FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   126   127   128   129   130   131   132   133   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   144   145   146   147   148   149   150  
151   152   153   154   155   156   157   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   >>   >|  
ady observed, we must remember that this correlation between a geographically restricted habitat and the zoological or botanical affinities of its inhabitants, is repeated over and over and over again in the faunas and floras of the world, so that merely to enumerate the instances would require a separate chapter. Furthermore, the general argument thus presented in favour of descent with continuous modification admits of being enormously strengthened by three different classes of additional facts. The first is, that the correlation in question--namely, that between a geographically restricted habitat and the zoological or botanical affinities of its inhabitants--is not limited to the now existing species, but extends also to the extinct. That is to say, the dead species are allied to the living species, as we should expect that they must be, if the latter are modified descendants of the former. On the alternative theory, however, we have to suppose that the policy of maintaining a correlation between geographical restriction and natural affinity extends very much further back than even the existing species of plants and animals; indeed we must suppose that a practically infinite number of additional acts of separate creation were governed by the same policy, in the case of long lines of species long since extinct. Thus far, then, the only answer which an advocate of special creation can adduce is, that for some reason unknown to us such a policy may have been more wise than it appears: it may have served some inscrutable purpose that allied products of distinct acts of creation should all be kept together on the same areas. Well, in answer to this unjustifiable appeal to the argument from ignorance, I will adduce the second of the three considerations. This is, that in cases where the geographical areas are not restricted the policy in question fails. In other words, where the inhabitants of an area are free to migrate to other areas, the policy of correlating affinity with distribution is most significantly forgotten. In this case species wander away from their native homes, and the course of their wanderings is marked by the origination of new species springing up en route. Now, is it reasonable to suppose that the mere circumstance of some members of a species being able to leave their native home should furnish any occasion for creating new and allied species upon the tracts over which they travel, or the terri
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   126   127   128   129   130   131   132   133   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   144   145   146   147   148   149   150  
151   152   153   154   155   156   157   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

species

 

policy

 

creation

 

inhabitants

 

allied

 

restricted

 

suppose

 

correlation

 
question
 

additional


native

 

adduce

 

affinity

 

extinct

 

geographical

 

extends

 

existing

 
separate
 

answer

 

argument


affinities
 

geographically

 

habitat

 

zoological

 

botanical

 

unknown

 

ignorance

 

reason

 

unjustifiable

 

appeal


appears

 

served

 

distinct

 
inscrutable
 

products

 
purpose
 

circumstance

 

members

 

reasonable

 

tracts


travel

 
creating
 
furnish
 
occasion
 

springing

 

origination

 
migrate
 

considerations

 

correlating

 

distribution