The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1882-04-12
Darwinism at a Discount.

of the ascent of man from an ape, and the
gradual procession of the higher species
of animals from the lower, are decidedly
discouraging to the author of the theory.
Not few of the eminent scientists who
at first seemed to regard this ancestry of
man with great degree of veneration,
have latterly lost much of their reverence
for the ape theory, and show marked
unwillingness to acknowledge the family
relationship; while the absurd theory is
receiving heavy blows from outsiders who
were never ashamed to call God their
Father.
A late London paper has an interest
ing report of paper recently read be-
fore the Victoria Philosophical Institute
upon Breaks in the Continuity of Nam
malian Life at certain Geological Peri
DDS fatal to the Darwinian Theory of
Evolution" by Mr.. T. X. Callard, F. G.
S., which is spoken of as throwing much
light on the subject of the comparatively
recent origin of man, and being among
the most important contributions of the
philosophical and scientific disquisitions
of the Institute. An important discussion
followed, in which a number of eminent
scientists participated and which was al
together favorable to the position taken
by the author of the paper. The we'll
known geologist and paleontologist, E.
Charlesworth, remarked in the progress
of the discussion, that whilst the theory
of evolution according to Darwin gets rid
of many difficulties it at the same time
raised large number
The author has been hunting in Mr.
Darwin's own preserves, or in those of
his brothers, the biologists, and shows as
the result of his investigation that in the
geological history of the past the links
necessary to establish the theory of evolu-
ton by gradual development are utterly
wanting, while on the other hand ali
scientific history brings us up to the point
of the sudden development, or, in other
words, the actual creation of man. The
following is an extract from the paper re-
ferred to-
Man had no existence in pre-glacial
times. Every attempt to prove other
wise has signally failed. Professor Nc
Kenny Hughes, although an advocate
for the doctrine of mans antiquity, in
reviewing the present state of the evil
dence bearing upon the question emphat-
ically says that "the evidence for the
antiquity of man has completely broken
down in all cases where it has been at
tempted to assign him to a period more
remote than the post-glacial river gray
els"
Was man, then, new creation or an
evolution from an old fauna? Sir John
Lubbock has reminded us in his late ad-
dress that evolution does not mean that
a sheep might turn to a COW, or zebra
to horse That no one would more
confidently withstand any such hypo-
thesis than would Charles Darwin, his
view being not that the one could be
changed into the other, but that "both
are descended from a common ancestor. -
In the words of Darwin, "species have
descended from other species by insensi-
bly, fine graduation.
Before the glacial epoch man was not
but when it passed away, and a new
fauna appeared, man was there. When
did the evolution take place? Profess
sor Dawkins POUNDS his argument for the
non existence of man in Europe in the
Pliocene period on the fact that that in
all Europe he can only find one solitary
species of Pliocene mammal that is now
the associate of man, and he does not find
a single specimen from the Miocene.
Man, says the evolutionist, was derived
from some anthropoid ape. Did that ape
struggle through the Ice period? If man
was derived from the ape the theory re-
quires that at a certain point of time the
ape should be so near to man, or the
man to the ape, that it would have been
impossible to say whether the mammal
under consideration was man or ape.
Darwin stakes his theory upon this. He
says: If it could be demonstrated that
any complete organ existed, which could
not possibly have been formed by minute
successive slight notifications, my theory
would absolutely break down." and Pro
lessor Dawkins endorsed what Charles
Darwin says, in these words, that "be.
tween his man's] appearance in the
Pleistocene age and the present day the
time is too small to have produced APP
preciable physical or intellectual change. "
Immense time is asked for because of the
minuteness Of each successive change.
Dryopithicus is claimed to be the most
advanced of the ape kind (some of his
bones may be seen in the new Natural
History Museum) but Dryopithicus be-
came extinct in the Miocene age, leaving
the whole Of the PlioceDe to separate him
from man besides which Professor Daw-
lxinc Iioo1o ,vo.- e. l. L. Il - ( IL