I had to burst out laughing at the comment of Cicero. But Stroebel's last comment was perhaps overly harsh with his German countrymen, since France had already produced a Fontenelle... and America was spawning the likes of Andrew Dickson White. — By this announcement in Lehre und Wehre, I am certain that C.F.W. Walther was well aware of Carl Schöpffer and Dr. Alexander Frantz. And Walther would nine years later make a bold statement about Copernicus's own faith that no one else claimed... but that comes in my later blog post.
|Prof. Dorothy Stimson|
A Carl Schoepffer had taken up the defense of the Tychonic scheme in Berlin before this (1854) and by 1868 his lecture was in its seventh edition. In it he sought to prove that the earth revolves neither upon its own axis nor yet about the sun. He had seen Foucault's pendulum demonstration of the earth's movement, but he held that something else, as yet unexplained, caused the deviation of the pendulum, and that the velocity of the heavens would be no more amazing than the almost incredible velocity of light or of electricity.Unfortunately we see that Stimson's history is disappointingly superficial (including incorrect dates, misspellings regarding Pastor Knak) and, like most other science historians, lacked objectivity and overlooked Schöpffer's last great work The Contradictions in Astronomy (Die Widersprüche in der Astronomie, 1869), which included his firsthand "List" of great German scientists... too bad. But to all historians of science who have ignored Schöpffer, I say:
Humboldt and Gauss did not ignore Schöpffer.
|Die Widerspruche in der Astronomie|
"the foundation of almost every geocentric work published from then to 1950".In order to begin to correct today's history, I want to publish the full text of this book here:
——— >>> Full text Die Widersprüche in der Astronomie in Google Docs, available for immediate automatic Google Translation in Chrome browser. The text in this document has been polished somewhat, corrections made, spellings updated, all for the ease of fast automatic translation.
Schöpffer's name became so detested by the publishing trade that he needed a pseudo-name from 1856 to 1868 in order to keep publishing his scientific works: L. F. Dietrich (see here and here).
As badly as Schöpffer was treated for his scientific stand, yet Pastor Knak's confession, based purely on the Holy Scriptures, set the world on fire. Schöpffer suffered much – Knak suffered more, for his response was based purely on faith in God's Word.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
This concludes my posts directly about Schöpffer, yet I want to reveal the other writer who provided a preface to Schöpffer's last great book: Dr. Alexander Frantz ... a Lutheran?... in Part 18g-1.