Darwinism stated by Darwin himself: Characteristic passages from the writings of Charles DarwinDarwin, Charles
Science
Darwinism stated by Darwin himself: Characteristic passages from the writings of Charles Darwin
Darwin, Charles
Evolution (Biology)
The several difficulties here discussed, namely--that, though we find
in our geological formations many links between the species which now
exist and which formerly existed, we do not find infinitely numerous
fine transitional forms closely joining them all together; the
sudden manner in which several groups of species first appear in our
European formations--the almost entire absence, as at present known,
of formations rich in fossils beneath the Cambrian strata--are all
undoubtedly of the most serious nature. We see this in the fact that
the most eminent paleontologists, namely, Cuvier, Agassiz, Barrande,
Pictet, Falconer, E. Forbes, etc., and all our greatest geologists, as
Lyell, Murchison, Sedgwick, etc., have unanimously, often vehemently,
maintained the immutability of species. But Sir Charles Lyell now gives
the support of his high authority to the opposite side; and most
geologists and paleontologists are much shaken in their former belief.
Those who believe that the geological record is in any degree perfect
will undoubtedly at once reject the theory. For my part, following
out Lyell’s metaphor, I look at the geological record as a history
of the world imperfectly kept, and written in a changing dialect; of
this history we possess the last volume alone, relating only to two or
three countries. Of this volume, only here and there a short chapter
has been preserved; and of each page, only here and there a few lines.
Each word of the slowly-changing language, more or less different in
the successive chapters, may represent the forms of life which are
entombed in our consecutive formations, and which falsely appear to us
to have been abruptly introduced. On this view, the difficulties above
discussed are greatly diminished, or even disappear.
HOW COULD THE TRANSITIONAL FORM HAVE SUBSISTED?
[Page 138.]
It has been asked by the opponents of such views as I hold, how, for
instance, could a land carnivorous animal have been converted into
one with aquatic habits; for how could the animal in its transitional
state have subsisted? It would be easy to show that there now exist
carnivorous animals presenting close intermediate grades from strictly
terrestrial to aquatic habits; and, as each exists by a struggle for
life, it is clear that each must be well adapted to its place in
nature. Look at the _Mustela vison_ of North America, which has webbed
feet, and which resembles an otter in its fur, short legs, and form of
tail. During the summer this animal dives for and preys on fish, but
during the long winter it leaves the frozen waters, and preys, like
other polecats, on mice and land animals. If a different case had
been taken, and it had been asked how an insectivorous quadruped could
possibly have been converted into a flying bat, the question would have
been far more difficult to answer. Yet I think such difficulties have
little weight.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account