The Great Martian Controversy Continued

: To Mars Via The Moon

"As the result of very long continued and systematic observation of the

lines on Mars, together with carefully plotting them down on a globe, it

was found that every line was continuous, uniform in width, and went

straight from one definite point to another, not one breaking off in

open space. Moreover, on being tested, nearly all were found to be arcs

of great circles, and therefore the shortest possible lines which could
>
connect any two points on a sphere. This fact strongly supports the idea

that they are not natural but artificial formations. For a long time the

lines were only seen on the red, or lighter, parts of the planet, but in

1892 an expedition was sent from Harvard Observatory to Arequipa, in

Peru, for the purpose of observing the planet under very favourable

conditions, and this resulted in important discoveries. Professor W.H.

Pickering, who accompanied the expedition, was fortunate enough to

observe that the canal lines extended over the dark or blue-green

portions of the disc; and later observations have proved that this is

the case all over the planet, and the lines are visible from pole to

pole.



"These observations also led Professor Pickering to the important

conclusion that all the dark areas were covered with vegetation, and

that the bright or red areas were deserts, the colour of the latter

being exactly that of our deserts when viewed from a great distance.

Herschel's idea had been that the red areas were land covered with

vegetation of a red colour, and that the dark areas were seas.



"It was, however, now quite clear that permanent lines in such numbers

and length could not exist in seas; and other observations have

demonstrated that, instead of appearing smooth and uniform as water

would, these areas are full of detail and variations, and that they pass

through all the changes of colour, according to seasons, that land

covered with vegetation does upon our earth. In the winter time, when

the land is fallow, it appears brown or chocolate colour; in the spring,

the time of early vegetation, it becomes a pale blue-green tint; as the

season advances the blue-green becomes darker; whilst in the autumn it

tends to a light brown, and at length changes into chocolate colour in

the winter. This has been carefully noted time after time when the

planet has been in a position to be observed; and the same sequence of

change-which can only be associated with vegetation-has always

occurred.



"It may, therefore, now be accepted as a proved fact that the dark areas

are land upon which vegetation grows, ripens, and dies away according to

the seasons of the Martian year.



"Professor Pickering also made another discovery, viz. a large number of

isolated, round, darkish spots, most of which occurred where canal lines

joined or crossed each other. Some of these had been seen much earlier

by other observers, but Professor Pickering was the first to see them in

large numbers and call attention to them. He termed them 'lakes,' but

later discoveries from continued observation showed that they were not

water, and they were then given the name of 'oases.' Some are seventy or

eighty miles in diameter, and nearly two hundred are now marked on the

maps. They mostly occur in certain definite positions-in the point

where single canals join or cross each other, or, in the case of double

canals, between the two lines. It has been noted that they undergo the

same seasonal changes as the dark areas do, but only as regards the

outer portion of the circle, which gradually fades away in the latter

part of the Martian year; whilst the central portion becomes fainter but

does not disappear.



"Of course it was at once declared that these oases were illusions which

would naturally be seen where two lines crossed each other and were

viewed from a great distance. But they only occur in some cases at such

crossings, and there are many junctions without any oases. Moreover,

they are also seen between the double canals where there are no

junctions nor anything which could give rise to illusion.



"At Flagstaff Observatory it was also noted that the canal lines

themselves underwent seasonal changes. Those viewed during the winter

season were always so faint as to be scarcely discernible, but at the

period when vegetation would naturally begin to grow they became more

easily visible, and still more distinct as the season advanced.



"Then Professor Lowell announced his great conception, which has given

rise to so much controversy, and has also been much misunderstood and

misrepresented.



"Briefly, his conclusions were as follows:-'Science teaches that a

small planet will become cool and develop life much sooner than a large

one. Similarly a small iron casting will become cool in a few days,

whilst a large one will be many weeks or even months in cooling. A small

planet will also develop more rapidly, and reach its final stage when it

will be incapable of supporting life, very long before a larger planet

like our earth will have reached that stage. Applying this to Mars, a

much smaller planet than our earth, it is scientifically reasoned that

Mars has passed through nearly all its stages and is approaching its

last. It has lost much of its atmosphere, all its large bodies of water,

such as oceans or seas, and, as regards the land, that has become

levelled by erosion, and about five-eighths of the whole area has become

desert.



"'Science also shows that in such circumstances rain would cease to fall

over the larger part of the planet, but the water vapour in the air

would be carried by natural circulatory currents of air to the polar

regions, and there deposited in the form of snow or hoarfrost, thus

forming a large snow-cap at the north pole in one season of the year,

and a still larger snow-cap at the south pole in the opposite portion of

the year.



"'These snow-caps would begin to melt in the spring as soon as the tilt

of the planet brought the pole to the position where the sun would take

effect, and would continue during the early summer. As there is no

permanent glaciation on a planet which has lost its water, the snow-cap

would melt to a very large extent, and the resultant water must go

somewhere.



"'The inhabitants of the planet could not exist without water, and

their land would become entirely desert unless supplied with moisture.

It will, therefore, be seen that the only thing possible, as a means of

self-preservation, would be for them to make channels to carry the water

in the most economical way from the poles to the parts where it was

needed. Unless they found a means of doing this death stared them in the

face. What greater incentive could there be!'



"This is what Professor Lowell is convinced has actually been

accomplished upon Mars, with the result that there is a network of

canals all over the planet by which water is conveyed from each pole and

carried across from one hemisphere into the other. The lines seen show

where the canals are, but not the canals themselves, because they are

too narrow to be seen. The lines really are broad bands of vegetation

irrigated by the canals which run through them, hence the seasonal

changes which have been noted in their colour.



"All this seems very reasonable, deduced as it is from scientific fact

and from the many different things which have actually been seen and

confirmed by many thousands of observations, but it has met with the

most bitter opposition on the part of many astronomers, both

professional and amateur. Theory after theory has been brought forward

with the object of disproving the existence of the canal lines; some of

these, such as eye-strain, diplopia, bad focussing, illusion, and

imagination, have already been mentioned.



"Proofs of the reality of the lines having become too strong for most of

the objectors, they then turned their endeavours to the overthrowing of

the theory that the lines were canals, suggesting that they were all of

natural origin.



"Amongst these suggestions it was stated they were edges of shadings,

natural growths of long lines of trees and vegetation, cracks in the

surface of the planet or foldings caused by contraction, trap-dykes,

&c., but not one of these suggestions will bear investigation. I have

already pointed out the impossibility of shadings having straight edges

for thousands of miles in so many hundreds of cases. It is equally

impossible to imagine natural growths of trees and vegetation in bands

of uniform width and thousands of miles long, and nearly all forming

arcs of great circles.



"They cannot be cracks, for they are of uniform width throughout their

length, and always run direct from one definite point to another, no

matter how distant apart they may be.



"Cracks, such as we see on the moon, though sometimes straight, are

usually wide near the centre of disturbance which caused them, and

narrow off to a fine point, and often end anywhere out in open space;

moreover, they are usually very irregular in width, and take a zig-zag

course instead of a straight one. This, as I have said, is not the case

with a single canal line on Mars. If they were cracks, some at least

would be irregular and end in open space. The same remarks apply in the

case of foldings or ridges.



"The oases, once declared to be illusions, were then said to be large

openings in the soil at the junctions of the cracks; or they might be

craters, and so on. But this does not account for the appearance of the

oases between twin canals, or the systematic manner in which the canals

effect a junction with the oases. Again, therefore, the theory fails to

fit the known circumstances of the case.



"Dr. A.R. Wallace rather favours the idea of natural cracks or faults in

the surface of the planet; and suggests that the outer crust of Mars may

be a crystalline or similar formation which would lend itself to the

production of numerous cracks in the surface. He points to a few cracks

and faults in the earth's surface, all of small size, as confirming this

idea; but the cases he adduces only seem to prove that there is on our

earth absolutely no natural formation which can in any way properly be

compared with the lines seen on Mars. Moreover, there seems to me no

ground whatever, beyond the needs of the theory, for supposing that the

crust of Mars is of a crystalline nature, or such as would predispose to

the formation of cracks. On the contrary, all the evidence is against

it-the existence of vegetation in some parts, the general appearance of

the red portion, and the large clouds of sand which have been observed,

all being indicative of a sandy formation, in the red portion at least.



"The theory also fails to take into consideration the most important

point of all, viz. that every canal runs direct from one definite point

to another, perhaps over two thousand miles distant. In very many cases

numerous lines connect with one small area, or even with one point. The

Lucus Ascraeus has no less than seventeen of these canals connecting with

it, and appears to be a kind of Martian Clapham Junction.



"The deserts on Mars serve the same purpose as our seas, as lines of

communication may be established anywhere across them. A map of Mars,

showing the canals converging towards some one part, bears a great

resemblance to our maps showing the courses taken by vessels from

different parts all converging upon one seaport.



"Much has also been said about the widths of the canals as rendering

them impossible of construction, so let us consider how wide they are.



"The lines seen vary from two or three miles up to nearly thirty miles

in width; but there are only one or two of the latter, and the majority

are five to ten miles wide. Notwithstanding Professor Lowell's repeated

statements that they represent bands of vegetation, these widths are

often referred to as the widths of his canals. I have frequently seen

them described as 'fifty miles,' a 'hundred miles,' and even as

'hundreds of miles' wide. These exaggerations usually appear in

newspapers and journals, and evidently arise from insufficient knowledge

on the part of the writers.



"Owing to the small gravitation upon Mars, the work of digging canals

would be extremely easy upon that planet (even assuming the Martians to

be without machinery) as compared with the same work on our earth; but

there is neither necessity nor reason for the construction of such

enormously wide canals as those mentioned. Moreover, it seems to me that

very wide canals would defeat the object for which they were

constructed; and Professor Lowell does not regard the widest lines as

being canals. They may be remains of natural channels or arms of the

seas, as they do not run so straight as the canal lines proper.



"Our people," I remarked, "have argued both against the possibility of

constructing such canals and of forcing water along them, because, as

they say, none of our engineers would be able to accomplish such work. I

certainly have more confidence in the skill and capabilities of our

engineers, and doubt not that if they were required to solve a similar

problem they would overcome all difficulties and carry out the work

successfully."



"I'm with you there, mon!" exclaimed M'Allister.



"I may remind you," I proceeded, "that when steam navigation was first

mooted, it was confidently asserted that no steamship would ever succeed

in crossing the Atlantic Ocean, and I can remember when it was learnedly

demonstrated that it would be quite impossible to construct a canal

across the Isthmus of Suez! How small the prophets must have felt when

the work was accomplished!



"I am afraid it is usual to take a very limited view of all such

matters, and we judge of them entirely from what we know ourselves,

never looking ahead, as it is considered unscientific to go beyond our

own knowledge. Because something may be quite impossible to us, it does

not follow that it is impossible to more advanced people.



"Think how many great scientific facts which are quite commonplace at

the present time were unknown and undreamed of even so recently as our

grandfathers' time! Who then can forecast what may be possible five

hundred years, or even a century hence; and who will be bold enough to

fix a limit to the possibilities of science! I freely admit I am an

optimist in these matters."



"I think, Professor," said John, "that your view is really the more

scientific of the two. While it may not be possible accurately to

forecast all the facts, intelligent anticipations may logically be

formed from a survey of our own past history."



Proceeding, I then remarked, that "Another discovery made at Flagstaff

Observatory was that at the ends of certain canals, where they joined

the dark areas, were small V-shaped dark markings which Professor Lowell

has termed carets. From their occurrence in these positions only, and

from his observations of the peculiar and extremely systematic manner in

which the canals, especially the double ones, run into the carets, he

has concluded that they must serve some special and important purpose.



"We have been told upon high authority that the carets are illusions,

and could not possibly be seen, as the planet is so distant from us. But

the fact remains that they have frequently been seen and drawn; they

always appear the same, and are never seen except in connection with

canals which join dark areas. These dark areas, I may say, are believed

to be the beds of ancient seas, from which the water has long since

departed.



"In connection with all these disputed lines and markings it has often

been urged that though they are seen through comparatively small

telescopes they are not seen when a very large instrument is used; and

it has also been said that observers, knowing what they wished to see,

simply imagined they did see it. We have, however, abundant proof that

both these arguments are unreliable and incorrect.



"It is a well-known fact that when a faint object has been once seen

through a telescope, others are able to see it through a smaller

instrument. This was the case with the satellites of Mars, which have

been seen with much smaller instruments than that used to discover them.



"The fact that such objects are really seen is proved by the observer

marking them on his drawing in their correct position, although they may

have moved from the point at which they were originally seen.



"I will give you an illustration of the ease with which it is possible

to overlook something that should be clearly visible to you, yet it is

not seen by you until your attention is called to it by some one else.

Almost every one has had some such experience:-



"You may have on the front of your coat a small stain, or grease-spot,

in a position where you could plainly see it, yet might wear the coat

for days or even weeks in complete unconsciousness of the existence of

the stain until some one pointed it out to you. After that you cannot

look at the coat without seeing the stain, and it becomes so

persistently obtrusive that you are compelled to have it removed. There

is, however, no imagination about your seeing the mark."



John here said to me: "Professor, I noticed you said that many who do

not believe in the actuality of the lines and markings on Mars

frequently refer to the fact that, while they are stated to be seen

through small telescopes, they are quite invisible through a very large

instrument, and they regard this as proving that the lines or markings

do not exist. Is there not something in this argument?"



"Well, John," I replied, "the argument sounds not only plausible, but

reasonable, and inexperienced persons might use the argument, believing

it to be a sound and good one. I must, however, confess that I have

been surprised to see this argument used by persons who must surely know

that there is no weight in it at all.



"It is well known to all practical observers, and indeed to all who have

studied optical matters, that, for several reasons, very large

telescopes are quite unsuited for the observation of fine planetary

detail.



"The real advantage of these enormous instruments lies in their great

'light-grasp,' which enables observers to see very faint points of

light, such as small satellites of planets, faint stars, double stars,

distant comets, or nebulae, which could not be seen with a smaller

instrument necessarily having less 'light grasp.' Yet this very excess

of light, which is the great advantage of a large instrument, is one of

the things that spoils the definition of faint planetary details; it

drowns them all out, or 'breaks them up.'



"Again, these large instruments are much more liable than smaller ones

to what is termed 'chromatic' and 'spherical' aberration; and this also

is detrimental to definition. No very large refractor is entirely free

from these defects.



"Another objection is that, in using such large and long-focussed

instruments, a much higher power must necessarily be employed than in

the case of smaller instruments. This high power magnifies all the

little movements and disturbances in our atmosphere to exactly the same

extent as it magnifies the object looked at, with the result that these

disturbances blur out all fine detail. The canal lines on Mars could

never be seen in such circumstances. If the object were looked at

through a smaller instrument, with lower power, it might be fairly well

seen, for the atmospheric disturbances would not be magnified to such

an extent as to spoil definition.



"There are very few nights in the year when these immense instruments

can be used to advantage on the planets, whilst a smaller instrument

might define well three or four nights out of every six. It is on record

that the user of Lord Rosse's great reflector stated that there were

only about three nights in the year when its best definition could be

obtained; and its use has produced very meagre results, compared with

what had been anticipated.



"It is also almost universally recognised that in using these great

instruments, whether for photography or for the visual observation of

fine detail, it is absolutely necessary to stop down the aperture to a

very large extent, by reducing it to about 12 inches in diameter or even

less. The big telescope is thus really converted into a small one of

long focus.



"There is, in addition, the acknowledged fact that nearly every

discovery of new detail on planets has been made with a comparatively

small telescope, although the same objects may have been under constant

observation for years with big telescopes. The new detail was never

noticed until after it had been seen with a smaller instrument, and

perhaps only then when atmospheric conditions were unusually good.



"As an instance, I may mention that the faint 'crape ring' of Saturn was

seen by Dawes when using an 8-inch aperture to his telescope; yet it had

never been discovered with the large instruments, although the planet is

one that is under constant observation when in a position to be seen.



"I could give innumerable instances of similar cases, but enough has

been said to show that because some object cannot be seen in a very

large telescope, it is no proof at all that the object does not exist.



* * * * *



"Amid the chaos of varied, and often self-contradictory, theories

respecting Mars-some abandoned by their own authors; others in which

facts and conditions had to be assumed for which there was not only no

evidence, but actual disproof by many recorded observations-Professor

Lowell's conceptions stand out clearly and boldly.



"They are all founded on the results of prolonged and systematic work in

the observation of the planet, not only by himself but by numerous

colleagues-work in which many of his critics have had little or no

experience under favourable conditions. His conceptions fit in with

observed facts with all the accuracy of the pieces in a child's picture

puzzle; whilst his logical deductions are supported and enhanced by his

wide knowledge of physical science and planetology.



"Yet, as I have both heard and read, his views and discoveries have been

described as 'sensational,' 'fanciful,' 'fairy tales,' and by other

terms which I would rather not quote.



"Underlying some of these objections there seems to be an idea that some

reason must be found for opposing anything and everything which would

tend to indicate the possibility of intelligent life existing upon any

other planet than the earth; although it is difficult to understand why

such a possibility should be so abhorrent. It is a view that does not

commend itself to me, but I need not say more on that point.



"Nicola Tesla, the great electrician, is, however, convinced of the

existence of life upon Mars, and he has expressed in very emphatic terms

his opinion of the opposite view, which, however, I refrain from

quoting. He says that Mars must have passed through all terrestrial

changes and conditions, and that the whole arrangement of the canals, as

depicted by Professor Lowell, would seem to be artificially designed. He

then goes on to state that he has discovered electrical disturbances on

the earth which must have come from Mars and no other planet.



"In the treatment he has received from some of his smaller critics

(whose vehemence is usually in inverse proportion to their knowledge of

his work and writings) Professor Lowell has had an experience similar to

that of many other observers who have done good work.



"If an observer be blessed with the happy combination of good eyesight,

a good instrument, and favourable atmospheric conditions, and publishes

writings and drawings showing that he has seen something which has not

previously been observed, he at once becomes a target for captious

critics who seem to be under the impression that all astronomical

knowledge begins and ends with themselves, and that anything they cannot

see does not exist. It matters not that the observer attacked may have

given months to particular observations where his critics have only

spent a few hours: he is told that his drawings are incorrect and do not

represent the planet; that they may be works of art, but do not

represent facts; that he possesses a very vivid imagination, and so on.

This procedure may be persisted in until at last the victim either turns

and rends his critics or ceases to publish his drawings or records, to

the great loss of many others who take an intelligent interest in his

work.



"Professor Lowell's telescope is over 32 feet in focal length, and has

an object glass of excellent quality 24 inches in diameter, the work of

the celebrated Alvan Clark. Thus, whilst not one of the giants, it is

not exactly what would be termed a small instrument, and few indeed of

the critics have anything approaching it in capacity, while none enjoys

the advantage of such ideal conditions in the situation of his

observatory.



"I was therefore much amused in reading an effusion by one critic who,

in discussing the question of the canal lines, remarked that he could

not accept 'these one-man discoveries,' oblivious of the fact that they

are the discoveries of many observers. He then very naively gives the

illuminating information that his astronomical experience is confined to

the 'observation' of the moon for about six months, by the aid of a

1-1/4-inch hand-telescope! Surely, when confronted with a critic of

such vast experience and so wonderfully equipped, Professor Lowell must

retire discomfited from the field!"



At the conclusion of my remarks both John and M'Allister expressed their

thanks, saying that "Now they were informed as to the points on which

our scientists were not agreed, they would look forward with still

greater interest to our arrival at our destination, for they were as

anxious as I was to solve the mysteries of the red planet."



More

;