PALEONTOLOGY 101 



and if "no conclusions can be fairly based upon it, 

 merely from the absence of testimony," why should 

 the evolutionist attempt to use this fragmentary 

 record in support of his theory? 



If, as Darwin claims, the known forms are abso- 

 lutely as nothing in number compared to the un- 

 known, if we know but one species in a thousand 

 that has existed, how can we with safety determine 

 from the one known species what the thousand un- 

 known species were? Evolution presumes to do this, 

 for it asserts that the unknown were intermediate 

 forms between known species. It demands, in the 

 first place, that the absence of these forms shall not 

 go to negative its claims, and then it proceeds to sup- 

 ply the nearly entire and enormous absent record and 

 make it conform to its own necessities. 



Darwin says that in our present condition of knowl- 

 edge "it seems to me to be about as rash to dogma- 

 tize on the succession of organic forms throughout 

 the world, as it would be for a naturalist to land for 

 five minutes on some one barren point in Australia, 

 and then to discuss the number and range of its 

 productions."* 



This means that from our extremely fragmentary 

 knowledge of extinct species it is impossible for us to 

 determine the order of their geological succession, — 

 the great majority of the species being, it is claimed, 

 entirely unknown to us. 



Evolution, however, does take very definite 

 grounds with regard to the kinds of species and to 

 their order of succession. It asserts that nearly all 

 species of animals that have existed are unknown to 

 us, that all the infinite number of lost species were 

 either connecting links between known species, or 

 that they were genetically related to them. 



* Origin of Species, p. 285. 



