FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254  
255   256   257   258   259   260   261   262   263   264   265   266   267   268   269   270   271   272   273   274   >>  
he presence of a new correlate. Vast, black thing poised like a crow over the moon. It is our acceptance that these two shadows of Chisbury looked, from the moon, like vast things, black as crows, poised over the earth. It is our acceptance that two triangular luminosities and then two triangular patches, like vast black things, poised like crows over the moon, and, like the triangularities at Chisbury, have been seen upon, or over, the moon: _Scientific American_, 46-49: Two triangular, luminous appearances reported by several observers in Lebanon, Conn., evening of July 3, 1882, on the moon's upper limb. They disappeared, and two dark triangular appearances that looked like notches were seen three minutes later upon the lower limb. They approached each other, met and instantly disappeared. The merger here is notches that have at times been seen upon the moon's limb: thought to be cross sections of craters (_Monthly Notices, R.A.S._, 37-432). But these appearances of July 3, 1882, were vast upon the moon--"seemed to be cutting off or obliterating nearly a quarter of its surface." Something else that may have looked like a vast black crow poised over this earth from the moon: _Monthly Weather Review_, 41-599: Description of a shadow in the sky, of some unseen body, April 8, 1913, Fort Worth, Texas--supposed to have been cast by an unseen cloud--this patch of shade moved with the declining sun. _Rept. Brit. Assoc._, 1854-410: Account by two observers of a faint but distinctly triangular object, visible for six nights in the sky. It was observed from two stations that were not far apart. But the parallax was considerable. Whatever it was, it was, acceptably, relatively close to this earth. I should say that relatively to phenomena of light we are in confusion as great as some of the discords that orthodoxy is in relatively to light. Broadly and intermediatistically, our position is: That light is not really and necessarily light--any more than is anything else really and necessarily anything--but an interpretation of a mode of force, as I suppose we have to call it, as light. At sea level, the earth's atmosphere interprets sunlight as red or orange or yellow. High up on mountains the sun is blue. Very high up on mountains the zenith is black. Or it is orthodoxy to say that in inter-planetary space, where there is no air, there is no light. So then the sun and comets are black, but this earth's a
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254  
255   256   257   258   259   260   261   262   263   264   265   266   267   268   269   270   271   272   273   274   >>  



Top keywords:

triangular

 

poised

 

appearances

 

looked

 
notches
 

necessarily

 

unseen

 
orthodoxy
 

Monthly

 
disappeared

acceptance

 
mountains
 

Chisbury

 

things

 
observers
 

Whatever

 

Account

 

considerable

 

comets

 

parallax


acceptably

 

object

 

observed

 
nights
 

stations

 

visible

 
distinctly
 

suppose

 

interpretation

 

yellow


interprets

 

sunlight

 

orange

 

atmosphere

 
discords
 

zenith

 
Broadly
 

confusion

 

phenomena

 
intermediatistically

position

 

planetary

 
Something
 

approached

 
minutes
 

evening

 
thought
 
merger
 

instantly

 
Lebanon