304 ATMOSPHERIC FACTOR IN EVOLUTION. 



nurture of the various parts in the way that shall be best for t3:e 

 organism as a whole. In this way, certain cells under the skin 

 are gradually so modified by a change of nutrition that dark 

 pigment is deposited within the cells, thus acting as a shade to 

 fhe rest of the body. 



Take, again, the lizard-like creatures that used to live in the 

 Karroo many million years ago. They are supposed to have 

 arrived with short, feeble, crawling limbs ; but finding here a 

 series of swamps they gradually developed powerful walking legs. 

 We know the explanation according^^to Darwin : the gradual evo- 

 lution of the long strong legs by the weeding out of the weak- 

 lings, or rather of the short legs. 



According to my theory, the all-wise nurture regulating centre 

 in all the lizard-like animals knew at once of the new condition, 

 and recognised the extra work that these new conditions put on 

 the limbs. Therefore, for the good of the organism as a whole, 

 an extra supply of nourishment was sent to the limbs, at the 

 expense of the other parts. The limbs of all animals gradually 

 respond to this liberal treatment, and gradually increase in length 

 and strength. No need here for the slaugihter of the weaklings. 



Take another instance, suggested by this last one. Some ani- 

 mals, when they lose a limb or part of a limb, have the power 

 of renewing the lost part. How does Darwinism explain this? 

 According to my theory, as soon as a limb is lost, the centre 

 knows, and knows, too, that it is for the good of the organism 

 as a whole to have the lost member replaced. The centre there- 

 fore sees that the usual, or more likely an extra, supply of nour- 

 ishment is sent to the damaged part till the lost limb is replaced. 



Cases such as the last would seem to indicate that this centre 

 in the lower organism has a greater power of controlling, regu- 

 lating or altering the organism than in the higher forms. And 

 this is as we would expect ; the lower, that is, the younger, a form 

 of life is, the more plastic it is. 



Now to return to the objections to Darwinism : I have already 

 mentioned two. 



(3) Natural selection, according to Darwin, is, as Prof. Arthur 

 Thomson puts it, Siva the Destroyer. It works by weeding out 

 the weaklings, by a slaughter of the innocents. In my Negro 

 example, if the "white skins" 'had found their new country 

 "flowing with milk and honey" and therefore had no struggle 

 for existence, no evolution, according to Darwin could have taken 

 place. 



(4) The fittest do not always survive. In war times, the 

 bravest and best usually volunteer. The stay-behinds have the 

 best chance of surviving. \A^hen the volunteers go into battle, 

 again, the stay-hehinds have the best chance of survival. So^ 

 too, with animals in the battle of life. In herds of gregarious 

 animals, the boldest of those that wander furthest afield run the 

 greatest risk of being caught by carnivora. We even see this in 

 a brood of young chickens; the best foragers are the ones most 

 likely to come to grief. The result of our observations may be 

 summed up thus. The pioneers run the most risk, the lag- 

 hehinds and the stay-at-homes have the most chance of surviving. 



