THE EVOLUTION OF CLIMATE
The climate of any point on the earth’s surface depends
on a complex of factors, some of them due to influences
arriving from outside the earth, and others purely
terrestrial. Since any variations of climate must be
due to a change in one or more of these, it is necessary,
before we can discuss changes of climate, to consider
briefly what the factors are.
The only important extra-terrestrial factor of climate
is the amount of radiant energy which reaches the
borders of the earth’s atmosphere from the heavenly
bodies—that is, from the sun, for the moon and stars
can be ignored in this connexion. The only other
conceivable factor is the arrival of meteorites, bringing
kinetic energy which is converted into heat, and introducing
cosmic dust into the atmosphere; but it is highly
improbable that this is of appreciable effect.
The amount of solar radiation[1] which reaches the
earth depends in the first place on the total radiation
emitted by the sun, and in the second place on the
distance of the earth from the sun, both of which quantities
are variable. It has been calculated that if other
factors remained unchanged an increase of ten per cent.
in the solar radiation would raise the mean temperature
of the earth’s surface by about 7° C., or between 12°
and 13° F., with, of course, a corresponding fall for a
decrease.
After the sun’s radiation reaches the outer limits of
the earth’s atmosphere its nature and intensity are
modified by the composition of the air through which
it passes. In general the air itself is very transparent to
the small wave-lengths which make up the solar rays,
but the presence of fine dust, whether of volcanic or of
cosmic origin, has been shown by Humphreys to be a
distinct hindrance to their passage, so that volcanic
eruptions of an explosive nature, such as that of Krakatoa
in 1883, La Soufrière (St. Vincent) in 1902, or Katmai
(Alaska) in 1912, may result in a fall of temperature
over the world as a whole.
The temperature of the earth is determined by the
balance between the radiation received from the sun
and the terrestrial radiation to space, and a decrease in
the latter would be as effective in raising the mean
temperature as an increase in the former. The use of
glass for greenhouses depends on this principle; for glass
is transparent to heat rays of small wave-length, but is
largely opaque to the rays of greater wave-length which
make up terrestrial radiation. Certain constituents
of the atmosphere, especially water-vapour, carbon
dioxide and ozone, are effective in this way, and variations
in the amount of these gases present may affect
the temperature.
The angle at which the sun’s rays strike the earth’s
surface is a highly important factor. Within the Tropics
the sun at midday is nearly vertical throughout the
year, and the mean temperature in these regions is
correspondingly high; on the other hand, during the
long polar night the sun is not seen for half the year,
and very low temperatures prevail. There is thus a
seasonal variation of the heat received from the sun in
middle and high latitudes, the extent of which depends
on the “obliquity of the ecliptic,” i.e. the inclination
of the earth’s axis to the plane of its orbit round the
sun, and any changes in this factor must alter the seasonal
variation of climate.
Further, since the climate of any place depends so
closely on its latitude, it follows that if the latitude
changes the climate will change. A ship can change
its latitude at will, but we are accustomed to regard the
position of the “firm ground beneath our feet” relatively
to the poles as fixed within narrow limits. This stability
has, however, been questioned from time to time, mainly
on evidence derived from palæoclimatology, and theories
of climatic change have been based on the wanderings
of continents and oceans. Finally, local climate is
intimately bound up with the distribution of land and
sea, and the marine and atmospheric currents resulting
therefrom, and on elevation above sea-level, both of
which factors, as we shall see, have suffered very wide
variations in the geological past.
Nearly all the theories which have been put forward
to account for geological changes of climate, and especially
the occurrence of the last or Quaternary Ice Age,
are based on the abnormal variation of one or other of
the above factors, and we may consider them briefly in
turn. Very few have ever been taken seriously. In
the first place, we can at once dismiss fluctuations in
the radiation emitted by the sun as a cause of great
changes of climate. It is true that many small fluctuations
are traceable directly to this cause, such as the
eleven-year periodicity of temperature and rainfall; but
these fluctuations are, and must be, greater at the
equator than at the poles, while the fall of temperature
during the Glacial period reached its maximum near
the poles and was least at the equator. Moreover, there
is not the slightest direct evidence in support of such a
theory, and it can only be admitted when all other
hypotheses have failed.
The “astronomical” theory of the cause of climatic
fluctuations is associated chiefly with the name of James
Croll. Croll’s theory connects abnormal variations of
climate with variations, firstly of the eccentricity of the
earth’s orbit, and secondly of the ecliptic. In periods
of high eccentricity the hemisphere with winter in
aphelion is cold because the long severe winter is far
from being balanced by the short hot summer; at the
same time the opposite hemisphere enjoys a mild equable
climate. This theory commanded instant respect, and
still finds a place in the text-books, but difficulties soon
began to appear. The evidence strongly suggests that
glacial periods did not alternate in the two hemispheres,
but were simultaneous over the whole earth; even on
the equator the snow-line was brought low down.
Moreover, on Mars the largest snow-cap appears on the
hemisphere with its winter in perihelion. Although
Croll’s reasoning was beautifully ingenious he gave very
few figures; while the date which he gives for the
conclusion of the Ice Age, 80,000 years ago, has been
shown by recent research to be far too remote, 15,000
years being nearer the mark.
Croll’s theory has recently been revived in an altered
form by R. Spitaler, a Czecho-Slovakian meteorologist,
who calculated the probable alteration in the mean
temperature of each latitude under maximum eccentricity
(0.7775) and maximum obliquity (27° 48′), the
distribution of land and water remaining unchanged.
The results are shown in the attached table, where -
means that the temperature was so much below the
present mean, and + that it was so much above.
|
|
Aphelion December. |
Aphelion June. |
|
|
|
|
Winter. |
Summer. |
Year. |
Winter. |
Summer. |
Year. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
°F. |
°F. |
°F. |
°F. |
°F. |
°F. |
| N. 60° |
-9 |
+15 |
-1 |
-5 |
-4 |
-1 |
| 30° |
-13 |
+13 |
-2 |
+1 |
-8 |
-2 |
| Equator |
-8 |
+4 |
-2 |
+1 |
-6 |
-2 |
| S. 30° |
-6 |
+1 |
-2 |
+3 |
-5 |
-2 |
| 60° |
-2 |
-1 |
-1 |
+1 |
-2 |
-1 |
| |
Spitaler claims that these differences are sufficient to
cause a glacial period in the hemisphere with winter in
aphelion, but from this point his theory departs widely
from Croll’s. During the long severe winter great
volumes of sea water are brought to a low temperature,
and, owing to their greater weight, sink to the bottom
of the ocean, where they remain cold and accumulate
from year to year. But the water warmed during the
short hot summer remains on the surface, where its heat
is dissipated by evaporation and radiation. Thus,
throughout the cold period, lasting about 10,000 years,
the ocean in that hemisphere is steadily growing colder,
and this mass of cold water is sufficient to maintain a
low temperature through the whole of the following
period of 10,000 years with winter in perihelion, which
would otherwise be a genial interval. In this way a
period of great eccentricity becomes a glacial period over
the whole earth, but with crests of maximum intensity
alternating in the two hemispheres. Unfortunately the
numerical basis of this theory is not presented, and it
seems incredible that a deficiency of temperature could
be thus maintained through so long a period. Further,
the difficulty about chronology remains, and the work
brings the astronomical theory no nearer to being a
solution of the Ice Age problem than was Croll’s.
The theory which connects fluctuations of climate
on a geological scale with changes in the composition
of the earth’s atmosphere is due to Tyndall and Arrhenius,
and was elaborated by Chamberlin. The theory supposed
that the earth’s temperature is maintained by
the “blanketing” effect of the carbon dioxide in the
atmosphere. This acts like the glass of a greenhouse,
allowing the sun’s rays to enter unhindered, but absorbing
the heat radiated from the earth’s surface and returning
some of it to the earth instead of letting it pass through
to be lost in space. Consequently, any diminution in
the amount of carbon dioxide present would cause the
earth to radiate away its heat more freely, so reducing
its temperature. But it is now known that the terrestrial
radiation which this gas is capable of absorbing is taken
up equally readily by water-vapour, of which there
is always sufficient present, and variations of carbon
dioxide cannot have any appreciable effect.
Brief mention may be made here of a theory put
forward by Humphreys, who attributed glaciation to
the presence of great quantities of volcanic dust in the
atmosphere. It would require an enormous output of
volcanic dust to reduce the temperature sufficiently;
but in any case the relation, if any, between vulcanicity
and temperature during the geological ages is rather
the reverse of that supposed by Humphreys, periods of
maximum volcanic action coinciding more frequently
with high temperatures than with low. Perhaps the
best comment on Humphreys’ theory is that in 1902
F. Frech produced its exact opposite, warm periods being
associated with an excess of vulcanicity and cold periods
with a diminution.
The theory which attributes climatic changes in
various countries to variations in the position of the
poles has been adduced in two main forms. The first
is known as the Pendulation Theory, and supposes the
existence of two “oscillation poles” in Ecuador and
Sumatra. The latitude of these points remains unchanged,
and the geographical poles swing backwards
and forwards along the meridian of 10 E. midway
between them. Varying distances from the pole cause
changes of climate, and the movements of the ocean,
which adjusts itself to the change of pole more rapidly
than the land, causes the great transgressions and regressions
of the sea and the elevation and subsidence of
the land.
An alternative form put forward by P. Kreichgauer,
and recently brought up again by Wegener, explains
the apparent variations in the position of the pole, not
through a motion of the earth’s axis, but by the assumption
that the firm crust has moved over the earth’s core
so that the axis, remaining firm in its position, passes
through different points of the earth’s crust. The cause
of these movements is the centrifugal force of the great
masses of the continents, which are distributed symmetrically
about the earth. Imagine a single large
continent resting on a sub-fluid magma in temperate
latitudes. Centrifugal force acting on this continent
tends to drive it towards the equator. There is thus a
tendency for the latitude of Europe to decrease. Similar
forces acting through geological ages have caused the
poles and equator to wander at large over the earth’s
surface, and also caused the continents to shift their
positions relatively to one another. According to
Wegener, in the Oligocene there was only a single
enormous continent, America being united to Europe
and Africa on the one hand, and through Antarctica to
Australia on the other; while the Deccan stretched
south-westwards nearly to Africa. The poles were in
Alaska and north of the Falkland Islands. The treatment
in Kreichgauer’s original book is speculative and
at times fanciful; Wegener’s treatise appears to demand
more respectful attention, but is open to some vital
objections. In the first place, theories of this class
demand that the glaciation occurred in different regions
at widely different times, whereas we shall see in the
following pages that the evidence points very strongly
to a double glaciation during the Quaternary occurring
simultaneously over the whole earth. This objection,
which was fatal to Croll’s theory in its original form,
is equally fatal to theories of pole-wandering as an
explanation of the Quaternary Ice Age. Secondly, we
know that the last phase of this glaciation, known as the
Wisconsin stage in America and the Wurmian in Europe,
was highly developed only 20,000 years ago, and probably
reached its maximum not more than 30,000 years ago.
In the last 5000 years there has been no appreciable
change of latitude, at least in Eurasia; and it seems
impossible for the extensive alterations required in the
geography of the world by Wegener’s theory to have
taken place in so short a time.
The great glaciation of the Permian period, referred
to in the next chapter, is a totally different matter.
During this time the ice-sheets appear to have reached
their maximum area, and to have extended to sea-level,
in countries which are at present close to the equator,
while lands now in high latitudes remained unglaciated.
It is true that at the present day glaciers exist at high
latitudes under the equator itself, and given a ridge
sufficiently steep and a snowfall sufficiently heavy such
glaciers would possibly extend to sea-level; but even
these conditions would not give rise to the enormous
deposits of true boulder-clay which have been discovered,
and there seems no way of avoiding the supposition of
an enormous difference in the position of the pole
relatively to the continents at this time.
Wegener’s theory alone, however, requires that glaciation
should always have been proceeding in some part
of the globe (unless both poles were surrounded by wide
expanses of ocean), which is hard to reconcile with the
extremely definite and limited glaciations which geological
research has demonstrated. In these circumstances
we may tentatively explain the pre-Tertiary glacial
periods by combining Wegener’s theory of the movements
of continents and oceans as a whole with the
theory of changes of elevation and of land and sea
distribution which is outlined below. That is to say,
we may suppose that the positions of the continents
and oceans have changed, relatively both to each other
and to the poles, slowly but more or less continuously
throughout geological time; while at certain periods the
land and sea distribution became favourable for extensive
glaciation of the regions which at that time were in high
latitudes.
The geographical theory, which states that the Ice Age
was brought about by elevation in high latitudes, and
by changes in the land and sea distribution, though
never seriously challenged, has suffered until recently
from a lack of precision. The present author attempted
to remedy this by a close mathematical study of the
relation of temperature to land and sea distribution at
the present day. The method at attack was as follows:
from the best available isothermal charts of all countries
the mean temperature reduced to sea-level was read off
for each intersection of a ten-degree square of latitude
and longitude, for January and July, from 70° N. to 60° S.
latitude; this gave 504 values of temperature for each
of these months. Round each point was next drawn
a circle with an angular radius of ten degrees, divided
into east and west semicircles. The area of each semicircle
was taken as 100, and by means of squared paper
the percentage of land to the east and land to the west
were calculated; finally, in each month the percentage
of the whole circle occupied by land, ice, or frozen sea
was calculated, this figure naturally being greater in
winter than in summer. The projection used was that
of the “octagonal globe,” published by the Meteorological
Office, which shows the world in five sections,
the error nowhere exceeding six per cent.
These figures were then analysed mathematically,
and from them the effects on temperature of land to
the east, land to the west, and ice were calculated. The
detailed numerical results are set out in an Appendix;
it is sufficient here to give the following general conclusions:
(1) In winter the effect of land to the west is always
to lower temperature.
(2) In winter the effect of land to the east is almost
negligible, that is to say, the eastern shore of a continent
is almost as cold as the centre of the continent. The
only important exception to this rule is 70° N., which
may be considered as coming within a belt of polar
east winds.
(3) In summer the general effect of land, whether to
the east or west, is to raise temperature, but the effect
is nowhere anything like so marked as the opposite effect
in winter.
(4) The effect of ice is always to lower temperature.
(5) For every latitude a “basal temperature” can be
found. This is the temperature found near the centre of
an ocean in that latitude. This “basal temperature”
is a function of the amount of land in the belt of latitude.
Poleward of latitude 20° an increase of land in the belt
lowers the winter basal temperatures very rapidly and
raises the summer basal temperature to a less extent.
The “basal temperature” is important, since it is the
datum line from which we set out to calculate the
winter and summer temperatures of any point, by the
addition or subtraction of figures representing the local
effect of land in a neighbouring 10° circle.
As an illustration of the scale of the temperature
variations which may be due to geographical changes,
suppose that the belt between 50° and 70° N. is entirely
above the sea. Then we have the following theoretical
temperatures; for a point on 60° N. at sea-level:
January -30° F.; July 72° F.
Data for calculating the effect of ice are rather scanty,
but the following probable figures can be given, supposing
that the belt in question were entirely ice-covered:
January -30° F. (as for land); July 23° F.
Supposing that the belt were entirely oceanic, the
mean temperature in 60° N. would be:
January 29° F.; July 41° F.
These figures show how enormously effective the
land and sea distribution really is. From Appendix
it is easy to calculate the probable temperature distribution
resulting from any arrangement of land and water
masses. Since the geography of the more recent geological
periods is now known in some detail, we have thus
a means of restoring past climates and discussing the
distribution of animals and plants in the light of this
knowledge. Of course it is not pretended that no other
possible causes of great climatic variation exist, but no
others capable of seriously modifying temperature over
long periods are known to have been in operation. As
we shall see later, there are solar and other astronomical
causes capable of modifying climate slightly for a few
decades or even centuries, but these are insignificant
compared with the mighty fluctuations of geological
time.
In applying the results of this “continentality” study
to former geological periods the method adopted is that
of differences. The present climate is taken as a standard,
and the temperatures of, for instance, the Glacial period
are calculated by adding to or subtracting from the
present temperatures amounts calculated from the change
in the land and sea distribution. This has the advantage
of conserving the present local peculiarities, such as those
due to the presence of the Gulf Drift, but such a procedure
would be inapplicable for a totally different
land and sea distribution, such as prevailed during the
Carboniferous period. That it is applicable for the
Quaternary is perhaps best shown by the following
comparison of temperatures calculated from the distribution
of land, sea and ice with the actual temperatures
of the Ice Age as estimated by various authorities
(inferred fall):
|
| Locality. |
Author. |
Inferred Fall. |
Calculated Fall. |
|
| Jan. |
July. |
Mean. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
°F. |
°F. |
°F. |
°F. |
| Scandinavia |
J. Geikie |
More than 20 |
36 |
18 |
27 |
| East Anglia |
C. Reid |
20 |
18 |
13 |
15 |
| Alps |
Penck and Brückner |
11 |
13 |
9 |
11 |
| Japan |
Simotomai |
7 |
9 |
5 |
7 |
|
It is seen that the agreement is quite good.
There is one other point to consider, the effect of
height. The existence of a great land-mass generally
implies that part of it at least has a considerable elevation,
perhaps 10,000 or 20,000 feet, and these high lands
lave a very different climate to the neighbouring lowlands.
Meteorologists have measured this difference
in the case of temperature and found that the average
fall with height is at the rate of 1° F. in 300 feet. In
the lower levels the fall is usually greater in summer
than in winter, but at 3000 feet it is fairly uniform
throughout the year. Consequently, quite apart from
any change in climate due to the increased land area,
an elevation of 3000 feet would result in a fall of
temperature of 10° F., winter and summer alike. This
reinforces the effect of increased land area and aids in
the development of ice-sheets or glaciers.
The effect of geographical changes on the distribution
of rainfall are much more complicated. The open sea
is the great source of the water-vapour in the atmosphere,
and since evaporation is very much greater in the hot
than in the cold parts of the globe, for considerable
precipitation over the world as a whole there must be
large water areas in the Tropics. In temperate latitudes
the water-vapour is carried over the land by onshore
winds, and some of it is precipitated where the air is
forced to rise along the slopes of hills or mountains.
Some rain falls in thunderstorms and similar local
showers, but the greater part of the rain in most temperate
countries is associated with the passage of “depressions.”
These are our familiar wind- and rain-storms;
a depression consists essentially of winds blowing in an
anti-clockwise direction round an area of low pressure.
These centres of low pressure move about more or less
irregularly, but almost invariably from west to east in the
temperate regions. They are usually generated over
seas or oceans, and, since a supply of moist air is essential
for their continued existence, they tend to keep to the
neighbourhood of water masses or, failing that, of large
river valleys. In a large dry area depressions weaken or
disappear. Their tracks are also very largely governed
by the positions of areas of high pressure or anticyclones,
which they tend to avoid, moving from west to east on
the polar side of a large anticyclone and from east to
west on the equatorial side. Since anticyclones are
developed over the great land areas in winter, this
further restricts the paths of depressions to the
neighbourhood of the oceans at that season.
For all these reasons the tracks of depressions, and
therefore the rainfall, are intimately connected with the
distribution of land and sea. In winter there is little rainfall
in the interior of a great land-mass, except where it is
penetrated by an arm of the sea like the Mediterranean;
on the other hand, the coasts receive a great deal of rain
or snow. The interior receives its rain mostly in spring
or summer; if the coastal lands are of no great elevation
this will be plentiful, but if the coasts are mountainous
the interior will be arid, like the central basins of Asia.
The development of an ice-sheet is equivalent to
introducing perpetual winter in the area occupied by
the ice. The low temperature maintains high pressure,
and storm-tracks are unable to cross the ice. At the
present day depressions rarely penetrate beyond the
outer fringe of the Antarctic continent, and only the
southern extremity of Greenland is affected by them.
Since the total energy in the atmosphere is increased by
the presence of an ice-sheet, which affords a greater
contrast of temperature between cold pole and equator,
storms will increase in frequency and their tracks must
be crowded together on the equatorial side of the ice-sheet.
In the southern hemisphere we have great
storminess in the “roaring forties”; south of Greenland
the Newfoundland banks are a region of great storminess.
Hence, when an ice-sheet covered northern and central
Europe the Mediterranean region must have had a
marked increase of storminess with probably rain in
summer as well as in winter.
But if snow-bearing depressions cannot penetrate an
ice-sheet, it may be asked how the ice-sheet can live.
The answer depends on the nature of the underlying
country. A land of high relief such as Antarctica is,
and as Greenland probably is, rising to a maximum
elevation of many thousand feet near its centre, draws
its nourishment chiefly from the upper currents which
flow inward on all sides to replace the cooled air which
flows outwards near the surface. These upper currents
carry a certain amount of moisture, partly in the form
of vapour, but partly condensed as cirrus and even
cumulus cloud.
At low temperatures air is able to hold only a negligible
amount of water-vapour, and this current, coming in
contact with the extremely cold surface of the ice, is
sucked dry, and its moisture added to the ice-sheet.
Probably there is little true snowfall, but the condensation
takes place chiefly close to the surface, forming a
frozen mist resembling the “ice-mist” of Siberia.
Even if the central land is not high enough to reach
into the upper current at its normal level, the surface
outflow of cold air will draw the current down to the
level of the ice. This will warm it by compression, but
the ice-surface is so cold that such warming makes little
difference in the end. This process of condensation
ensures that after the ice reaches a certain thickness it
becomes independent of topography, and in fact the
centre of the Scandinavian ice-sheet lay not along the
mountain axis, but some distance to the east of it.
It is probably only on the edges of the ice-sheet, and
especially in areas of considerable local relief, that
snowfall of the ordinary type takes place, associated with
moist winds blowing in the front section of depressions
which skirt the ice-edge. But when conditions are
favourable this source of supply is sufficient to enable
these local ice-sheets to maintain an independent life,
merely fusing with the edges of the larger sheet where
they meet. Examples of such local centres in Europe
were the Irish and Scottish glaciers, and at a later stage
the Lofoten glaciers of the west of Norway, and in
America the Cordilleran glaciers of Columbia.
Penck and Brückner have demonstrated that in the
Alps the increase of glaciation was due to a fall of temperature
and not to an increase of snowfall. The
argument is threefold: firstly, the lowering of the
snow-line was uniform over the whole Alpine area,
instead of being irregular as it would be if it depended
on variations of snowfall; secondly, the area and depth
of the parent snow-fields which fed the glaciers remained
unchanged, hence the increased length of the glaciers
must have been due to decreased melting below the
snow-line, i.e. to lower temperatures; thirdly, the upper
limit of tree-growth in Europe sank by about the same
amount as the snow-line. The same conclusion holds
for the great Scandinavian and North American ice-sheets,
the extension of which was undoubtedly due to
a great fall of temperature. In the case of the Alps the
interesting point has come to light that the fall of
temperature, though due in part to increased elevation,
is mainly accounted for by the presence of the Scandinavian
ice-sheet, which extended its influence for many
miles beyond the actual limits of glaciation, so that its
waxings and wanings are faithfully reproduced in those
of the Alpine glaciers, even to the details of the final
retreat after the last maximum.
It is only when we turn to tropical and sub-tropical
regions that we find variations of temperature unable
to account for increased glaciation. Not only were the
changes of land and sea distribution on a very much
smaller scale than further north, but the Appendix shows
that the temperature value of a corresponding change
of land area is also very much less. But the high intertropical
mountains—the Andes and Kenya and Kilimanjaro
in central Africa—which to-day bear glaciers, in
Quaternary times carried much greater ones. We
cannot call in a fall of temperature, for the reason above
stated, and also because at lower levels there is no
evidence of colder conditions. In the Glacial period
the marine fauna was the same as to-day, and mountains
which now fall short of the snow-line by a few hundred
feet were still unglaciated even then. The only alternative
is increased snowfall on the higher mountains.
Fortunately this fits in well with meteorological theory.
The rain and snowfall of tropical regions depends, first
of all, on the evaporation over the oceans. But evaporation
is profoundly influenced by the velocity of the
wind; and the wind, which in the Tropics represents the
strength of the atmospheric circulation, depends on the
thermal gradient between the equator and the poles;
since there is no evidence of any appreciable change
of temperature over the Tropics as a whole, while there
was a very great fall in cold temperate and polar regions,
the thermal gradient, and therefore, ultimately, the
tropical and sub-tropical, rain and snowfall must have
been very greatly increased. Hence the increased
glaciation of high mountains near the equator, and hence
also the evidence of “Pluvial periods” in the sub-tropical
arid regions on either side of the equator.
Thus during Glacial periods we have:
(1) Elevation in high latitudes caused a great increase
of land areas there.
(2) Both elevation and increase of land area resulted
in a lowering of temperature, materially increased by
the gradual development of great ice-sheets.
(3) These ice-sheets caused the development of subsidiary
ice-sheets on their southern and western borders.
(4) The lowering of temperature in high latitudes
increased the thermal gradient between equator and
poles, resulting in:
(a) Increased snowfall, and hence increased
glaciation on high mountains near the equator.
(b) Pluvial periods in the sub-tropical arid regions.
Humphreys, W. J. “Physics of the air.” Philadelphia, 1920. [Pt. 4,
pp. 556-629.]
Chamberlin, T. C. “An attempt to frame a working hypothesis of the
cause of glacial periods on an atmospheric basis.” Journal of Geology
(American), Vol. 7, 1899, pp. 545-84, 667-85, 751-87. [Carbon
dioxide theory.]
Croll, J. “Climate and time in their geological relations.” London, 1875.
“Discussions on climate and cosmology.” London, 1889. [Eccentricity
of earth’s orbit.]
Spitaler, R. “Das Klima des Eiszeitalters.” Prag, 1921. Lithographed.
[Eccentricity of earth’s orbit. Reviewed in the Meteorological Magazine,
London, September, 1921.]
Simroth, H. “Die Pendulationstheorie.” Leipzig, 1908.
Kreichgauer, P. “Die Aequatorfrage in der Geologie.” Steyr, 1902.
Wegener, A. “Die Entstehung der Continente und Ozeane.” Die Wissenschaft,
Bd. 66, Braunschweig, 1920.
Köppen, W. “Ueber Aenderungen der geographischen Breiten und des
Klimas in geologischer Zeit.” Stockholm, Geografiska Annaler, 2,
1920, pp. 285-99.
Brooks, C. E. P. “Continentality and temperature.” Quarterly Journal of
Royal Meteorological Society, Vol. 43, 1917, p. 169; and 44, 1918,
p. 253. [Influence of land and sea distribution.]
Enquist, F. “Eine Theorie über die Ursache der Eiszeit und die geographischen
Konsequenzen derselbe.” Bull. Geol. Inst., Upsala, 13, 1915,
No. 2. [Influence of land and sea distribution.]
Hobbs, W. H. “Characteristics of existing glaciers.” New York, 1911.
[Glacial anticyclone.]
TABLE OF GEOLOGICAL FORMATIONS
| Quaternary |
{ Recent |
| { Pleistocene |
| |
|
Tertiary or Cainozoic |
{ Pliocene |
| { Miocene |
| { Oligocene |
| { Eocene |
| |
|
Mesozoic or Secondary |
{ Cretaceous |
| { Jurassic |
| { Triassic |
| |
|
| Palæozoic |
{ Permian |
| { Carboniferous |
| { Devonian |
| { Silurian |
| { Ordovician |
| { Cambrian |
| |
|
| Proterozoic |
Pre-Cambrian |