Wilkins, John, A discovery of a new world : or a discourse tending to prove, that 'tis probable there may be another Habitable World in the Moon ; with a discourse concerning the Probability of a Passage thither; unto which is added, a discourse concerning a New Planet, tending to prove, that 'tis probable our earth is one of the Planets
page |< < (65) of 370 > >|
    <echo version="1.0RC">
      <text xml:lang="en" type="free">
        <div xml:id="echoid-div98" type="section" level="1" n="35">
          <p>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s998" xml:space="preserve">
              <pb o="65" file="0077" n="77" rhead="That the Moon may be a World."/>
            commonly ſee refuted in the Gommentators on
              <lb/>
            the Books de Gælo.</s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s999" xml:space="preserve"/>
          </p>
          <p>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s1000" xml:space="preserve">Vitellio and Reinoldus, Affirm the Spots to
              <lb/>
              <note position="right" xlink:label="note-0077-01" xlink:href="note-0077-01a" xml:space="preserve">Opt. lib. 9.
                <lb/>
              comment.
                <lb/>
              in Pnrb.
                <lb/>
              pag. 164.</note>
            be the Thicker parts of the Moon, into which
              <lb/>
            the Sun cannot Infuſe much Light; </s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s1001" xml:space="preserve">and this
              <lb/>
            (ſay they) is the Reaſon why in theSuns Eclip-
              <lb/>
            ſes, the Spots and Brighter parts, are ſtill in ſome
              <lb/>
            meaſure Diſtinguiſhed, becauſe the Sun Beams
              <lb/>
            are not able ſo well to Penetrate through thoſe
              <lb/>
            Thicker, as they may through the Thinner
              <lb/>
            parts of that Planet. </s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s1002" xml:space="preserve">Of this Opinion alſo was
              <lb/>
            Gæſar la GaHa, whoſe Words are theſe, The
              <lb/>
            ‘ Moon doth there appear Cleareſt, where ſhe
              <lb/>
            ‘ is Tranſpicious, not only through the Superfi-
              <lb/>
              <note position="right" xlink:label="note-0077-02" xlink:href="note-0077-02a" xml:space="preserve">Ex'qua par-
                <lb/>
              te luna eſt
                <lb/>
              tranſpicua
                <lb/>
              non ſolum
                <lb/>
              ſecundum
                <lb/>
              ſuperficiem
                <lb/>
              ſed etiam
                <lb/>
              ſecundum
                <lb/>
              ſubſtantiam
                <lb/>
              eatenus cla-
                <lb/>
              ra, ex qna
                <lb/>
              autem parte
                <lb/>
              opaca eſt
                <lb/>
              eatenus ob-
                <lb/>
              ſcura vide-
                <lb/>
              tur. De Phæ-
                <lb/>
              nom. eap. II.
                <lb/>
              Albert.
                <lb/>
              mag. de
                <lb/>
              Coævis
                <lb/>
              Q. 4. Art.
                <lb/>
              12.
                <lb/>
              Colleg. Con.</note>
            ‘ cies, but the Subſtance alſo, and there ſhe
              <lb/>
            ‘ ſeems ſpotted, where her Body is moſt Opa-
              <lb/>
            cous. </s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s1003" xml:space="preserve">The ground of this his Aſſertion, was,
              <lb/>
            becauſe he thought the Moon did receive and
              <lb/>
            beſtow her Light by Illumination only, and not
              <lb/>
            at all by reſlexion; </s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s1004" xml:space="preserve">but this, together with the
              <lb/>
            ſuppoſed Penetration of the Sun-Beams, and
              <lb/>
            the Perſpicuity of the Moons Body, I have
              <lb/>
            above Anſwered and Refuted.</s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s1005" xml:space="preserve"/>
          </p>
          <p>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s1006" xml:space="preserve">The more Common and general Opinion, is,
              <lb/>
            that the Spots are the Thinner parts of the
              <lb/>
            Moon, which are leſs able to reflect the Beams
              <lb/>
            that they receive from the Sun, and this is moſt
              <lb/>
            agreeable to reaſon; </s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s1007" xml:space="preserve">for if the Stars are there-
              <lb/>
            fore brighteſt, becauſe they are Thicker, and
              <lb/>
            more Solid than their Orbs, then it will follow,
              <lb/>
            that thoſe parts of the Moon which have leſs
              <lb/>
            Light, have alſo leſs Thickneſs. </s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s1008" xml:space="preserve">It was the
              <lb/>
            Providence of Nature (ſay ſome) that ſo con-
              <lb/>
            trived that Planet to have theſe Spots within
              <lb/>
            it; </s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s1009" xml:space="preserve">for ſince that is neareſt to thoſe lower </s>
          </p>
        </div>
      </text>
    </echo>
Impressum