Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1904-12-24
THE APE THEORY

Som time ago II was noticed that
scientists no longer are satisfied with
the Darwnlan theory OF the origin Of
species. Now, a contributor to The
Chicago Record. Herald takes up that
discussion and points out that differ
emit theories generally depend upon dif.
ferent interpretations placed upon facts
known and admitted. ut Is easy he
says, 10 re-read very different mean
ngs from the same facts, and 10 end
false readings from a limited number
OF facts throughout the entire lltera-
ture OF evolution. There is almost
nothing final about science Every
phase Of NE IS capable Of higher, truer
interpretations, and doubtless this will
continue 10 be 80. This conclusion is
justified by the very theory Of evolution
itself"
Our author Is particularly emphatic
IN his protest against the so-called
"tall theory" He challenges the prop
osltlon OF Haeckol. that the rudmen-
tary little tail OF man Is an IrreCutable
proof Of the fact that he is descended
from tailed ancestors" He illustrates
his position by the evolution Of the
typewriter H. he says. any one "
these scientists win go to m exhibition
Of typrewrltng machines he win See IN
dubItable proofs Of the evolution OF
that useful article In each Of the drst
dozen Invented he viii note a mcchanl-
cal principle. In the next dozen In the
ascending scale be win find that prln-
cIpIe repeated. exactly IN five or six
cases, and modified in others In the
third dozen Of the ascending series he
win ind new principles Of more i'm
portance, or the original mechanical
principle eliminated and superseded by
another Thus we find "yestlges' and
"rudlmentary structures somewhere
along the line IN the evolution Of every
mechanism Now, ! wish TO ask II this
proves that one machine gave birth to
or caused TO exist the next machine In
tho ascending scale2
The question he answers In the neg
alive and continues:
Compare the physical organisms OF
q man and an ape and there seems 10
be much reason IN the DOrWinl9n the
Dry that man is descended from q
hairy tailed Quodruped, probably ar
boreal In IT, habits However those
who believe this theory have compared
only the physical organisms The very
moment that the attempt Is made 10
compare an abe with q man as In
diyIdull entities, taking into account
their whole natures. then the theory
utterly fails The two species d'G'r
too radically in their essential idenu-
ties The distinction between man and
'he animal ls the absolutely lmpassa-
Bile gulf OF rational and moral capacity
Neither apes nor natural selection ever
produced human beings"
The similarity observed can be. We
ora told much more satisfactorily ac-
counted for by assuming that God or
nature Cthe name makes no dfference)
has used some OF the same materials In
various combinations to create every
structure that exists. "The same or
ganlc and mechanical principles are re
Deltod over again In various species
but that fact does not prove that one
species ever produced another and dif-
faront species, II simply proves that
the ne forces Of nature are proceeding
on established lines, with variations
more or less efficient IN accordance
with the general tendency OF progress
II Is @ question upon which science
certainly has not spoken It's last woras
History as far as yts testimony goes Is
against the ape theory. As we turn
lbs pages and motto the ancestry Of the
race, We do not find a gradually de-
scendng scale toward the animal
kingdom, We notice names such as
Calico and Isaac Newton, Luther,
shapespeare, Paul, Plato, Aristotle.
Socrates, Scion. Solomon, David.
Moses. Abraham, Noah. No matter how
tar back we follow the beaten path Of
history, there Is no trace Of an animal
ancestry, And even back Of recor Tod
history. man has raised his eternal
monuments, that testify to lofty gem
ius, ideals, aspirations as far removed
from the intellectual sphere OF mon.
keys, as heaven Is from earth His
tory Is decidedly against the ape the