92 EVOLUTION AND SOCIAL PROGRESS 



and fallacy than their own. For the plain truth is that, 

 though some agree in this and that, there is not a single 

 point in which all agree; battling for evolution, they have 

 torn it to pieces ; nothing is left, nothing at all on their showing, 

 save a few fragments strewn about the arena. 7 



To the objection that this must surely be an 

 exaggeration, Sir Bertram Windle answers that 

 it is nothing more than a literary expression of 

 what in a formal scientific way must be gathered 

 from Kellogg s own summaries of our evolution 

 theories. And Kellogg cannot be accused, as he 

 adds, of anti-Darwinian bias, nor does he conceal 

 his contempt &quot;for the poor deluded Catholic.&quot; 

 Such, therefore, is the haze and mist of uncer 

 tainty that like a dense cloud cover almost the 

 entire subject of evolution. 



Why then this dishonesty in classroom and text 

 book? Why this presentation of materialistic 

 evolution as an established and unquestioned fact, 

 when it was never even a credible theory, in the 

 sense that it was never based upon sufficient evi 

 dence to make of it a scientific possibility? Why 

 the open regret expressed by certain noted scien 

 tists, that after all evolution has not disproved 

 the existence of God- as most certainly it has 

 not succeeded in doing? Is materialistic evolu 

 tion merely a symptom of the disease, common 

 enough in scientific circles, which has quite cor- 



7 Times, June 9, 1905. Quoted by Sir Bertram Windle in 

 &quot;Facts and Theories,&quot; pp. 94-95. 



