332 
PALEONTOLOGICAL GEOLOGY 
is impossible, let me answer that I, too, used to think that way. 
For minds that are not biased, there is ample room for discussion 
on that subject. 
First of all, let us recall the fact that geologically we have not 
yet accounted for the presence of so many large mountain features 
on the Earth, as a suggestion, that we should not be too hasty 
in concluding as to the basic causes for the mountains on the 
Moon. The reason that we cannot yet account quantitatively 
for the origin of all the mountain structures here is probably, 
because (on the principle that great results come generally from 
a convergence of causes) some one of the major causes has been 
overlooked. The omitted factor is probably that of life as a 
geologic process in the making of mountains. That living things 
compose one of the great geologic processes is of course well 
enough known, but we do not seem to have given magnitude 
enough to it, in our theories, as to cause and effect in relation to 
mountain-building. The suggestion that life on the Earth may 
be the first cause of the building of mountains here, if not on the 
Moon, may seem a little startling, but is, I believe, well worth 
thinking about seriously, though not too seriously, of course. 
The great obstacle to a full and clear consideration of the 
relations of organic forces to the origin of mountain ranges of 
the Earth and the other planets, is the theory of spontaneous gen¬ 
eration of first life — a theory to which zoologists are wed, as 
nicely shown in the excellently written article already cited. It 
is not the intention now to protest against any atheistic, or mechan¬ 
istic, hypothesis that may hold that inspiration in man, along with 
the life of animals and plants, has originated from an immensely 
complex concatenation of physica-chemical circumstances only, 
except to say, that it must stand on its own merit. The mechan¬ 
istic view that life arose from matter that was not living, but 
became living at some fictitious time in the past, if accepted dog¬ 
matically, cuts out other important considerations. For example, 
it assumes that life began, which we really do not know yet, and 
that it is the consequence of things of which it may be really the 
cause — such as mountains. Accordingly I feel free to consider 
it as not probably true, as follows. 
Living things, as we see them now and in the geologic record, 
are morphologically a unit group so that it is not necessary to as- 
