128 Additional Objections to Redfield’s Theory of Storms. 
TANCES” which it may meet. Yet it must be quite clear, that 
any reaction with currents not moving the same way, or moving 
with an inferior sonnei or obliquely, could ee be hss 
“ga. The following inconsistencies will shntings wee far Mr. Rede 
feld’s sossont of the ee of storms is tee be deemed suf> 
Om avorcot th haw ne wend 
ficiently accurate or verset shed principles 
of science. - 
54. “ The rotation pee a sini whirling: fables! not — 
ahetipee in the position and condition of its constituent par- 
ticles, vraotaaias bepescsett accession ee ee antnal wren Mein ou 
Z.. i | > os 
y of ; together wi 
pe eRe Ses Pay te a 7 
spirally at one extremity of vis of rotation.” (Franklin 
sesame etapa: Meds pe p20: “Nor is it my intention 
idaebigoa tend to withdraw or 
— a panrens or accumulation towards» the 
exterior Shi, than at the centre of the gale. This connerion 
and result is in strict accordance with the facts of the case as ex- 
hibited in all storms of this aneneedl so far as wy eb ie: 
ein eae extend.” trey ula 
55. On opposite sides of the same leaf we find shdieniidineg 
jalibieen Agreeably tothe first, there is a constant accession 
of airfrom the exterior atmosphere to the’ body-of a: whirlwind; 
attended by an upward force and 
one extremity of its axis of rotation ; agreeably tothe last,” the 
a action tends: to ‘withdraw-'the ee 
> a coe | — fer) a. % oe ae ieee a 
iin a = 7 SSCS LASES OS! ~~ 4 sc ae __oeS V Ew ew ENS ERS 
oe ee Po a, | ta rie —* Tae ye ee Oe 
a a 2 rs ‘= stk 1 | 7 \- 3 * > 
S f a FO 5 w Ls wore 
2 va ’ Peo re — of Wr ae ge ee 
F ee Tae Se a ae 4 oe — 7. 4 
