Essays Upon Some Controverted QuestionsHuxley, Thomas Henry
Religion
Essays Upon Some Controverted Questions
Huxley, Thomas Henry
Science
Notwithstanding, therefore, that we have not witnessed within the last
three thousand years the devastation by deluge of a large continent,
yet, as we may predict the future occurrence of such catastrophes, we
are authorised to regard them as part of the present order of nature,
and they may be introduced into geological speculations respecting the
past, provided that we do not imagine them to have been more frequent
or general than we expect them to be in time to come (vol. i. p. 89).
Again:--
If we regard each of the causes separately, which we know to be at
present the most instrumental in remodelling the state of the surface,
we shall find that we must expect each to be in action for thousands of
years, without producing any extensive {274} alterations in the
habitable surface, and then to give rise, during a very brief period,
to important revolutions (vol. ii. p. 161).[70]
Lyell quarrelled with the catastrophists then, by no means because they
assumed that catastrophes occur and have occurred, but because they had got
into the habit of calling on their god Catastrophe to help them, when they
ought to have been putting their shoulders to the wheel of observation of
the present course of nature, in order to help themselves out of their
difficulties. And geological science has become what it is, chiefly because
geologists have gradually accepted Lyell's doctrine and followed his
precepts.
So far as I know anything about the matter, there is nothing that can be
called proof, that the causes of geological phenomena operated more
intensely or more rapidly, at any time between the older tertiary and the
oldest palæozoic epochs than they have done between the older tertiary
epoch and the present day. And if that is so, uniformitarianism, even as
limited by Lyell,[71] has no call to lower its crest. But if the facts were
otherwise, the position Lyell took up remains {275} impregnable. He did not
say that the geological operations of nature were never more rapid, or more
vast, than they are now; what he did maintain is the very different
proposition that there is no good evidence of anything of the kind. And
that proposition has not yet been shown to be incorrect.
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