A visiting bishop (perhaps from Berkeley) observed that its size is not an attribute of the object itself because the size of the object depends on how far away it is. Thus the object appears to be a different size to different observers. He also rejects its shape for similar reasons, and even its blackness. So how can we say that the object consists of anything more than the qualities we observe?
Trees fell in otherwise empty forests ... in the bar of the Dog and Digitiser a single hand clapped ... and in a dilapidated caravan in a nearby field, two priests were seen arguing over the size of a cow.