FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240  
241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   256   257   258   259   260   261   262   263   264   265   >>   >|  
ain all that can be said of it. Nevertheless, a few months suffices to develop the one out of the other, and that too by a series of modifications so small, that were the embryo examined at successive minutes, not even a microscope would disclose any sensible changes. That the uneducated and ill-educated should think the hypothesis that all races of beings, man inclusive, may in process of time have been evolved from the simplest monad a ludicrous one is not to be wondered at. But for the physiologist, who knows that every individual being _is_ so evolved--who knows further that in their earliest condition the germs of all plants and animals whatsoever are so similar, 'that there is no appreciable distinction among them which would enable it to be determined whether a particular molecule is the germ of a conferva or of an oak, of a zoophyte or of a man'[332]--for him to make a difficulty of the matter is inexcusable. Surely, if a single structureless cell may, when subjected to certain influences, become a man in the space of twenty years, there is nothing absurd in the hypothesis that under certain other influences a cell may, in the course of millions of years, give origin to the human race. The two processes are generically the same, and differ only in length and complexity." * * * * * The very important extract from Professor Hering's lecture should perhaps have been placed here. The reader will, however, find it on page 199. FOOTNOTES: [321] 'Origin of Species,' Hist. Sketch, p. xvi. [322] See 'Naval Timber and Arboriculture,' by Patrick Matthew, published by Adam and C. Black, Edinburgh, and Longmans and Co., London, 1831, pp. 364, 365, 381-388, and also 106-108, 'Gardeners' Chronicle,' April 7, 1860. [323] 'Vie et Doctrine Scientifique de Geoffroy Etienne St. Hilaire,' Paris, Strasbourg, 1847, pp. 344-346. [324] 'Hist. Nat. Gen.,' tom. ii. 413. [325] 'Hist. Nat. Gen.,' tom. ii. p. 415. [326] Ibid. [327] Ibid. p. 421. [328] 'Hist. Nat. Gen.,' vol. ii. p. 431, 1859. [329] 'Origin of Species,' Hist. Sketch, p. xix. [330] 'Hist. Nat. Gen.,' vol. ii. p. 432. [331] See 'The Leader,' March 20, 1852, "The Haythorne Papers." [332] Carpenter's 'Principles of Physiology', 3rd ed., p. 867. CHAPTER XIX. MAIN POINTS OF AGREEMENT AND OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE OLD AND NEW THEORIES OF EVOLUTION. Having put before the reader with some fulness the theories of t
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240  
241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   256   257   258   259   260   261   262   263   264   265   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

hypothesis

 

influences

 
evolved
 
Species
 

Sketch

 

reader

 

Origin

 

Doctrine

 

Scientifique

 

Gardeners


Chronicle
 

Longmans

 

Timber

 

Arboriculture

 
Patrick
 
FOOTNOTES
 

Matthew

 

published

 

London

 

Geoffroy


Edinburgh

 

POINTS

 

AGREEMENT

 

DIFFERENCE

 

CHAPTER

 

Principles

 

Carpenter

 

Physiology

 

BETWEEN

 

fulness


theories

 
THEORIES
 

EVOLUTION

 

Having

 

Papers

 

Haythorne

 

Hilaire

 

Strasbourg

 

Leader

 

Etienne


ludicrous

 

wondered

 

physiologist

 

simplest

 

beings

 

inclusive

 

process

 
individual
 

whatsoever

 

animals