評論
打印
Against the Oval Earth man, the first card I can play is the analogy of the sun and moon. The Oval Earth man promptly answers that I don't know, by my own observation, that those bodies are spherical. I only know that they are round, and they may perfectly well be flat discs. I have no answer to that one. Besides, he goes on, what reason have I for thinking that the earth must be the same shape as the sun and moon? I can't answer that one either.
面對"地球卵形說"者，我能打的第一張牌是，可以根據太陽和月亮來類推。"地球卵形說"者立即回敬道，我無法根據自己的觀察得知那些天體是球形的。我只能得知他們是圓的，而它們完全可能呈扁平的圓盤狀。我對此無言以答。此外，他還會說，我憑什么理由認為地球一定與太陽和月亮的形狀相同？對此，我同樣無法解答。
My second card is the earth's shadow: when cast on the moon during eclipses, it appears tobe the shadow of a round object. But how do I know, demands the Oval Earth man, that eclipses of the moon are caused by the shadow of the earth? The answer is that I don't know, but have taken this piece of information blindly from newspaper articles and science booklets.
我的第二張牌是地球的影子：月食期間，地球投在月亮上的影子看上去呈圓形物體狀。但"地球卵形說"者馬上要問，我怎么知道月食是由地球的影子造成的呢？回答是，我并不知道，我只是照搬報刊文章和科普小冊子上的說法而已。
Defeated in the minor exchanges, I now play my queen of trumps: the opinion of the experts.The Astronomer Royal, who ought to know, tells me that the earth is round. The Oval Earth man covers the queen with his king. Have I tested the Astronomer Royal's statement, and would I even know a way of testing it? Here I bring out my ace. Yes, I do know one test.The astronomers can foretell eclipses, and this suggests that their opinions about the solarsystem are pretty sound. I am, to my delight, justified in accepting their say-so about theshape of the earth.
小小交鋒受挫，于是我打出一張王牌"Q"：專家的看法。英國格林威治皇家天文臺臺長總該是權威了，他告訴我說地球是圓的。"地球卵形說"者用他的"K"牌壓倒我的"Q"牌。天文臺臺長的話我檢驗過沒有？再說，我知道怎么個檢驗法嗎？這時候，我打出我的"愛司"。是的，我確實知道一個檢驗方法。天文學家能預報月食，這一點表明他們關于太陽系的看法是非常可信的。因此，令我高興的是，我接受他們關于地球形狀的論斷是有道理的。
