OBJECTIONS TO EVOLUTION 179 



vastly remote, for we know that the amphibians of 

 the Carboniferous age had lungs, and that these must 

 have been evolved from the lungs or air-bladders of 

 the fishes of the preceding age. 



Are we to assume that organs so highly developed 

 as lungs have been independently evolved several 

 times? If, on the other hand, the living Dipnoi are 

 the descendants of the fishes of the Devonian, whose 

 air-bladders performed the office of lungs, how can we 

 account for the fact that the lungs of the Dipnoi are 

 still rudimentary? Why have they not made progress 

 in evolution in the many million years? We are told 

 that the theory of progress in organization is consis- 

 tent with the theory of lack of progress in some 

 members of a group. 



This doctrine which I have already discussed, seems 

 to me to be wholly inadequate to explain the great 

 and frequent discrepancies that exist in all classes of 

 the animal kingdom. 



We might continue the inquiry as to the evolution 

 of special organs until we had exhausted the list, and 

 in each case find that evolution of an organ through 

 its incipient stages is inexplicable. 



The organs which spiders possess for secreting 

 material and for making a web could not have been 

 gradually evolved. The whole apparatus involved in 

 making the web would be useless until sufficiently 

 developed to make a web. 



The same is true of the sting of the scorpion, the 

 stings of bees, the mandibles of spiders with the 

 gland of poisonous fluid at the base, and the poison 

 apparatus of serpents. All of these glands for secret- 

 ing poison would be useless until they could secret a 

 harmful fluid. Are we to assume that the perforated 

 sting of the scorpion, including the gland of poison 



