THE GEOLOGIST. 



JUNE 1864. 



THE PEIMART TRANSLATION OF THE EAETH. 

 By the Editor. 



In reference to the correspondence on my speculations in theoretical 

 geology and astronomy which have been printed in this Journal, I wish 

 to take this opportunity of saying, that if in the cases of the Rev. O. 

 Fisher, p. 54 in this volume, and of Dr. Leslie, p. 295 in Vol. VL 3 I 

 have inserted such comments on any of the physical hypotheses to 

 which from time to time I have given expression without replying 

 to those comments, that I do not therefore acknowledge my opponents 

 to be right, nor, on the other hand, do I intend to pass them over 

 slightingly as wrong, or as unworthy of attention. I simply thought 

 it best not to get into controversy while my own ideas were being- 

 enunciated. I cannot, however, concur in the Rev. 0. Fisher's views 

 as to the possibility of the earth's velocity, if initial primarily, being 

 maintained, nor of a larger orbit for our planet being a result of any 

 retardation of her motion. I am well aware of Kepler's law referred 

 to, and I have my own opinion both of its value and its application. 

 Mathematics may derive a result from a given basis, but mathematics 

 never yet gave birth to a basis of facts. That two added to two 

 make four may be mathematically demonstrated, but no amount of 

 mathematical reasoning would prove four to be derived from two and 

 two. It is evident it might have been derived from 3 + 1, or 1 + 1 + 

 1 + 1. Just so if the orbital velocity of our earth had been imparted 

 to it by explosion, by condensation, by any projectile force whatever, 



YOL. VII. 2 D 



