Proofs of Evolution. 315 



ABSTRACT OF THE DISCUSSION. 



Me. Nelson J. Gates: — 



In discussing this subject, I labor under the disadvantage of 

 almost entire agreement with the lecturer. The proofs of Evolu- 

 lution are of the nature of mathematical demonstrations. As in 

 geometry the statements as to the relations of lines and figures are 

 a reflection of the nature of things, — of that which cannot be other- 

 wise, — so in evolution the history of the development of a single 

 cell is of the nature of a statement of axiomatic law. The law of 

 development is within, not without, and we need 'only apprehend 

 it to see its truth. Simple laws are readily seen to be thus axiom- 

 atic, but in a complex problem we cannot so readily educe the law; 

 but it is there nevertheless. The debatable ground at present in 

 Evolution is the question of the origin of life. Evolution has not 

 yet proved that spontaneous generation has occurred, but its as- 

 sumption that the forces of Nature were sufficient to cause the 

 appearance of life is justified by the known facts of biological de- 

 velopment. The other alternative, that of special supernatural 

 creation, has nothing but ignorant tradition to support it. Spon- 

 taneous generation is shadowed forth by the strange phenomena 

 of frost-work, in which we often see the forms of ferns and flowers 

 imitated perfectly. The process of crystallization is akin to the 

 process of growth in organic forms. 



Dr. Kobert G. Eccees: — 



While the popular mind is somewhat slow in grasping the truth 

 of Evolution in its comprehensiveness, yet it is a fact that all men 

 are evolutionists, whether consciously or not, in the things that 

 they know — so far as their actual knowledge goes. In our own 

 minds the thoughts that are most fitted to the environing person- 

 ality are those that survive. Even in theology, the influence of 

 Evolution is evident. Indeed, the founder of Christianity himself 

 accepted the principle of Evolution: "First the blade, then the ear, 

 then the full corn in the ear." The principle of continuity is one 

 that is often overlooked by evolutionists. The illustration used 

 by the lecturer, of the fish using fins for land locomotion until 

 they developed into legs, is one that enforces this point. There 

 is nothing new in itself; but there is continually new synthesis. 

 In the past is the foundation of all that shall appear in the future. 

 You and I differ on some subject; we are neither wholly right; we 

 each have a part of the truth ; we compare experiences and thoughts, 

 and synthesize them into a new truth that is complete for both of 

 lis. Wrong synthesis is the trouble with the theologians. In the 



