January 1, 1898.] 



KNOWLEDGE. 



either in the latter area, in Europe, or in Africa, a land 

 connection by way of the South Pacific, and that at a 

 comparatively recent epoch, oilers almost the only satis- 

 factory explanation of the means of transit, if the Antarctic 

 theory be rejected. And it may be mentioned in passing 

 that the acceptance of even the latter would imply a large 

 modification from the existing distribution of land and 

 water in the southern hemisphere. 



But the evidence for a land connection by way of the 

 Pacific does not by any means rest on the testimony of 

 marsupials alone. Passing over certain groups, it may 

 be mentioned that the earthworms of Australia and New 

 Zealand are strangely like those of Patagonia, and have 

 no very near relatives in Africa ; while an almost equally 

 strong affinity is stated to exist between the Patagonian 

 and Polynesian land slugs. Neither of these groups of 

 animals are fitted to withstand the cold of high latitudes, 

 and it is difficult to see how the members of the second, at 

 any rate, could have reached the two areas by any other 

 means than a direct land connection. 



Turning now to the brief reports hitherto received as to 

 the results of the Funafuti boring, it appears that this 

 has been carried far below the limits of coral life, and is 

 still in coral limestone. So far, therefore, the advocates 

 of the theory that Polynesia is the remains of a sunken 

 continent have scored a great triumph ; and although 

 there is still the possibility thit some of the atolls in this 

 vast area may prove to be perched on the denuded 

 summits of extinct submarine volcanoes, even this would 

 not interfere with the general conclusion. If deeper 

 borings should result in touching rooks more or less 

 similar to ordinary continental sedimentary deposits or 

 metamorphic crystallines, an even firmer basis would be 

 afforded to the hypothesis of subsidence which has now 

 received such strikmg confirmation. 



As the result of the boring it appears, then, that there 

 is a possibility that the community between the South 

 American and Australasian faunas may admit of being 

 explained by means of a direct land connection between 

 the two areas at a comparatively recent geological date. 

 Even, however, if this explanation receive future support 

 and acceptation, there are, as in all similar cases, 

 still many difficulties with which to contend. One of 

 these is the practical absence of all non-volant mammals 

 from Polynesia, with the exception of the Solomon group, 

 where a few cuscuses and rats are found. But the case 

 of the West Indies— where there is every probability that 

 there was formerly a large mammalian fauna, the majority 

 of which were drowned by submergence — may very likely 

 afford the solution of the difficulty. Worms and slugs 

 would probably find means of survival in circumstances 

 where mammalian life would disappear. This explana- 

 tion will, however, clearly not apply in the case of New 

 Zealand, where, if mammals had ever existed, their 

 remains would almost certainly have been discovered. It 

 must be assumed then that, if Polynesia was the route by 

 which the faunas of Australia and Patagonia were formerly 

 connected. New Zealand was at that time isolated. And, 

 indeed, seeing that the hypothetical land connection between 

 the areas in question must have existed at a comparatively 

 late epoch, it is most likely that the ancient Polynesian 

 land was already broken up to a considerable extent into 

 islands and archipelagos, so that the main line of con- 

 nection may have been but narrow, and from time to time 

 interrupted. Indeed, it must almost of necessity have 

 been but incomplete and of short duration after the intro- 

 duction of modem forms of life, as otherwise the types 

 common to Australia and Patagonia would be much 

 more numerous than we find to be the case. Hence there 



is no improbability in the suggested isolation of New 

 Zealand during the period in question. 



But, putting these interesting speculations aside, the 

 results of the Funafuti boring indicate almost without 

 doubt that Polynesia is an area of comparatively recent 

 subsidence ; and it has already been mentioned that there are 

 good reasons for regarding a large part of the basin of the 

 South Atlantic as of no great antiquity, whUe the area of the 

 Indian Ocean appears to have been considerably enlarged 

 during the later geological epochs. Apparently, therefore, 

 the great extent of ocean at present characteristic of the 

 southern hemisphere is a relatively modern feature. 



Hence it is clear that the extreme views prevalent a few 

 years ago as to the absolute permanency of the existing 

 continental and oceanic areas clearly stand in need of 

 some degree of modification. And what we have now to 

 avoid is that the pendulum should not once more take too 

 long a swing in the opposite direction. 



So far as the great continental masses of the northern 

 hemisphere are concerned, it would appear that portions 

 of these have always existed to a greater or lesser extent as 

 land. But the great extent and homogeneous character of 

 formations like the Mountain Limestone, the Chalk, and 

 the Nummulitic Limestone, suggest that sea was much 

 more prevalent in this area than it is at present, and that, 

 so far as the Old World is concerned, the continental area 

 has been growing. The North Atlantic, and probably also 

 the North Pacific, may apparently be regarded as basins 

 of great antiquity. On the other hand, in the southern 

 hemisphere, although Africa, parts of AustraUa, and 

 at least some portions of South America, are evidently 

 land surfaces of great antiquity, they, together with the 

 islands of the Coral Sea, seem to be mere remnants of a 

 much more extensive southern continent or continents. 

 Conversely the southern oceans have gained in area by 

 swallowing up these long-lost lands. Obviously, then, 

 although true in a degree, continental permanency has 

 by no means been the only factor in the evolution of the 

 present surface of the globe. 



IS WEATHER AFFECTED BY THE MOON? 



By Alex. B. MacDowall, m.a. 



THE history of science, in its relation to popular 

 beliefs, often affords on both sides curious illus- 

 trations of the old adage, Humanum est errare. 

 Certain ideas as to the causation of natural phe- 

 nomena are widely prevalent. Science steps in to 

 examine them. She tests and measures ; sees them to be 

 very faulty ; puts them aside as worthless and vain. But 

 there comes a time when this judgment has to be revised, 

 and considerable grains of truth are found among the 

 rubbish. 



There are at present signs, if I mistake not, that the 

 denial of hmar influence on weather has been made too 

 confidently. 



If we ask any working gardener, or fisherman, or sailor, 

 whether he thinks the moon has anything to do with 

 weather, he will probably reply with a ready affirmative. 

 He may enlarge, in his own wise way, on what weather 

 we have to expect if the change of the moon is at this 

 hour or that ; if the moon is high or low ; if the new 

 moon is on her back or standing up, and so on. Popular 

 weather lore on this subject is, we all know, plentiful ; 

 and in reading a collection of those sayings we are not 

 exactly impressed with their harmony or consistency. 

 The pages of Aratus, of Virgil, of Bacon, witness to the 

 venerable character of this class of " saws.'' And the 



