THE WEATHER GUIDE-BOOK, A CONCISE EXPOSITION OF ASTRONOMIC-METEOROLOGY. BY ALFRED J. PEARCE. LONDON: SIMPKIN, MARSHALL & CO., 4, STATIONERS' HALL COURT, E.C. PREFACE. What is Astronomic Meteorology? will be the question suggested by the title of this work. Before answering it directly, I cannot do better than quote Sir John Herschel's definition of Meteorology: "METEOROLOGY, which, in its ancient and etymological sense, included all the appearances of the heavens, as well astronomical as atmospheric, is at present restricted in its meaning to the description and explanation of those phenomena which group themselves under the heads of the weather, of the seasons, and of climate-phenomena, which scientifically regarded, are referable almost entirely to the agency of those laws which govern the ever-varying affections of the atmosphere of our globe in its relations to heat, moisture, and electricity, and the movements which the changes of those relations, brought about by astronomical or other causes, impress upon its parts." The prefix "Astronomic" is used in order to denote that "astronomical causes" form the basis on which this theory is founded. In other words, that the constant recurrence of certain changes in the state of the atmosphere, and variations of weather, in coincidence with certain relative positions of the Earth, Sun, Moon, and planets (Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune), has led to the inference that these coincidences are referable to cause and effect."' The prefix "Astro" is also used to distinguish this particular theory from Meteorology pur et simple-i.e. in the present acceptation of the term. It has Much prejudice exists against Astro-Meteorology. been suggested to me that the probable cause of the greater part of this prejudice is attributable to an idea - said to be very prevalent that this weather-theory is a branch of the ancient astrology. Astro-Meteorology is altogether distinct from Astrology. The former science is based upon the theory, which will be hereafter explained more fully, that the planets act upon the atmosphere of the Earth in such a manner as to induce changes of weather; while astrology is based upon a theory of planetary influencephysical and psychical-on ourselves. It would be as reasonable to discard Astronomy as Astro-Meteorology, because of its former connection with astrology-for the terms (astronomy and astrology) were until lately, synonymous. It were as reasonable to reject Chemistry because it had its origin in Alchemy. Let our scientific men examine Astro-Meteorology, and adopt it if it be demonstrated to be truth, but let them not argue that the adoption of it necessitates the recognition of Astrology. An objection urged by Mr. Saxby escaped my attention when writing the first chapter of this work. This objection is contained in the following paragraph: 66 "I would first plainly declare, that I do not, nor did I ever, believe in Astro-Meterology. The laws of gravitation apply, of course, to all space as a universal law, but it is not difficult to demonstrate that its effect on the planets as parts of the Solar system is quite another thing in amount from their effect on our Earth's atmosphere. Believers in astro-meteorology fall into the error of estimating the bulk, and not the specific gravity of celestial bodies. It is obviously of importance, for instance, to consider whether a planet has the specific gravity of our earth or of cork! or whether the distance be one quarter of a million of miles from us, as the Moon is, or as in the case of Jupiter, nearly five hundred millions of miles! with, moreover, the fact that attraction decreases inversely as the cube of the distance!" It is not the Earth on which Jupiter acts, but the atmosphere; therefore it does not matter what the specific gravity of Jupiter may be, compared to that of the Earth. The chemical action of Jupiter's rays has been proved to be fourteen times greater than that of the Moon's rays; consequently, the objection as to the distance of Jupiter from the Earth compared to that of the Moon falls to the ground. Jupiter's action on our atmosphere is, probably, electric. The amount of ozone in the atmosphere is, usually, very great under Jupiter's influence, as for instance, from the 17th to the 24th of March, and from the 9th to the 16th of May, 1864, when the mean quantity of ozone was at the maximum. The extraordinary heat of May, 1864, was due to the Earth passing between the Sun and Jupiter (i.e. the Sun in opposition to Jupiter) on the 13th, and the Earth forming the angle of 120 degrees with Mars and Jupiter on the 17th of May. Again, the remarkable coincidences of extreme heat in May, 1833, in April, 1840, and in May, 1848, with similar relative positions of Mars, Jupiter, and the Sun (vide pp. 47, 48, and 49) are sufficient of themselves to establish the influence of these bodies. If it can be proved by an appeal to facts, fairly collated, that these coincidences were accidental-if the balance of testimony be against Astro-Meteorology, I shall be happy to renounce my faith in it. My only object is the establishment of truth. Let my readers cast away prejudice, and consider that the seeking after truth and the contemplation of the CREATOR'S laws, must be pleasing in His sight. Let them bear in mind the opinion of truth-seekers expressed by the Rev. Canon Stanley in the following beautiful language, extracted from a sermon delivered at Westminster Abbey, on Sunday evening, April 3rd, 1864 : "If there were any present who have devoted themselves to science; if there were any there who were students, in any sense, of science in nature, science in language, science in history, and science in theology—if there were any in whom truth seemed to be the leading pole-star of their lives, be they there, or be they far away from church or abbey, they were, consciously or unconsciously, willingly or unwillingly, labouring in the service of Him who is the truth.' 6 The pursuit of the science of Meteorology is, necessarily, a labour of love. How many precious lives would be saved, how many homes would remain happy, instead of being made desolate, if the approach of the tempest could be foreseen! I have often been asked why I do not write to the Times on Astro-Meteorology. I have done so repeatedly, but none of my letters have appeared. A similar fate has befallen letters to the Daily Telegraph and to the Standard". *The Standard did print one of my letters in Oct. 1863. |