1902 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE, 



247 



You know how I have been fig^hting, not 

 only superstition but deliberate impostors, 

 in reg-ard to foretelling- the weather. Yes, 

 I have been " snowed under " several times; 

 and, worst of all, by (apparently) educat- 

 ed and intellig-ent people, who insist, in spite 

 of all I can say, that we have men living 

 who can tell a year ahead what the weath- 

 er is going to be on a certain day. When 

 the Weather Bureau took this matter up I 

 turned to that for relief, thinking our gov- 

 ernment would certainly be able to find 

 men who could sift truth from falsehood, or 

 science from folly and superstition, and. 

 thank God, I have not been disappointed. 

 It is true, the papers (some of them) say, 

 "The Weather Bureau predicts an unusu- 

 ally cold winter," or something to that ef- 

 fect. Every time I get hold of such clip- 

 pings I forward them to the Department, 

 and each time comes the public announce- 

 ment, very emphatically, that the Weather 

 Bureau has never yet even hazarded a con- 

 jecture as to what a certain summer or win- 

 ter is likely to be. If you see any such 

 piece of folly in your home paper, or in any 

 other, call the editor down. Tell him he is 

 not up to the times. 



Well, when I heard about the bombard- 

 ment of thunder-clouds with artillery, I fell 

 to wondering whether humanity had any 

 artillery equal to such a task; and my faith 

 in and admiration for Chief Willis L. 

 Moore, of the Weather Bureau, were great- 

 ly increased by noticing that the head of 

 the Department stood squarely against such 

 a waste of money. As this whole matter 

 illustrates the difference between sense and 

 science, and as it shows, too, not only how 

 crowds of people or even a great nation may 

 be misled into spending vast sums of mon- 

 &y, I have thought best to copy at consider- 

 able length from the author's report to the 

 Department of Agriculture for the j^ear end- 

 ing June, 1901. 



DESTRUCTION OF HAILSTORMS WITH CANNON, ETC. 



Considerable interest has been aroused among agri- 

 culturists in the United States relative to the preven- 

 tion of hailstorms by the use of explosives fired from 

 specially designed cannon. The experiments con- 

 ducted along this line by grape-growers of France and 

 Italy have aroused popular interest in this country. 

 The theory is not a new one, though perhaps not so 

 ancient as the idea that precipitation occurs .soon after 

 and as a result of the explosives used in battles. As 

 early as 1769 the Marquis de Cheviers, a retired naval 

 officer of France, thought that he could combat the 

 scourge of hailstorms by the firing of cannon : but his 

 experiments, like those conducted by many others at 

 various times during the past century, were not pro- 

 ductive of definite results 



One of the mo.st serious drawbacks to grape culture 

 in Europe is the destruction caused by hail, and the 

 growers are naturally interested in any thing that 

 promises to give immunity from such damage. Dur- 

 ing the past two or three years renewed interest has 

 been taken in the matter by the vineyardists of certain 

 parts of France and Italy. Several manufacturers 

 have placed upon the market a special form of cannon 

 which they claim will effectivelv break up hail-bear- 

 ing clouds^ The belief in the efticacy of this methoi 

 of protection has become quite general in Europe, al- 

 though scientists versed in the physics of the air have 

 not expressed confidence in the system. 



In brief the apparatus in use consists of a cannon 

 fitted with a funnel-shaped conical extension The 

 difference between the various forms of cannon that 

 are used lies mainlv in the shape and size of the fun- 

 nel extensions and the size of the powder charges. 



Usually the cannon are fired vertically upward, al- 

 thougH in some instances the apparatus is inclined to- 

 ward an advancing cloud. The effect of the funnel at- 

 tachment is to cause the formation of a mass of rapid- 

 ly revolving air, or vortex, which leaves the mouth of 

 the cannon with tremendous velocity. In shape, the.se 

 vortices can be likened somewhat to the rings or puffs 

 of smoke made by a person smoking a cigar. It is 

 claimed that these whirling masses of air, intermixed 

 with gases from the explosives, are forced upward to 

 a sufficient height to enter the hail cloud and destroy 

 its hail forming processes. If it is granted that these 

 rings a'icend to a sufficient height to enter the cloud, I 

 am of the opinion that the force of the ring is too puny 

 to have anv appreciable effect on the cloud. 



Many experiments have been made for the purpose 

 of ascertaining the actual height to which the.se air 

 rings rise before being dissipated. In a report by 

 Profs. J. M Pernter and W. Trabert, who, at the invi- 

 tation of the Imperial Department of Agriculture of 

 Au'itiiaand of the inventor of one of the methods, 

 made as complete an investigation as was possible, 

 and, under various conditions, these scientists .stated 

 that they were not able to report any thing positive as 

 to the value of hail-shooting. They reported that, 

 using the largest cannon and the heaviest charges, the 

 vortices did not a.scend to a height of 1000 feet on an 

 average, although in some instances greater distances 

 were obtained. 



There is a marked difference of opinion as to the ef- 

 fectiveness of cannon-firing, with the manufacturers 

 and many grape-growers on the one side and the 

 scientists of America and Europe on the other. The 

 former maintain that hailstorms can be prevented in 

 the manner described, while the tatter clniiii that the 

 force exerted by the explosives is infinitesimal as com- 

 pared to the forces of nature that are exerted in hail 

 formation, and that experiments conducted by the ad- 

 herents of the cannonading p oce.ss themselves have 

 not produced convincing results. The inimber of 

 thunderstorms from which hail is precipitated is but 

 a small percentage of the actual number. In most lo- 

 calities of the United .States a whole season sometimes 

 passes without a fall of hail, while in seasons of ab- 

 normal thunderstorm frequency the number of hail- 

 storms is small. While in the grape-growing regions 

 of France and Italy there may be greater hailstorm 

 frequency, it is still'true that the number of hailstorms 

 is few as compared to the number of thun terstorms 

 without hail. The expi-rimenters .score a success 

 whenever they shoot at a thunderstorm cloud that does 

 not produce hail, although the chances are greatly in 

 favor of there being no hail in the cloud. Again, thev 

 excuse the occurrences of hail in spite of a bombard- 

 nient by saying that the cannon was not large enough 

 or the powder charge sufficiently heavj', and declare 

 that the hailstorm was far less severe than it would 

 otherwise have been. How is one either to prove or 

 disprove such statements ? 



It is true that many important discoveries have been 

 made by experiments that were conducted contrary to 

 scientific theorit s, and in the matter under discussion 

 it is not our intention tooverweigh the scientist or to 

 underestimate the practical investigator, but unques- 

 tioned facts and not explanations must be the proof of 

 results. Scientists both in America and in Europe de- 

 clare that hailstorms can not be prevented by the use 

 of cannon and explosives of even greater power than 

 have been used or that it is possible for man to use, 

 and they base'their belief on such knowledge of the 

 forces of nature as science has revealed. Those oppos- 

 ed attempt to break down the scientists' argument by 

 declaring that no one has yet satisfactorily explained 

 the proct.sses of hail formation. This is true to a cer- 

 tain extent, but enough is known upon which to base 

 a logical opinion. 



But there are other reasons for believing that the 

 u.se of cannon and explosives in preventing hailstorms 

 is not effective. Mr. Stiger, one of the inventors of 

 the apparatus in use, claims that hail is formed in 

 quiet spots in the atmosphere, where atmospheric 

 moisture crystallizes out in large crystals in a manner 

 analogous to the formation of large crystals of .salt in 

 liquid .solution. I agree with Professor Abbe that 

 there are no such quiet spots in the atmosphere, and 

 hailstones are not crystals, but masses of ice with only 

 a partially crj-stalline structure. Even the perfect 

 crystals of the snowflake are formed in the midst of 

 rapidly moving air. Hailstorms are generally local 

 and very erratic. .Some have maintained that they are 

 controlled by the hills or the contour of the ground or 

 by the presence of forests and lakes, and this may be 

 true to a certain degree ; but, practically, the whole 

 question it one of ascending and descending currents 

 that characterize whirlwinds and thunder.stonns. 



