598 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



can be pointed out in which he ceased to he brute and became human. 

 But in some senses the question of antiquity may be answered. It may 

 be proved that man, as we now recognize him, has existed on earth 

 more than a certain number of years. That period may be of six, ten, 

 twenty, or a hundred thousand years ; how much more we may never 

 know. And the quarrels upon the subject to-day are over the accura- 

 cy of the Mosaic estimate of 6,000 years. The question has been dis- 

 cussed on both sides by clerical dabblers. On the one hand, I have 

 heard an eminent " evangelical " divine assert most dogmatically that 

 there was absolutely no evidence to overthrow the Mosaic chronology, 

 and that all belief to the contrary was " utter delusion." On the other 

 side, I have listened to a prominent " liberal " preacher who claimed 

 that it was almost certain that man had dwelt on the earth for at least 

 4,000 centuries ! And probably neither of those estimable men had a 

 very clear conception of the subject they discussed so airily. Not 

 only does space forbid my entering at length into this subject, but, if 

 I should do so, I should lay myself open to the charge of being a sci- 

 entific dabbler. Suffice it to say that the best scientific authorities ap- 

 pear to be well agreed that man has existed for much more than 6,000 

 years. Human bones have been found under circumstances which 

 make it highly probable that they were buried at least 20,000 years 

 ago. There was not, perhaps, absolute proof, but probability. And 

 this probability, supported as it is by some evidence, is far more worthy 

 of belief than the mere unfortified assertions of the Old Testament. 

 Whatever value the latter work may have in its relations to morality 

 and religion, it is an unsafe guide in matters of science. Geology and 

 astronomy have both contended with it, and have come off victorious. 

 Perhaps its errors may exist only in the interpretations of theologians ; 

 if so, the interpreters may be deceived even now. 



I do not wish to be understood as attacking the clergy. I wish 

 only to show that science will not bear to be used for partisan pur- 

 poses. The truth must not be tampered with. And clergymen, in 

 dealing with science, are often mere special pleaders, who wilfully ig- 

 nore much evidence. There are some preachers who are controversial- 

 ly inclined, and batter away at science whenever it crosses their path. 

 And they often stultify themselves. For instance, they attack the 

 Darwinian theory, and reject it because it is not proved. But they ac- 

 cept the theory of individual creations, which is equally unproved. It 

 would be wiser for them to hold judgment in suspense, and wait for 

 the decisions of competent investigators. But here some reverend 

 gentleman may say indignantly : " What ! shall we not defend our 

 faith against the attacks of science ? " Certainly, my dear sir ; only do 

 not be careless. First make sure that your faith is attacked ; then, 

 that you understand the nature of the attack, and then give your op- 

 ponent credit for honesty equal with your own. Do not hesitate 

 to look squarely at all the evidence bearing upon the questions in 



