68 The Bible of Nature 



results, 1 and in so doing it must always argue 

 from what goes on now to what may have 

 happened long ago. 



Just as Darwin argued from the experience of 

 breeders in the nineteenth century to what might 

 have occurred in natural breeding millions of 

 years ago, so Lyell, before him, argued from proc- 

 esses of earth sculpture going on under his eyes 

 to what might have occurred in ancient days when 

 there was no eye to see. This is the only path of 

 interpretation available, but it is obviously one 

 on which we must walk warily. In appreciating 

 the value of certain factors we must work from the 

 present backward, but it is possible that the pres- 

 ent state of affairs may give us, so to speak, a false 

 start. 



Development and Evolution. It seems a confusion 

 of thought to speak of the evolution of the earth, 

 as if it were like the evolution of organisms. We 

 should rather compare the story of the earth to 



1 We have to show that A, B, and C are the antecedent 

 conditions of D, E, and F; that A, B, and C are all the 

 antecedents of D, E, and F; that D, E, and F are all the 

 consequents of A, B, and C. From actual experience we 

 must give good reason for believing that the sequences we 

 suppose to have occurred are in line, in principle at least, 

 with the sequences we study to-day. Obviously, too, the 

 modal interpretation that we give must be as simple and 

 generalized as possible. As we soon discover that the 

 same kind of sequence occurs and has occurred over and 

 over again, we make a formula for it. 



