298 ATMOSPHERIC FACTOR IN EVOLUTION. 



animal. In fact if animal life had not been evolved on this planet 

 but plant life only, then long ago, in fact many millions of years 

 ago, this world of ours would have been a howling wilderness 

 with an atmosphere void of carbon. 



We thus see that organic evolution has proceeded among the 

 two lines of plant and animal ; and from the fact that they are 

 each dependent on and helpful to the other, it might be argued 

 that here we have evidences of design and pre-arrangement. Now 

 design and pre-arrangement in a case like this, presuppose 

 omnipotence and omniscience. I do not suggest that the 



pre-arrangement meant certain special acts of creation or special 

 interferences with the workings of Nature's laws then in force. 

 The logical position to take is, that there has been pre-arrange- 

 ment all through. This means that we accept the theory that 

 nothing happens by chance ; but that everything happens accord- 

 ing to general laws fixed at the beginning, laws that are as 

 uniform and unalterable in their action as the law of gravitation. 

 Our problem is to find evidence of some such general law in 

 accordance with which the evolution of organic matter has been 

 brought about. 



I have already stated my opinion that the change in the atmos- 

 phere has been the dominant factor in bringing about this evolu- 

 tion ; but what is the law in accordance with which this change of 

 atmosphere, that is, this change of food, has brought about this 

 change of organism? 



Let us turn to Darwinism for a little. We find that 



Darwin in his "Origin of Species " takes no account of atmos- 

 pheric change. He never mentions it. He practically ignores, 

 too, tne effect of the change of food on living organisms. He 

 says : " How much a direct effect difference of climate, food, etc., 

 produces upon any being is extremely doubtful." 



Seeing then that Darwin completely ignores this atmos-' 

 pheric change, and seeing that I hold it to be so important, I 

 have had to look elsewhere than to Darwinism for the general 

 law under which organic evolution has been brought about. 

 But, meantime, I will consider Darwinism for a little, and later 

 on I will attempt to propound a new theory of my own. Darwin 

 states his position thus : — 



"As many more individuals of each species are born than can possibly 

 survive, and as, consequently, there is frequently recurring struggle for 

 existence, it follows that anv being if it vary, however slightly, in any manner 

 profitable to itself, will have a better chance of surviving and thus be 

 naturally selected. From the strong principle of inheritance, any selected 

 variety will tend to propagate its new and modified form." 

 My objections to Darwin are as follows : — 

 (i) Darwin assumes that the selected variety will propagate 

 its new form. Now there are two kinds of modifications an 

 organism can acquire. (a) Modifications acquired in the life- 

 time ; (b) innate ones born with the organism ; called also re- 

 spectively exogenous and endogenous. Now it used to be 

 accepted that the first sort, i.e., the modfications acquired in a 

 lifetime, were inherited. Indeed, Herbert Spencer once said : 



" Either there has been inheritance of acquired character or there haS 

 been no evolution." 



