Revieios — Geo- Theology. 83 



its highest recommendation is its harmless absurdity. We have 

 seldom seen a better " Book of Nonsense." 



II. The Eev. Mr. Kiry has come under our notice before. In the 

 Geological Magazine for July, 18G6, a short review was published 

 of his " Age of Man Geologically Considered in its Bearings on the 

 Truths of the Bible." In this book the author displayed his great 

 powers of illogical reasoning, and no inconsiderable amount of dis- 

 respect towards Sir Charles Lyell. 



We regret to find but little improvement either in Mr. Kirk's 

 geology or his reasoning. He talks of " the fond partiality with 

 which favourite hypotheses are almost worshipped," and then tries 

 to throw ridicule on some of the generally accepted inferences re- 

 garding bygone periods, and to substitute in their stead hypotheses 

 invented by himself for the professed purpose of supporting the 

 Mosaic writings. His reasoning in regard to time is especially 

 faulty. 



In speaking of the upheavals and downthrows, Mr. Kirk says, 

 " It is amusing to see how happy many great minds are in their 

 enjoyment of vertical motion alone. Their sea-beds sink to no- 

 where, and their mountains and continents rise from nowhere ; but 

 they themselves are not troubled with the incongruity in the dream ! 

 Is it not possible that there may be a horizontal motion of the 

 earth's surface ? " 



Satisfied with the simple asking of the question, he proceeds, " If, 

 then, we give uj) the merely vertical movement of upheaval and 

 subsidence, with latitude maintained, and believe that since half an 

 English county could be turned over like a turf on its grassy side, 

 any number of such formations could be pushed along from tropical 

 to temperate, and thence to arctic positions on the great globe. We 

 have, at least, one line of thought marked off, by which changes of 

 climate, and all consequent changes of species, may ultimately be 

 accounted foi-." 



In this way he elucidates the origin of the London clay ! " Is it 

 not evident that this clay was formed within the tropics, and that 

 somehow it has been removed, until it lies in our northern 

 latitude ? " 



And he concludes, that "we must recast our ideas of the ex- 

 tinction of species, and alter our views of what is called geological 

 time." 



Major Twemlow gives us quite as good a theory to account for 

 the London clay. He talks of a mighty rush of waters bringing 

 tropical fruit to the valley of the Thames, and spreading drift and 

 commingling fossils as we find them ! 



That such theories should be promulgated at the present day seems 

 astonishing ; and the publication of such papers would greatly impede 

 the progress of Geological Science, if the writers were only as able 

 as they are willing to make proselytes to their own views. 



^ Geological Theories; being a Discourse on the Past and Present Relations of 

 Geological Science to the Sacred Scriptures. Eead before tke Victoria Institute. 

 By the Eev. John Kirk. Svo. pp. 51, London. 



