There is a lot of rumor and innuendo floating around TT about JS and LDS theology.
Do you have examples of such or is this just another of the "rumors"?
Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
>> From: Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> DAVEH: So....in absence of Dean answering my below question, do you
>> know what he is talking about, Perry? I vaguely remember somebody
>> posting some stuff about moon men and LDS theology several years ago,
>> but don't recall the details. A quick search of the net didn't get
>> me very far, and I'm too tired to do much else tonight. Perhaps you
>> have it at your fingertips...
>
>
> Dave, I find it hard to beleive that you have never heard that JS
> claimed there were men living on the moon.
DAVEH: I do recall hearing such, but Dean introduced a new element
into it that I had not heard.....7 foot Quakers. Seems like some folks
just make stuff up and then simply declare it as truth. There is a lot
of rumor and innuendo floating around TT about JS and LDS theology. I'm
amazed that some folks would just assume because it is posted on TT that
it is true. Rather than make a claim that JS did such and such, or that
Mormons believe in a certain unsavory way....wouldn't it be better to
ask about it, or do some web searching to find out what is really
factual? And....wouldn't one be a little skeptical about using the
opinions of anti-Mormons as being a good source of LDS theology?
> You must not be looking too hard.
DAVEH: You are right, and I think I said so....I was pretty tired at
the time, and wasn't up to spending a lot of time searching for 7 foot
quakers. I did a cursory search and failed to find them, so I suspected
that Dean's facts were a little at odds with reality.
> It has been brought up on this forum more than once, and I have
> posted a link to the "moon hoax" site before.
>
> Try these links:
> http://www.challengemin.org/moon.html
> http://www.carm.org/lds/quotes_js.htm
> http://www.irr.org/mit/WDIST/wdist-strange-teachings.html
DAVEH: Thank you for posting them. It seems like there is only one
primary source that claims JS referred to moon men. Kinda makes you
wonder, doesn't it. IF Js had really believed AND taught others about
moon men, then one would expect it to show up in his teachings, writings
or even in the journals of many of the folks who heard it. After
all....that would certainly be a controversial thought at the time, I
should think. Yet there seems to be just the one recounting of it...by
Oliver Huntington. I'm not suggesting that Huntington is lying, but
who knows in what context the matter was discussed. I can think of all
kinds of scenarios where one person could be chatting and speculating
about what and who lives on the moon, or that it be made of green
cheese. If the person listening is thinking that the guy is instead
prophesying rather than just offering an opinion, then the way he
relates that discussion to somebody else could have a much different
slant on it than what was intended by the other person making the comments.
>
>> BTW.......I didn't see any connection between your below URL and
>> JS.....did I miss it? (That is one difficult site to read with the
>> small print and the moon in the background!!!)
>
>
> The "moon hoax" article could explain why Joseph Smith believed that
> men lived on the moon. While it does not mention JS in particular (why
> should it?), it was written in 1935, two years before he was claimed
> to have made the statement. The hoax drew in a lot of prominent men,
> and JS may have been duped as well.
DAVEH: BY also made some similar comments about moon inhabitants that
may (or may not) be related to JS's comments. LDS theology allows for
spirits inhabiting certain worlds as I understand it. To discuss it
with you would require a lot of speculation on my part, and doing so
with an anti-Mormon would only be painting a target on my chest.
Discussing it on TT would just be asking to be stood up before the
firing squad.
>
> Dave, wake up! I am offering you a plausible explanation to why Joseph
> Smith may have uttered a seemingly stupid statament about people
> living on the moon!
DAVEH: I did realize that, Perry. Thank you for your consideration.
But I think it more likely that JS did a lot of speculating about
things, and a lot of folks really paid attention to what he said because
of his prophet status. And knowing how folks can hear what a person
says and then entirely misrepresent it when relating it to another....I
think my explanation is much more plausible.
> I think this is quite a credible explanation, and somewhat excuses the
> less-than-prophetic statement of JS. I have not seen this posted
> before in defense of JS, not even on apologetic mormon sites. "PERRY
> IS DEFENDING YOUR PROPHET!" This alone should be the reason for taking
> the time to understand the connection!
DAVEH: You are assuming I did not understand the connection. I did. I
just don't think it is as plausible as a couple other scenarios that I
can think of based on my understanding of how LDS think, and how folks
misinterpret what others say.
>
> BTW, if you are not using Internet Explorer,
DAVEH: I use OPERA.
> them moon in the background will scroll with the text, making parts of
> it hard to read. But, with Internet Explorer the background remains
> fixed in place, and the text can be scrolled to a dark place and be
> quite readable.
DAVEH: OPERA renders it as well as IE, but I am out of town right now,
using an old and small monitor without very good resolution. Combine
that with my old (and tired) eyes, and it was a poorly laid out website,
IMO.
> However, I will attach the article below so you can read it without
> the "quaker-inhabited" full moon in the background:
DAVEH: Thanx. I could have done the same, but read it far enough to
figure it wasn't worth the time due to my alternate theory.
>
>
> THE MOON HOAX 1
>
> The "moon hoax," as it has come to be known, is a neglected chapter in
> the history of astronomy. It was not scientific and may not have been
> influential, but it shows what was believable in 1835. Many educated
> laymen accepted it and even scientists wondered at least whether it
> could be true.
>
> The main "hero" of the affair was Sir John Herschel, the son of Sir
> William. He had embarked, in November 1833, on the long journey to
> South Africa for the purpose of getting a good look at the Southern
> sky, which up to that time had been neglected, simply because all the
> large telescopes, and most of the small ones, were located in the
> northern hemisphere. Sir John transported a 5-inch refractor and an
> 18-inch reflector to Capetown.
>
> The carrier of the moon hoax was the daily New York Sun, then only two
> years old, with a circulation of about 8,000. In addition to ordinary
> news and advertisements the paper was in the habit of running long
> essays in serial form. One of these had been written by the
> British-born author and essayist Richard Adams Locke (of the same
> family as the philosopher John Locke, though not a lineal descendant,
> as wrongly stated by Edgar Allan Poe). Mr. Locke had been paid $150
> for his essay and the proprietors of The Sun had asked more. Locke had
> been reading, in the 1826 volume of the Edinburgh,New Philosophical
> Journal, a tediously philosophizing article on the inhabitants of
> other worlds, especially of the moon. The outcome of this reading,
> plus the offer of another $150, was what we now call the "moon hoax."
>
> The story began in The Sun on August 25, 1835, under the title "Great
> Astronomical Discoveries Lately Made by Sir John Herschel, LL.D.
> F.R.S. &c, at the Cape of Good Hope." An editorial stated that the
> editors of The Sun were pleased to bring to American readers "this
> reprint of a special Supplement of the Edinburgh,Journal of Science,"
> complete, except for mathematical material of no interest to the
> average reader.
>
> The article itself began with introductory remarks by the editor of
> the "Edinburgh Journal" to the British public and continued:
>
> To render our enthusiasm intelligible, we will state at once, that
> by means of a telescope, of vast dimensions and an entirely new
> principle, the younger Herschel, at his observatory in the Southern
> Hemisphere, has already made the most extraordinary discoveries in
> every planet of our solar system; has discovered planets in other
> solar systems; has obtained a distinct view of objects in the moon,
> fully equal to that which the unaided eye commands of terrestrial
> objects at the distance of a hundred yards; has affirmatively settled
> the question whether this satellite be inhabited, and by what orders
> of beings; has firmly established a new theory of cometary phenomena;
> and has solved or corrected nearly every leading problem of
> mathematical astronomy. For our early and almost exclusive information
> concerning these facts, we are indebted to the devoted friendship of
> Dr. Andrew Grant, the pupil of the elder, and for several years past
> the inseparable coadjutor of the younger Herschel. The amanuensis of
> the latter at the Cape of Good Hope, and the indefatigable
> superintendent of his telescope during the whole period of its
> construction and operation, Dr. Grant has been enabled to supply us
> with intelligence equal, in general interest at least, to that which
> Dr. Herschel himself has transmitted to the Royal Society.
>
> The reader of The Sun was given the impression that he was being let
> in on wonderful discoveries at the earliest possible moment, that the
> Royal Society was still digesting the material submitted by Dr.
> Herschel, but that Herschel's friend, working faster, had written it
> all up for his scientific friends in Edinburgh, and now The Sun, by a
> lucky combination of circumstances (or, preferably, because of the
> astuteness of its editors) had the first advance copy of the Scottish
> journal to reach American shores and was sharing all this information
> with its readers, for only a few pennies. The first day's installment
> was somewhat dull, at least by present-day standards. It described the
> new telescope, with a simply astonishing expenditure of wordage. The
> technical jargon, all meaningless, was just "thick" enough to convince
> the reader that he would not be able to follow it if it grew any more
> detailed and persuade him to accept the supertelescope as described.
> When Sir John Herschel was satisfied that the telescope was perfect,
> "he sailed from London on the 4th of September, 18342, in company with
> Dr. Andrew Grant, Lieut. Drummond, of the Royal Engineers, F.R.A.S.,
> and a large party of the best English mechanics. They arrived, after
> an expeditious and agreeable passage, and immediately proceeded to
> transport the lens and the frame of the large observatory to its
> destined site, which was a piece of table-land of great extent and
> elevation, about thirty-five miles to the northeast of Capetown. . . .
> All this, of course, was under strictest government secrecy."
>
> This ended the first day's installment. The sales figures of The Sun
> climbed to about 12,000 copies on that day. The next day's installment
> got around to the moon.
>
> It was about half-past nine o'clock on the night of the 10th [of
> January 1835], the moon having then advanced within four days of her
> mean libration, that the astronomer adjusted his instruments for the
> inspection of her eastern limb. The whole immense power of his
> telescope was applied, and its focal image about one-half of the power
> of his microscope. On removing the screen of the latter, the field of
> view was covered throughout its entire area with a beautifully
> distinct, and even vivid representation of basaltic rock. Its color
> was a greenish brown, and the width of the column, as defined by their
> interstices on the canvas, was invariably twenty-eight inches. No
> fracture whatever appeared in the mass first presented, but in a few
> seconds a shelving pile appeared of five or six columns width, which
> showed their figure to be hexagonal, and their articulations similar
> to those of the basaltic formation at Staffa. This precipitous shelf
> was profusely covered with a dark red flower, "precisely similar,"
> says Dr. Grant, "to the Papaver rhaeas, or rose-poppy of our sublunary
> cornfield"; and this was the first organic production of nature, in a
> foreign world, ever revealed to the eyes of men.... At the base of
> [another rock mass] they were at length delighted to perceive that
> novelty, a lunar forest. "The trees," says Dr. Grant, "for a period of
> ten minutes, were of one unvaried kind, and unlike any I have seen,
> except the largest class of yews in the English church-yards, which
> they in some respects resemble. These were followed by a level green
> plain, which, as measured by the painted circle on our canvas of
> forty-nine feet, must have been more than half a mile in breadth; and
> then appeared as fine a forest of firs, unequivocal firs, as I have
> ever seen cherished in the bosom of my native mountains. Wearied with
> the long continuance of these, we greatly reduced the magnifying power
> of the microscope, without eclipsing either of the reflectors, and
> immediately perceived that we had been insensibly descending, as it
> were, a mountainous district of a highly diversified and romantic
> character, and that we were on the verge of a lake, or inland sea....
> The water, wherever we obtained a view of it, was nearly as blue as
> that of the deep ocean, and broke in large white billows upon the
> strand. . . .
>
> Having continued this close inspection nearly two hours ... Dr.
> Herschel proposed that we should take out all our lenses, give a rapid
> speed to the panorama, and search for some of the principal valleys
> known to astronomers. . . The lenses being removed, and the effulgence
> of our unutterly glorious reflectors left undiminished, we found, in
> accordance with our calculations, that our field of view comprehended
> about twenty-five miles of the lunar surface, with the distinctness
> both of outline and detail which could be procured of a terrestrial
> object at the distance of two and a half miles. . . . Presently a
> train of scenery met our eye, of features so entirely novel, that Dr.
> Herschel signalled for the lowest convenient gradation of movement. It
> was a lofty chain of obelisk-shaped, or very slender pyramids,
> standing in irregular groups, each composed of about thirty or forty
> spires, every one of which was perfectly square, and as accurately
> truncated as the finest specimens of Cornish crystal. They were of a
> faint lilac hue, and very resplendent. I now thought that we had
> assuredly fallen on productions of art; but Dr. Herschel shrewdly
> remarked that if the Lunarians could build thirty or forty miles of
> such monuments as these, we should ere now have discovered others of a
> less equivocal character. He pronounced them quarz formations, of
> probably the wine-colored amethyst species. . . . On introducing a
> lens, his conjecture was fully confirmed: they were monstrous
> amethysts, of a diluted claret color, glowing in the intensest light
> of the sun! They varied in height from sixty to ninety feet.... and
> here our magnifiers blest our panting hopes with specimens of
> conscious existence. In the shade of the woods, on the southeastern
> side, we beheld continuous herds of brown quadrupeds, having all the
> external characteristics of the bison, but more diminutive than any
> species of the bos genus in our natural history. . . . It had,
> however, one widely distinctive feature, which we afterwards found
> common to nearly every lunar quadruped we have discovered; namely, a
> remarkable fleshy appendage over the eyes, crossing the whole breadth
> of the forehead and united to the eyes. We could most distinctly
> perceive this hairy veil . . . lifted and lowered by means of the
> ears. It immediately occurred to the acute mind of Dr. Herschel, that
> this was a providential contrivance to protect the eyes of the animal
> from the great extremes of light and darkness to which all the
> inhabitants of our side of the moon are periodically subjected. The
> next animal perceived would be classed on earth as a monster. It was
> of bluish lead-color, about the size of a goat, with a head and beard
> like him, and a single horn, slightly inclined forward from the
> perpendicular. The female was destitute of the horn and beard, but had
> a much longer tail. It was gregarious, and chiefly abounded on the
> acclivitous glades of the woods. In elegance of symmetry it rivalled
> the antelope, and like him it seemed an agile sprightly creature
> running with great speed, and springing from the green turf with all
> the unaccountable antics of a young lamb or kitten. This beautiful
> creature afforded us the most exquisite amusement.
>
> The lunar unicorn ended the second installment. By that time New
> Yorkers besieged the offices of The Sun and every copy the steam
> presses could turn out was snatched up. Circulation was at 19,360
> copies. The Sun had suddenly become the biggest newspaper in the
> world; even the Times of London only printed 17,000 copies.
>
> The following installment consisted of a painstaking, if fanciful,
> description of a number of lunar formations. Locke pictured a rather
> watery world, with tidal marks and so forth, although most astronomers
> were by then agreed that our moon is virtually waterless. Many of his
> readers must have read somewhere about the lack of water on the moon;
> presumably the implication that the experts were wrong was welcomed.
> That the public went along willingly with the story is testified by
> witnesses.
>
> Edgar Allan Poe, then the editor of the Southern Literary Messenger in
> Richmond, Virginia, wrote later: "Not one person in ten discredited
> it, and (strangest point of' all!) the doubters were chiefly those who
> doubted without being able to say why-the ignorant-those uninformed in
> astronomy-people who would not believe, because, the thing was so
> novel, so entirely out of the usual way. A grave Professor of
> Mathematics in a Virginia college told me, seriously, that he had no
> doubt of the truth of the whole affair!"
>
> William N. Griggs, who reprinted the moon hoax with its background,
> reported that he was present at the door of The Sun's office on one of
> these hectic days "when a highly respectable-looking elderly
> gentleman, in a fine broadcloth Quaker suit, completely dispelled the
> undecided opinions of the listening crowd around him, by asserting, in
> the calmest, coolest, and most unquestionable manner, that he was
> fortunately engaged on commercial business at the East India Docks, in
> London, when the cast lens, of seven tons weight, and the whole
> gigantic apparatus of the telescope described in the story, was taken
> on board an East India ship, for erection at the Cape of Good Hope,
> and that he himself saw it craned on board. He added that the
> statement in the introductory part of the narrative, that this
> shipment was made from St. Catherine's Docks, was, therefore,
> evidently an error on the part of the Edinburgh writer."
>
> There is some reason to believe that Locke expanded his story as he
> went along; some minor inconsistencies suggest that he interpolated
> long segments in his original manuscript. The next installment reached
> the climax: the discovery of "rational beings" of the moon.
>
> . . .we were thrilled with astonishment to perceive four successive
> flocks of large winged creatures, wholly unlike any kind of birds,
> descend with a slow even motion from the cliffs on the western side,
> and alight upon the plain.... We counted three parties of these
> creatures, of twelve, nine, and fifteen each, walking erect towards a
> small wood near the base of the eastern precipices. Certainly they
> were like human beings, for their wings had now disappeared, and their
> attitude in walking was both erect and dignified....
>
> Whilst passing across the canvas, and whenever we afterwards saw
> them, these creatures were evidently engaged in conversation; their
> gesticulation, more particularly the varied action of their hands and
> arms, appeared impassioned and emphatic. We hence inferred that they
> were rational beings, and, although not perhaps of so high an order as
> others which we discovered the next month on the shores of the Bay of
> Rainbows, that they were capable of producing works of art and
> contrivance.
>
> There were several other installments, in one of which the big
> telescope was nearly destroyed, and finally one in which Sir John
> Herschel established the nature of Saturn's rings-the details
> unfortunately omitted . . .as "being too mathematical for popular
> comprehension." With a promise of a much fuller account by Sir John
> himself, the series ended.
>
> Since the presses of The Sun were busy printing as many copies of the
> paper as possible, its proprietors must have employed another printer
> for the pamphlet edition which they thoughtfully had ready the
> following day.3
>
> The next few days were still hectic. Yale professors, named Olmstead
> and Loomis, journeyed to New York to ask for the omitted pages of
> mathematics. Locke told them that the original was at a print shop and
> supplied the address. Then he raced ahead and instructed the printer
> to direct the two professors to still another address. They finally
> gave up, convinced that they had been tricked but still unable to say
> that the supplement to the Edinburgh Journal did not exist.
>
> Another New York newspaper, the Journal of Commerce, wanted to reprint
> the whole story and also asked for the Edinburgh Journal. Locke first
> tried the tack that this was old stuff by now and the Journal of
> Commerce would just be wasting space. Then he apparently told the
> truth, because the Journal of Commerce was the first publication to
> label the whole story a hoax.
>
> It was later surmised that Locke had a collaborator, a French
> astronomer named lean Nicolas Nicollet who had recently arrived in New
> York, having left France because of financial difficulties. Whether or
> not he helped Locke for a cash consideration, will probably never be
> known.
>
> There are two more items of interest, the first concerning a friend of
> Sir John Herschel. Naturally copies of The Sun had reached Europe. The
> director of the Paris Observatory, Francois Arago, was outraged, not
> so much because a hoax had been perpetrated upon the public, as
> because it besmirched the name of Sir John Herschel. Arago read a full
> translation of the moon hoax to the French scientists assembled at the
> Academy and asked for a resolution. The resolution declared that while
> the piece was not to be regarded as a willful malicious attack on Sir
> John Herschel, its contents had to be declared "utterly incredible."
>
> The second item concerns Sir John Herschel himself, who was actually
> in South Africa, making astronomical observations.
>
> At intervals, for example, when the weather was bad, he went to
> Capetown, where he stayed at a hotel to read the papers and relax.
> Soon after the appearance of the moon hoax a Mr. Caleb Weeks, who
> lived in Jamaica, New York, and was the proprietor of a menagerie,
> went to Capetown to buy up some African animals. He took copies both
> of The Sun and of the pamphlet edition with him, hoping to find Sir
> John Herschel. Capetown probably did not have many good hotels at the
> time-Weeks stayed at the one that was visited almost daily by Sir
> John. The astronomer was there when Weeks asked the hotel clerk where
> he could be found. Weeks had himself announced, saying that he wished
> to discuss Sir John's new astronomical discoveries with him. Sir John
> received him with some surprise; he said that he was, of course,
> flattered by American interest, but did not understand how his
> discoveries could be known in America, since he had not yet even
> written a report.
>
> Weeks handed him the pamphlet and a bundle of the New York newspapers
> and withdrew. Only minutes later Sir John rejoined him in some
> agitation, asking whether the story was really a reprint from an
> Edinburgh journal, or a hoax made up in New York. According to Griggs,
> who knew Weeks personally, Weeks replied that the account was taken to
> be gospel truth in New York and elsewhere in the United States, and
> wasn't it a maxim that what everybody says must be true? Sir John
> Herschel started to laugh and invited Weeks and the other Americans
> with him into a private room to tell him the full story.
>
> In general he was amused.
>
> Most Europeans however, did not accept the hoax as lightheartedly as
> did its chief victim. That this "contribution" to astronomy had come
> from an English journalist was obscured by distance, and for decades
> to come astronomical news from America was received with great caution
> in Europe. The skepticism did not die out because American astronomers
> made more and more genuine and valuable contributions; it ended
> because the moon hoax itself was gradually forgotten.
>
> Footnotes:
>
> 1. Excerpt from "Watchers of the Skies", by Willy Ley, The Viking
> Press, New York, 1963.
>
> 2. Herschel's actual sailing date was November 13, 1833.
>
> 3. After its original publication in The Sun, the moon hoax first
> appeared in the pamphlet mentioned, with a reported total edition of
> 60,000 copies in two or three printings. The next reprint, edited by
> William Gowans, appeared in New York in 1859 as the title The Moon
> Hoax; or, A Discovery that the moon has a vast population of Human
> Beings, by Richard Adams Locke, with a short appendix of editorial
> opinions from newspapers other than The Sun. A small book, entitled
> The Celebrated "Moon Story," its Origins and Incidents, by William N.
> Griggs. (New York: Bunnell and Price, 1852), gives the background of
> the story, a biographical sketch of Locke, the story itself, and, in
> an appendix, an "authentic description of the moon." All the
> quotations in this chapter are from this book. In 1937 the text of the
> moon hoax was again reprinted in The Sky (New York), in several
> installments, with an introduction by William H. Barton, Jr. Grigg's
> book mentions French and German translations, which probably were in
> contemporary magazines and newspapers; my search for German or French
> editions in book or pamphlet form was unsuccessful.
>
> Perry
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you wish to receive
things I find interesting,
I maintain six email lists...
JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,
STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
----------
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org
If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.
