Extracted text
Editorial transcription, lightly normalized from the scan. Line-break hyphenation, spacing, capitalization, and unmistakable OCR errors have been repaired; italics and small capitals follow the printed text and the claims remain those of The Flaming Sword.
Printed under the department heading Editorial Discussions, Chats, and Correspondence. — The Editor.
EDITOR FLAMING SWORD:—I will say that you are right about concavity; your Chicago experiments of August 27 prove it. The mathematical theory, however, is wrong. I have caught the key, and will now go on to develop it.
I write you about your experiments, which I have been carefully considering lately. It is obvious that they agree with each other, and give conclusive testimony that we are living upon the inside surface of a spheroidal earth. I have carefully examined again, the account of the Rectilineator survey, and it seems accurate enough to prove that the earth is hollow. But granting that, the new determinations of the laws of light must logically follow from the premise; and the explanations given are not consistent deductions from the premise, and contradict each other in every way. In fact, the cosmogonic theories of KORESH are as full of hypotheses as any other system; and so far as I have seen, he expects people to accept them, not as hypotheses, but as truths. I say this, because I know the truth as far as I have gone in developing the system of cosmogony from the basis of the concave arc; and the truth is not in accordance with the theories of KORESH. On the convex hypothesis, constant new hypotheses have to be made, while on the concave hypothesis, each new law and fact of observation forces mathematically, the only correct explanation of the facts.
If you will carefully consider the enclosed demonstration, and discuss it in THE FLAMING SWORD, I think it would be of profit. It would be too bad to have what is certainly the most important series of experiments of the world's history, spoiled by incorrect explanations.—W. L. A., Black Hall, Conn.
It would indeed, be too bad to have the Koreshan series of scientific experiments spoiled by incorrect explanations, for it would spoil the entire System as it is now promulgated; and this is exactly the reason why the entire System should be left in the hands of the Discoverer of the form and function of the universe, and not left to be developed by a man who has been reading Koreshan literature and investigating a few of its conclusions, for only about six months! To whatever extent the mind fails to perceive the absolute harmony of premise and conclusion in every branch of the System, it fails to understand it; and the inconsistencies which seem to the above writer to exist in the Koreshan System, are but the palpable contradictions of his own illogical conclusions.
Koreshanity is a complete system of science; it is already developed, and is in accordance with the facts at every point. The only way in which it can be developed further, is by practical application of it to human affairs. There can be no true explanation of phenomena until the absolute science of optics and physics is understood; all of the factors and functions of vision must be known. So far as we can observe in several letters, the above writer does not manifest that he has the slightest conception of the laws of visual impression. In the several attempted explanations of our many experiments, perspective foreshortening is left out of the question entirely.
We are glad that any one can, to any extent, perceive truth in the Koreshan Astronomy; but we must caution the investigator against jumping at irrational conclusions from the premise. Koreshan physics and optics are in strict harmony with the fundamental premise that the earth's surface is concave; for in these branches it is scientifically determined and defined just how the concave universe produced the phenomena that we observe. We will shortly begin a series of articles on perspective foreshortening and the laws of vision, for the purpose of demonstrating from the standpoint of optics, and through the mathematical factors of optics involved, the actual concavity of the earth.
We have carefully looked over and considered the so called "demonstration," referred to above. A ridiculous mistake is made concerning the transmission of light from the objects beyond the horizon viewed by means of the telescope. Only last week, we published an attempt at the defense of the Copernican system—the assumption that the telescope so curved the rays of light from the objects over the summit of the convex water, as to bring the objects into view; this subterfuge was resorted to, because it is obvious that it is impossible to see through a hill of water. But now we have the conclusion before us, that in all our experiments wherein targets and ships' hulls were restored to view by means of the telescope, we saw through the water—not water in the form of a convex dome, but through water which is concave! A number of geometrical formulæ were used in connection with the index of refraction in water, resulting in the tracing of an imaginary path for a single ray of light through air and water. The object of this "explanation" is to explain how the horizon of the telescope appears to be more distant than the horizon of the naked eye.
The conclusion that we saw through miles of water is preposterous. It is impossible to see more than a few feet into the water of Lake Michigan, and certainly not more than a few inches into the black water of the Chicago river which flows through the Old Drainage Canal, on which some of our experiments were performed. If, instead of the surface being water, in our recent experiments, it were smooth ground surface, curving at the same ratio, the same phenomena of the horizon would have resulted. We have the facts of similar experiments being conducted on Lake Geneva covered with ice and snow, making the surface absolutely impervious to vision. Such an argument as is put forth by our correspondent would be ridiculous if used by a Copernican advocate, to prove that we could see through the bulge; it is all the more ridiculous when used by any one having reached the conclusion that the surface of the earth is concave. The inconsistencies of our friend are worse than the blunders of our opponents! Try again.
- --
The source scans remain the record. This page preserves the correspondence and the editorial reply without presenting the Koreshan System's conclusions as independently established results. The claims remain attributed to The Flaming Sword.
← Flaming Sword Archive
The Flaming Sword · Vol. 13, No. 46 · 6 Oct 1899 · PDF pp. 10-11