The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1914-10-31
Discussion on ain-Making
Not Entirely Fruitless.

NOT EI1I1TGly Fru1CIcSS-
We regret to note that our esteemed
contemporary. the Tampa Times. IS
gument. Under an editorial heading.
"a FruitIess Discussion" the Times
says;
Our esteemed contemporary, The
Pensacola Journal, continues to take
pride in its isolation, In combating
the world-known and weIl-authenti-
Gated fact that continued heavy can
nonading produces copious rainfall
Il - not probable that the protract-
ed discussion Of this subject would
justify the consumption Of the time
required and the occupying Of the
space that could easily be flied with
more interesting and edIfying matter.
So with this article we will dismiss
the subject, whether II rains or not
Our skeptical friend quotes from a
former editorial OF ours this sentence:
"As far back as there is any record
great battles have been accompanied
or Immediately followed by heavy
rainfaIls," and then demands from US
"a little authoritative data on the
subject
Our duties are much too exigent to
permit our bestowing the necessary
time upon looking up citations of au-
thorities In perhaps dozens OF volumes
Of histories. We do not keep In our
sanctum a sufficient library to FUR
nish such authorities, and when we go
home we go there to rest-we don't
carry the shop with us.
We do, however. remember from our
general reading that copious rains are
mentioned In connection with most OF
the great battles that nave been fought
since the invention Of gunpowder. It
is an historical fact, mentioned IN
many accounts, that the battle Of
Waterloo was accompanied and fol- /
lowed by heavy rains and by at least |
one OF the writers this is referred TO /
as impeding the movements Of the |
French cavalry
We also remember having conversed |
on this subject with numerous veter-
ans of the Civil war, from both sides.
and they all, without exception, SPOKE
Of the fact that the heavy firing al |
ways brought rain
It IS impossible to answer more def
nitely the questions of our contem-
porary as to specific records Of rain
fall at certain places, showing COM
parative amounts upon different dates I
or for different periods. for, as he L
there were no meteorological records
kept anywhere in the world
We would IN all kindness remind i
our friend that ridicule and sarcasm
are not argument and generally form
the last refuge Of those who find b
themselves destitute of more substan-
tia1 material.
We certainly hope our contemporary
is not in earnest about giving UP this
discussion. If. also. The
Journals light remarks have been con-
strued as ridicule or sarcasm. we right
now beg our contemporary pardon
But if ''the worId-known and we'll )
fact that continued
heavy cannonading produces copious 6
rainfall" is fact, there ought to be !.
no trouble in citing an authority or
two in substantiation OF It. I
It ought not TO be necessary to '
search dozens Of volumes of histo-
ries" to produce some scientific au-
Why not borrow a text book from =
some public school pupil and see what
hat says about rain? Better still, |
simply telephone your local weather.
nan for data on the subject. If he
hasn't got It, he will write to Wash
ngton for it and viii get you copies
II extracts from the scientific works
N this very question OF cannon and
ain.
What's the use Of having friends
nd public servants If You don't use
hem? These weather bureau men are
lways obhging and they viii be glad.
re are sure, to answer your telephone 1
euuests by sending you the best Of
that all the scientists have
,ritten about artificial rain-making.
WY not let the weether-man settle
!?
In the meantime. If this little dis
ussion has done nothing more than
} get some OF the younger generation
) thinking about this long-since ex-
loded theory that noise will make S
lin. it cannot be entirely fruitIess.
-