APPENDIX 359 



To have thus formed all species would have re- 

 quired hundreds of thousands of isolations, which 

 were impossible. Besides, it is evident that isolation 

 could not produce variations, but could simply keep 

 varieties apart after they were formed. 



Chapter II. treats of the " phylogeny or genealogy 

 of organisms," which, he says, " can only be deter- 

 mined by paleontologic research." 



In making out the general phylogeny for the animal 

 kingdom,* he depends on embryology, and not on 

 paleontology. He claims that embryology shows that 

 such animals as star-fishes, oysters and snails, craw- 

 fishes and beetles, and all animals with backbones, in- 

 cluding man, have been derived from worms, — hence 

 the truth of the claim by theologians, that " man is 

 but a poor worm of the dust." 



Again he says: " If we could study the embryology 

 of the many extinct forms of life, the missing stages 

 would be found, but as we have not the opportunity 

 of pursuing this important research, we have to rely 

 on paleontology for our phylogeny. Paleontology is, 

 and always will he, imperfect, but all that we get is 

 palingeny, or the phylogeny itself, and not an inverted 

 and distorted record of it." t 



It would seem from this language that the author 

 discards embryology in determining phylogeny, and 

 that he would depend exclusively on paleontology, 

 and yet, as stated above, he bases general phylogeny 

 on embryology. 



The reason is evident, and that is, paleontology 

 furnishes no evidence whatever as to the origin of the 

 sub-kingdoms of animals, and consequently, he must 

 lean upon the mere assumptions of embryology. 



The author shows % some of the shortcomings of 

 embryology. It should be remembered that the old- 



* Page 81. t Page 210. % Page 209. 



