126 PROF. H. LANGHORNE ORCHARD, M.A., B.SC., ON 
annihilation without trace is so extremely improbable that it 
may be pronounced impossible.”* Lamarck’s idea that, through 
its own effort, a creature changed into another of different 
species, has been exploded bv its inherent absurdity. A frog 
does not suo molu turn into an ox, however he may swell him- 
self. The idea that species transmutation may be effected by 
changing the environment, is refuted by Lyellff and more 
recently by Dr. Dallinger’s classical experiments on monads ; 
and heredity, reversion, and hybridism, corroborate the 
testimony of experience. The same refutation applies to 
the hypothesis that one species came out of another by direct 
immediate generation — a “ grotesque conception ” which retains 
whatever difficulties are connected with “special creation,” 
whilst destitute of the reasonableness which harmonises them. 
Attempt to derive Man from the lower animals . — The preceding 
considerations, negativing all species transmutation, apply to the 
attempt to derive man from the lower animals. Such attempt 
is further beset with peculiar difficulties, difficulties with regard 
to his body, with regard to his soul, with regard to his spirit. 
Of the first class are such matters as the explanation (on 
evolution principles) of the character and order of formation of 
the teeth, the upright position and the great toe, the brain and 
association centres, as well as this “ highest animal’s ” young- 
antiquity, and his sudden appearance, difficulties which are 
recognised, though reluctantly, by evolutionists themselves. 
Every attempt to prove the assumed descent of man by 
anatomical reasoning must be held to have broken down. As 
Mivart has pointed out, the method is radically vicious. 
Man should be considered as a Whole . — 
“We ought” (he says) “utterly to reject the conception that 
mere anatomy by itself can have any decisive bearing on the 
question as to man’s nature and being as a whole, f To solve this 
* Not only are there no genetic links, but Lord Kelvin, Sir Robert 
Ball, Professor Sollas, and others have shown that the whole time which 
has elapsed since the introduction of terrestrial life, is a small fraction 
only (say one-hundredth) of that required by evolutionists. (See Edward 
Fry, in Monthly Review , December, 1902.) 
t See Principles of Geology (Chapter ix of the earlier editions to the 
ninth). The Rev. J. T. Gulick maintains ( Evolution , Racial and Habitual , 
Washington, 1905) that segregation and isolation are essential. “ Isolation 
is an essential factor in the production and maintenance of divergent 
types.” Does this isolation occur in nature ? 
| Professor H. Nicholson says — “The fallacy lying at the root of 
Evolution is in imagining that resemblance of body, or limb, or embryo, 
denotes affinity.” (Ancient History of the Earth.) 
