298 
EASTMAN. 
Examination of Theories. 
The abstracts and excerpts just presented are, from the 
limitations of the method employed, frequently very brief, 
sometimes disconnected, and generally separated from the 
various discussions which led to the results cited. 
Although they present in themselves insufficient data for 
an accurate study or a rigorous discussion of the subject, 
they are quite sufficient to illustrate the evolution of the 
modern theories as they have been successively developed 
from the superstitions and the dogmatic assumptions of the 
last century. 
This development is a fair illustration of the growth of 
most of the sciences, and the sometimes absurd and baseless 
theories, some of which have been cited, are the usual evi¬ 
dences of an anxious, persistent searching after the truth 
which is satisfied only by success. 
While the modern theories have been slowly evolved from 
a multitude of observations and discussions, expanding here 
and there along the lines of least difficulty, it is not improb¬ 
able that frequently there has been a lack of the nicest dis¬ 
crimination as to what were real and well-established facts. 
Keeping in view the precept that no sound theory can be 
.based on doubtful data, it is proposed to examine briefly the 
accumulated mass of so-called knowledge of Meteors and 
Comets, with a view to ascertaining what we actually know 
about these bodies; what we infer, assume, and assert, and 
to some extent, perhaps, what we do not know about them. 
Meteors. 
Those bodies which are usually designated as meteors, me¬ 
teorites, and shooting-stars Sire known, to some extent, by every 
intelligent person. The first name is usually applied to those 
sporadic bodies which one can see occasionally on any clear 
night; the second term is applied to iron or stony masses 
that sometimes fall to the earth, while the last term is used 
