148 OBGANIC EVOLUTION CONSIDERED 



of them in any definite way. I regard the so-called 

 epitome as being mostly imaginary. 



It is true that the embryos of vertebrates look 

 much more alike than do the adults, and that the eggs 

 are still nearer alike in appearance than are the em- 

 bryos, but I insist again that in fact the embryos are 

 no nearer together in essential structure than the 

 adults. If we draw lines from adults to embryos, 

 and on to eggs, these lines will not be convergent, but 

 parallel. It seems evident that the egg which can be 

 developed into a man is just as different in nature 

 from the egg of a fish as the man is from the fish. 

 The eggs are essentially unlike. We cannot say that 

 their present resemblance points to a time when they 

 were not only alike in appearance, but also alike in 

 essence. This is the claim of evolution. 



Taking fish and man, we find eggs, embryos, and 

 adults essentially unlike, and, consequently, from 

 embryology it cannot be asserted that they were ever 

 identical. To assert former similarity in essential 

 character in the face of the widest present essential 

 differences all along the line is not justifiable. 



The evolutionist seeks to break down enormous 

 essential differences by appealing to certain transient 

 resemblances. He would have us believe that the 

 egg-cells of all animals are not only alike in appear- 

 ance, but that there was a time when they were iden- 

 tical. 



The essential qualities of eggs are beyond the power 

 of the microscope to reveal. We know beyond doubt 

 that eggs and embryos which look closely alike are 

 almost infinitely different in their powers of develop- 

 ment. The thing to be accounted for by evolution is 

 the unseen difference between eggs. Present resem- 

 blances between eggs are much less significant than 

 the present invisible differences. 



