, while internally tortured with ten thousand doubts and pangs. Ten thousand! Yea, ten thousand times ten thousand gravitating cords or strings are pulling at it! For we must remember that sun, moon and stars, and supposed millions of millions of “ other worlds than ours ” are each and all interested in that apple; and they send out their innumerable long and filamentous fingers to clutch it out of my open hand. Yet it remains outwardly unmoved in serene and blushing passivity. I shall have to eat it, threads and all, with whatever tentacles, or other attractive matter may be attached to it! What a mission! But there is such an attractive force, either in the apple, or in the natural taste God has give us for common fruit, as well as for common sense, that I take all risks and disappoint the sun and stars. I am glad that Newton was led to muse over an apple falling to the ground by its own weight, when the stalk was rotten. He would have mused more had it “fallen” upwards.

(Why should an apple, or any fruit for that matter, fall from the tree it came from? Since the tree is a bigger mass, and the bigger mass attracts the smaller – as we are told – then no fruit should fall at all!)

To be continued.

 

Posted in gravity exposed | Tagged , | 1 Comment

Computer Generated Reality

Posted on July 14, 2017 by revealed4you

Computer Generated Reality

Have you notice the words that are used in newspaper headlines? Here are some examples:

A work of art

A dream

A new form of space

Inventing reality

A new kind of experience

Virtual reality is liberating

Another gateway into reality

And it goes on and on. This is all subliminal conditioning to accept that which is not real. They have been doing it for years with fake news. And, it is no wonder that people are falling for it.

We are told by media and the scientists of what is real and what isn’t real, or insinuating this. The VR fans sees this as a paradigm shift in the role of computers. The ‘Powers-That-Be’ are dictating to us of what is real and what is not real. This includes:

what is in news

what’s in the sky

that the earth is flat

And, of course, they change the meaning of words to accomplish all of this.

There is an agenda and there are companies and government departments behind all of this. A prime example is NASA. These people are anti-Christs and the only way they can get others to accept their perversion of life and how to live it is by manipulation of what is real. Then they can get others to accept their agenda without too much rebellion. Otherwise, how else can the people remain docile while the criminals from the Middle East and Africa invade their land and commit crime without must protest from the people?

 

 

 

 

Posted in media lies, mind control | Tagged , | Leave a comment

The Boasted Accuracy of Modern Astronomy Exposed

Posted on July 14, 2017 by revealed4you

The Boasted Accuracy of Modern Astronomy Exposed

(Continuing our examination of modern astronomy.)

By Thos. Geo. Ferguson

The Science of Theoretical Astronomy makes a boast of its accuracy, and as it is best to “ prove all things ” a few of their statements shall be put to the test to see if they have any right to the claims they make, viz:— “ that Astronomy is the most exact of all sciences.”

Sir Robt. Ball tells us in his Story o f the Heavens, p. 510 (1893 E d .) We:

“ can determine the place of a planet with such precision that it is certainly not one second of arc wrong,” and he goes on to explain that “ a foot rule placed at a distance of 40 miles subtends an angle of a second, and it is surely a delicate achievement to measure the place of a planet, and feel confident that no error greater than this can have intruded into our result.”

The accuracy they vaunt so loud speedily disappears when the statements of two or three of the most “ eminent astronomers ” are compared with each other ! For instance, if we start with the problem which nearly all modern astronomers agree is the most important throughout the whole range of astronomy, viz :— The sun’s distance from the earth, we shall see what diversity of opinion (absolute contradictions— E d.) exist amongst them, so much so, that hardly any two of them agree about it. The late Mr. Proctor stated it was 91,500,000 miles, but Sir R. Ball gives it as 92,700,000. Surely a difference of 1,200,000 miles is not the “ precision ” Sir R. Ball speaks of in his work from which I have quoted ?

Again these distances differ very considerably from those given by other “ eminent astronomers” :— Copernicus gave it as 3,391,200miles; Kepler, 12,376,800 ; Newton (1st guess) 28,000,000; Newton (2nd guess) 84,000,000; Herschel, 95,000,000; Gould, 96,000,000; Cassini, 112,000,000; Mayer, 184,000,000.

Mr. Proctor in the opening remarks of his book The Sun, says :— “ The determination of the sun’s distance is not only an important problem of general astronomy but, it may be regarded as the very foundation of all our researches.”

How very far from accuracy must that science be which has such an uncertain foundation ? If modern astronomy depends upon the accuracy of the sun’s distance from the earth, then we are justified in saying that it is built on a sandy foundation, for, as we have seen, the astronomer’s theories about it, are against themselves.

Let us now glance at their theories about the planets, and I trust the reader will, from their own text books, compare the diameters and distances as given by the most “ eminent astronomers.” I shall only give one instance as a sample. Saturn’s mean distance from the sun, as given in Sir R. Ball’ s Story of the Heavens, is 884,000,000 miles, and the diameter 71,000 miles. Prof. Lockyer gives its distance as 880,000,000 miles; a difference of 4,000,000 miles. Prof. Olmsted gives Saturn’ s distance from the sun as 890,000,000 miles, and the diameter of Saturn as 79,000 miles. Others could be quoted equally at variance. Where, we ask, is the accuracy of this “most exact of sciences?”

No doubt some will say, “Well, how do the astronomers foretell the Eclipses, etc., so accurately?”  This is done by cycles. The Chinese for thousands of years have been able to predict the various Solar and Lunar Eclipses, and do so now, in spite of their disbelief in the theories of Newton and Copernicus. Thomas Keith in his “Treatise on the use of the globes” says:— “The Cycle of the moon is said to have been discovered by Meton, an Athenian, B.C. 433,” when, of course, the globular theory was not dreamt of. After a period of 18.6 years, the moon recommences precisely the same spiral path around the earth in relation to the sun, and so the Eclipse of the moon, which takes place on September 29th, will again occur in 18.6 years. We find in no other science (save perhaps Geology) such differences of opinion and such opposite statements existing amongst its professors, as among those of modern astronomy. Algebra, Arithmetic, Euclid or Geometry, may be called exact sciences, but certainly not modern theoretical astronomy.

That there are difficulties in connection with natural phenomena is not doubted, and that there are good men in the ranks who support these theories we do not deny, but we are prepared to show that at the outset assumption is called Fact, and consequently a multitude of errors have crept in which it is the duty of every lover of truth to warn people against and to expose. We may be thought to be fault finders, and had better be so-called than let falsehood reign and permeate society without an attempt to excise it. All we ask is that everything stated may be brought to the test of practical facts and common sense, then the truth will soon be evident. We have but very briefly touched this subject, but sufficient, we hope, to cause our readers to think, and to examine the matter for themselves.

 

Posted in Old flat earth news | Tagged , | Leave a comment

The Glacial Nightmare and the Flood

Posted on July 13, 2017 by revealed4you

The Glacial Nightmare and the Flood

“ A second appeal to common-sense from the extravagance of some recent Geology.”

By Sir H. H. Howorth, K.C.I.E., M.P., F.R.S., F.G.S

  “One of the chief objects,” says Sir H. H. Howorth, “of this book, is to show that the Glacial theory, as usually taught, is not sound; but that it ignores, and is at issue with, the laws which govern the movements of ice, while the geological phenomena to be explained refused be equated with it. This is partially acknowledged by the principal apostles of the ice theory. They admit that ice as we know it in the laboratory, or ice as we know it in glaciers, acts quite differently to the ice they postulate, and produces different effects ; but we are bidden to put aside our puny experiments which can be tested, and turn from the glaciers which can be explored and examined, to the vast potentiality of ice in shape of portentous ice-sheets beyond the reach of empirical tests, and which we are told acted quite differently to ordinary ice. That is to say, they appeal from subsidiary experiments to a prior argument drawn from a transcendental world. Assuredly this is a curious position for the champions of uniformity to occupy.”

“I hold that the Glacial Theory, as ordinarily taught, is based, not upon induction, but upon hypotheses, some of which are incapable of verification, while others can be shown to be false, and it has all the infirmity of the science of the Middle Ages. This is why I have called it a Glacial Nightmare. Holding it to be false, I hold further that no theory of modern times has had a more disastrously mischievous effect upon the progress of Natural Science.”

“ I not only disbelieve in, but I utterly deny, the possibility of ice having moved over hundreds of miles of level country, such as we see in Poland and Russia, and the prairies of North America, and distributed the drift as we find it there. I further deny its capacity to mount long slopes, or to traverse uneven ground. I similarly deny to it the excavating and denuding power which has been attributed to it by those who claim it as the excavator of lakes and valleys, and I altogether question the legitimacy of arguments based upon a supposed physical capacity which cannot be tested by experiment, and which is entirely based upon hypothesis. This means that I utterly question the prime postulate of the glacial theory itself.”

We notice that although Sir H. Howorth offers a “widespread flood” in place of the Glacial Theory, he ignores and repudiates the Universal Flood of Holy Writ, and considers it “propriety to leave the Biblical account alone.” He quotes from Sedgwick’s Paraphrase of Bacon, “the impossible task of equating science and faith.” He says;—

“The Pleistocene Flood, though far from being universal, was certainly one of the most widespread catastrophes which the world has seen.” “The breaking up of the earth’s crust, of which the evidences seems to be overwhelming, necessarily caused great waves of translation to traverse wide continental areas, and these waves of translation as necessarily drowned the great beasts and their companions, including palaeolithic man, and covered them with continuous mantles of loam, clay, gravel and sand, as we find them drowned and covered.”

We tell Sir H. Howorth and the whole world of scientists that there is another Nightmare for them to face, in which there is no more truth than there is in the “Glacial Nightmare!” That Nightmare is the Globular Nightmare of Sir Isaac Newton! The world; were it a sea-earth-globe, spinning with seven-fold motion through “space,” never could have been flooded; no, not even to the extent required by the theory of Sir H. Howorth! Where did the water come from? Where did it go to? If the water came in the form of rain, how did it overcome the frictional resistance of the revolving atmosphere ?

There is no theory extant that has had, and is having, so mischievous an effect upon Natural Science as the Globular Nightmare. It is the fundamental error of all errors in existence, hence the present system of “educating the masses” by “University Extension” schemes, tendeth but to make the nation a nation of rabid infidels.

The science of Geology is but the outcome of the Globular Nightmare, or. Sir H. Howorth could not have spoken of “the breaking up of the crust of the earth.” It it sad to see those who once were ardent advocates of “a vast and universal Flood” cringing before the geological idol of supposition, and pleading on its behalf for “a greater latitude of interpretation of Scripture,” or, “ some modification,” or, “ a little concession on the part of literal interpreters.” We remember that it is written in the Scriptures of Truth, “ he that believeth not God, makes Him a liar.” Until Geology, Astronomy or Evolution, can be produce some distinct and conclusive proof of truthfulness; and by consequence, unmistakable and irrefutable evidence against the Mosaic Cosmogony, we shall testify against their systematic theories as vain jibberish of so-called scientists.

Take heed what you hear.

 

Posted in Bible and science, Old flat earth news | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Making Us A Mere Speck

Posted on July 11, 2017 by revealed4you

Making Us A Mere Speck

By James Naylor

  It is the pride and boast of Modern Astronomy, that, compared with the ancient systems, it has introduced order for confusion, simplicity for complexity, and placed a comprehension of the universe within the reach of all. And the boast is not without some seeming justification; for if the modern system as ordinarily presented, be compared with the epicycle systems of the past, the former appears to much greater advantage.

Indeed, so much is this the case, that Sir John Herschel might well say in his “ Outlines of Astronomy.” “ We shall take for granted from the outset the Copernican system of the world, relying on the easy, obvious and natural explanation it affords of all the phenomena as they come to be described.” Now we are not concerned with a defence of the systems with which modern astronomy is contrasted, except in so far as they teach a plane earth, with the heavenly bodies in subordination to it. We are, however, concerned to show that, in spite of plausible appearances to the contrary, modem astronomy, both in its primaries and secondaries, is the most complex and confusing system ever palmed upon human credulity.

This is a strong statement, but we propose in this, and some following papers, to thoroughly justify it; and also to show, that if any will but put astronomical claims to an impartial investigation, they will inevitably conclude that these claims are but a confused jumble of unproven, contradictory, and self-destructive assumptions, that are utterly unworthy of acceptance in the name of truth. The scope of our labour is tersely expressed by our title, “ The pretensions and pretences of modern astronomy,” which also conveniently divides those labours into two parts, and gives to the “ pretentious,” a priority in the order o f examination ; these latter, however, need not occupy us long, for have they not been graphically portrayed by the great Sir John Herschell himself? Here are his words: “The earth on which we stand and which has served for ages as the unshaken foundation of the firmest structures, either of art or nature, is divested by the astronomer of its attribute of fixity, and conceived by him as turning swiftly on its centre, and at the same time moving onward through space with great rapidity.

The sun and the moon… become enlarged in his imagination into vast globes…The planets…are to him spacious, elaborate and habitable worlds . . . The stars . . are to him suns of various and transcendent glory, effulgent centres of life and light to myriads of unseen worlds, so that when after dilating his thoughts to comprehend the grandeur of those ideas his calculations have called up, and exhausting his imagination and the powers of his language to devise similes and metaphors, illustrative of the immensity of the scale upon which his universe is constructed, he shrinks back to his native sphere, he finds it in comparison a mere point, so lost . . as to be invisible and unsuspected from some of its principal and remoter members.”

It would be difficult for anyone to surpass language like the foregoing, in either the extent o f its pretensions or the graphicness of its diction. We will not, therefore, attempt it, but simply content ourselves by stating more formally the claims here asserted:

1 — The Earth, which naturally appears to us as the largest and most beautiful object with which we are acquainted, is viewed by the astronomer as a mere speck of the universe and so utterly insignificant as to be unsuspecting either by some of its principal or remoter members.

2 — O f the Earth’s motions of both rotation, and of translation through space are asserted, though its seemingly fixed and immovable character are amongst our earliest and most persistent impressions.

3 — The sun, moon and planets in astronomy become vast globes some o f which are elaborate and habitable worlds, though to the ordinary mind the two former appear but as centres of light or of heat, and the latter but as a variety of the objects with which the heavens appear studded.

4 — T h e stars, which from our earliest recollections have appeared to us as tiny, but withal, beautiful specks are enlarged by the astronomer into resplendent centres of systems ; in many cases vaster than the solar one, of which the Earth is asserted to be a member.

5— The Universe is of such immensity that it embraces myriads of unseen worlds, where existence is only asserted, or assumed, but not attempted to be proved, even by the astronomer.

To be continue

Posted in Old flat earth news, Sun Moon Stars | Tagged , | Leave a comment