Page:On the Influence of Carbonic Acid in the Air upon the Temperature of the Ground.pdf/39

This page needs to be proofread.
274
Prof. S. Arrhenius on the Influence of Carbonic Acid

opinion that a change in the transparency of the atmosphere would possibly give the desired effect. According to his calculations, "a lowering of this transparency would effect a lowering of the temperature on the whole earth, slight in the equatorial regions, and increasing with the latitude into the 70th parallel, nearer the poles again a little less. Further, this lowering would, in non-tropical regions, be less on the continents than on the ocean and would diminish the annual variations of the temperature. This diminution of the air's transparency ought chiefly to be attributed to a greater quantity of aqueous vapour in the air, which would cause not only a direct cooling but also copious precipitation of water and snow on the continents. The origin of this greater quantity of water-vapour is not easy to explain." De Marchi has arrived at wholly other results than myself, because he has not sufficiently considered the important quality of selective absorption which is possessed by aqueous vapour. And, further, he has forgotten that if aqueous vapour is supplied to the atmosphere, it will be condensed till the former condition is reached, if no other change has taken place. As we have seen, the mean relative humidity between the 40th and 60th parallels on the northern hemisphere is 76 per cent. If, then, the mean temperature sank from its actual value +5.3 by 4°–5° C., i. e. to +1.3 or +0.3, and the aqueous vapour remained in the air, the relative humidity would increase to 101 or 105 per cent. This is of course impossible, for the relative humidity cannot exceed 100 per cent. in the free air. A fortiori it is impossible to assume that the absolute humidity could have been greater than now in the glacial epoch.

As the hypothesis of Croll still seems to enjoy a certain favour with English geologists, it may not be without interest to cite the utterance of De Marchi on this theory, which he, in accordance with its importance, has examined more in detail than the others. He says, and I entirely agree with him on this point: – "Now I think I may conclude that from the point of view of climatology or meteorology, in the present state of these sciences, the hypothesis of Croll seems to be wholly untenable as well in its principles as in its consequences"[1].

It seems that the great advantage which Croll's hypothesis promised to geologists, viz. of giving them a natural chronology, predisposed them in favour of its acceptance. But this circumstance, which at first appeared advantageous, seems with the advance of investigation rather to militate

  1. De Marchi, l. c. p. 166.