The Nezperce herald. (Nezperce, Idaho) 1900-1957, 1923-05-31
REV. HOFFMAN ON EVOLUTION
Biological Evolution Lecture IT

tionists. o'o
We have shown that Darwinism &
rejected by great scientists, both pres.
ent and past, because the theory &
based on false premises. Not one Of
these premises has ever been substan.
mated. These theories are neither
scientific nor rational. We viii now
proceed to consider the main argu.
ments that are made in favor of Oar.
winism. This method of approach viii
clinch our argument.
Darwin's grandson recently made
the bland statement that all men wEo
nave any legitimate claim on intelli.
genee now accept the theory that man
sprang from some lower animal simu.
iating the monkey. The younger Oar
win accepts this belief Does his ae-
ceptance of this false theory make
him any more intelligent than are the
great men of science to whom refer.
ence was made in the previous lee.
tures BY whose authority does he
claim a mentality superior to that of
such men as Virchow and Agassiz. rec
ognlzed throughout the world as TAX
ing first rank in the realm of scienceg
1T requires only an ounce of gray mat !
ter to see that these men are, to saw |
the least, the equal of any Darwinian
evolutionist of whom we have a rec.
ord. The scientists who oppose Oar,
win not only have equal intelligence,
but they have access to the same
known facts and to the same mass of
literature. But evolution is not
science. 1t is speculation. Since it is
not subject to demonstration, it must
be reasoned out. And since it can be
judged only on the basis of the ra- I
honal test, any man, whether n scien-
list or not, has right to try his wits j
On this subject. 1t is therefore gross
y unjust for such men as S. Parkes {
Jadman and Harry Emerson Fosdick ]
% relegate to the scrap-heap of men t
al obscurity such men as William Jen- I
lings Bryan. Cadman and Fosdick ac t
ept evolution. Bryan does not. Not y
me of the trio is q scientist, hence v
ne speaks with as much authority as 8
oes the other when he takes his stand 0
n the subject of evolution. Mr.. v
'ryan's arguments are better met
nth logic, not with abuse of his men, +
atty. The opponents of the great OF.
tor show their own weakness by re-
orting to the method of ridicule. If
be truth is on their side, why not :.
how its IF these men can prove their =
laims, we shall all be glad to accept
ich proof. We expect facts from a =
dentist, not abuse. Cadman recent T"
(, in an address before q great audi y
ace composed of men, when asked :"
hat he thought of Bryan's book on y
yolution, answered by saying that the y
reat commoner spoke with the voice =
! authority when he discussed moral ! !"
form, but that he made fool of '"
mself when he discusses evolution.
adman accepts evolution. Bryan does '"
IT, Neither of them is scientist. a.
ow do they arrive at their respective ~
ewsf They have read books on the
biect. Both are orators. Bryan has
higher rating as an orator than has
.dman. He is therefore far from be-
Q mentally inferior to Cadman. 1t g.
llows that he certainty has moral !;
yht to repudiate evolution, the more a.
when he produces arguments ~,
ainst evolution that no evolution be
s yet refuted by resort to the scien' in
ic method. But it is characteristic Co
the evolutionist that he does not al
sort to science. He prefers abuse. -;
,use requires less thought and is
ire noisy. The opponents of evolu-
n have the advantage of having on
,;r side the statements of many ee4
Eat scientists, who state clearly that "s' e
Dlution is only an hypothesis. Men -
% have such weak ground on which -
rest their argument had better be -
little more careful about the Ian W.
aoe they use when attacking men ia'
e BRYAN. Since the Darwinist can 'n'
show @ single fact in the realm OF -, ~
ence in his favor, it seems the part 'A'
wisdom and courtesy to be little mo W
re meek and lowly in his claims. -. :
cir arguments will be accepted at w. w.
. whenever they produce the evi- ia'
IRE. but not until then. When
,lemy and Copernicus first advanc-
their new scientific discoveries, the bui
rid was against them. But dem in
tration of the evidence in favor OF sto
se new discoveries won scholarship Gus
r. The same will be true when evo' vol
ION proves itself to be scientific. pai
,ome Irrational Claims of Darwin
.s to the origin of life, Rev. E. ". cor
mes, Sc. D., Canon of Westminster Of
sermon delivered in January, tle'
l, said: u''