RATIONALISM.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 871, 18 July 1910, Page 2

RATIONALISM.

Sir,—Tour correspondent, -Mr. E. T. Evans, in your Saturday's issue endeavours to discredit the authority of scientific men who teach that all organic forms of life- have; descended from protoplasm that was first originated in the sea. Hβ tells us that Professor Huxley once believed this; us thoujh Huxley surrendered that- belief. Till his death Huxley maintained the doctrine of descent. As to tho slime dragged up from the Atlantic that Huxley named Bathybius and thought contained a low form of life, contrary to tho statement of Mi. Evans that he had not the manhood to admit thut ho had discovered a mare's nest, Huxley was one of tho first.to admit his error when Dr. John Murray demonstrated that Bathybius wits nut an oiganism at all (vide Tlic Study of Animal Life, page 219, by J. Arthur Thumpsoii, a distinguished zoologist, Edinburgh , ). Mr. Evans's little story has often been retailed by orthodox apologi&s ivho wished to illustrate tho fallibility of science. But. despite Huxley's crrol', the non-existenco of Bathybius was not proved by the failure of the Olmlleiiger explorers to find it. Hueckel still believed in its existence, and his constancy -was to some extent justified by 'the fact that in 187 a Bessels, on a North Polar expedition, dredged from 92 fathoms of water in Smith's Sound abundant quantities oi closely-similar slime. He observed its vital movements, and called it ProbiBathybiua. As to the human rare having evolved from primeval life in tho sea, in view of the immense body of facts supplied by comparative anatomy and other allied branches of science no reasonable thinker acquainted with the facts can doubt this common origin of all existing forms of nnima.l life from- a primitive form. Mr. Evans says "thai: it is very gratifying to learn that all scientific meii are now agreed that Darwin was wrong," implying that Mr. Jl'Cabo discredited Charles Darwin in his theory that man was descended from the same common stock as the apes branched off from. Mr. Evans's remark shows that he docs not understand the doctriuo of descent, for Charles Darwin held that even the ancestral form of man and tho apes was derived from still lower forms that would extend back to ono or more original forms, xhe trouble with such discreditors of science as Mr. Evans is that they do not tato the trouble to understand, clearly_ what they attempt to criticise. Such individuals do raoro harm than good (o Christianity. There arc many Christian clergymen who accept evolution as a fact, and who admit that it is a process of gradual creation. In fact, the evidence is so overwhelming that no other theory but tho one of gradual development of nil organic forms will bear examination. In conclusion; sir, in exposing i>lr. Evans's errors and misconceptions of evolution, I think the public will be nblo to appraiso the value of Ins knowledge and ability when he ironically sneers at the learning of the Rationalists. 1 hanking you, sir, in anticipation,—l am, etc., ARTHUR TALBOT. .'Wanganui, July 11, 1010.