Pliny, Natural History


Lucretius the Flat Earther


De Rerum Natura, Book I, 1052-1082,

“And in these problems, shrink, my Memmius, far
From yielding faith to that notorious talk:
That all things inward to the centre press;
And thus the nature of the world stands firm
With never blows from outward, nor can be
Nowhere disparted- since all height and depth
Have always inward to the centre pressed
(If thou art ready to believe that aught
Itself can rest upon itself ); or that
The ponderous bodies which be under earth
Do all press upwards and do come to rest
Upon the earth, in some way upside down,
Like to those images of things we see
At present through the waters. They contend,
With like procedure, that all breathing things
Head downward roam about, and yet cannot
Tumble from earth to realms of sky below,
No more than these our bodies wing away
Spontaneously to vaults of sky above;
That, when those creatures look upon the sun,
We view the constellations of the night;
And that with us the seasons of the sky
They thus alternately divide, and thus
Do pass the night coequal to our days,
But a vain error has given these dreams to fools,
Which they’ve embraced with reasoning perverse
For centre none can be where world is still
Boundless, nor yet, if now a centre were,
Could aught take there a fixed position more
Than for some other cause ‘tmight be dislodged.
For all of room and space we call the void
Must both through centre and non-centre yield
Alike to weights where’er their motions tend.
Nor is there any place, where, when they’ve come,
Bodies can be at standstill in the void,
Deprived of force of weight; nor yet may void
Furnish support to any,- nay, it must,
True to its bent of nature, still give way.
Thus in such manner not at all can things
Be held in union, as if overcome
By craving for a centre”


1.951–1117. The final part of book 1 is a leap from the invisibly small to the unimaginably large. The universe is infinite, he argues, consisting of infinitely extended space and an infinite number of atoms. Some philosophers, he adds, mistakenly picture our world as formed around a spherical earth, itself located at the universe’s centre. Although Lucretius does not say so, the juxtaposition of these two themes was natural because the latter thesis—a version of the Platonic one that privileged our own world as unique—was the main rival to that of the universe’s infinity. Modern readers may therefore well sympathize with the motivation of Lucretius’ critique of it, even if at the same time regretting his too ready dismissal of the ridiculous image of animals walking upside down in the antipodes, where it is day when it is night here (1.1058–67).”


The Hellenistic Ascendance Part 1: Euclid, Aristarchus and Eratosthenes; The Flat Earth History of Science C. 8

Thus, the Platonic Pantheistic Concentric Sphere Geocentric Cosmology had been fully developed by the Pythagoreans and their students, the Platonists. Plato passed on the Geocentric Cosmology to his master pupil Aristotle.


Aristotle having laid the foundation for Western Science and Philosophy established the Peripatetic School. For his accomplishments in Philosophy and Science Aristotle was awarded a special teaching office to Prince Alexander by King Phillip.


[Ridpath, Universal History, Vol. 10, pg. 618]

Under the tutelage of Aristotle, Alexander the Great would seek to spread the now advanced and high Greek Civilization to the world.


At the end of his reign his Kingdom would stretch from Macedon to Egypt and as far East as the Beas River.


And thus was established the Philosophical hegemony of the Pythagorean and Platonic Greco-Roman  tradition that still dominates the minds of Western man to this day.

Picking up from Alexander’s accomplishments the next region to gain international fame and accomplishment was Alexandria Egypt and its Champion Euclid. According to Proclus, Euclid was a Platonist and developed his system of Geometry as a way to explain the Platonic Solids.



Take for example, the first Definition of the Elements, Book I:

“1. A point is that of which there is no part.”

There is nothing in physical reality which has no part. This concept of the one or the point is an ancient Pagan Idea of the Monad Huperousia. It is not simply an abstraction. It is a metaphysical claim. What Euclid is presenting here is an ancient Pagan Religion.

The Proto-Heliocentric Model

The two men responsible for the creation of the Heliocentric model were Heraclides of Ponticus and Aristarchus of Samos.

Heraclides Ponticus, a Pythagorean student and Platonist  – J.L.E. Dreyer, A History of Astronomy from Thales to Kepler (Cambridge University Press, 1953), 123 – hypothesized that the Earth rotates on it axis once every 24 hours. He believed that the World was a god and that the planets were also divinities. (Ibid.) Dreyer maintains that Heraclides posited the rotation of the Earth to account for the irregularity of the Seasons.


[Pg. 133]


Aristarchus of Samos student of Strato, was the first to develop the Heliocentric model. From the account of Archimedes:



[Dreyer, 136-137]

Dreyer explains why Aristarchus’ model was rejected shortly thereafter:


[Pg. 148]

The Library of Alexandria


Under Ptolemy II Philadelphus the famous Library of Alexandria was built to house the world’s learning and knowledge up to this time. From this institution arose two great men of the period, Archimedes and Erastothenes.  Archimedes was a brilliant mathematician but it was Erastothenes’ shadow argument for the sphericity of the Earth that has been emphasized in this era.

What this argument fails to realize is that it assumes that the sun is millions of miles away from the Earth and its emanation strikes the Earth homogeneously and in Parallel lines.

We know it does not.

[See 4:18-4:40]

The exact same observation Erastothenes made can be explained assuming the sun is local to the Earth. And as we see above that assumption isn’t a baseless assumption. It has experimental verification.