Page Content (OCR)
[p. 195] Visitors to Venus: Y. Acad., 5-249. scientists of eminence. This is only a convenience, because it seems necessary to personify. If we look over Philosophical Transactions, or the publications of the Royal Astronomical Society, for instance, we see that Herschel, for instance, was as powerless as any boy stargazer, to enforce acceptance of any observation of his that did not harmonize with the system that was growing up as independently of him and all other astronomers, as a phase in the development of an embryo compels all cells to take on appearances concordantly with the design and the predetermined progress and schedule of the whole. Evans, Ways of the Planets, p. 140: That, in 1645, a body large enough to look like a satellite was seen near Venus. Four times in the first half of the 18th century, a similar observation was reported. The last report occurred in 1767. A large body has been seen--seven times, according to Science Gossip, 1886-178--near Venus. At least one astronomer, Houzeau, accepted these observations and named the--world, planet, super- construction--"Neith." His views are mentioned "in passing, but without endorsement," in the Trans. N. Houzeau or someone writing for the magazine-section of a Sunday newspaper--outer darkness for both alike. A new satellite in this solar system might be a little disturbing--though the formulas of Laplace, which were considered final in his day, have survived the admittance of five or six hundred bodies not included in those formulas--a satellite to Venus might be a little disturbing, but would be explained--but a large body approaching a planet--staying awhile--going away--coming back some other time-- anchoring, as it were-- Azuria is pretty bad, but Azuria is no worse than Neith.