This phase of the idea, however, is not so bad, for the human mind refuses to believe that distant and disconnected groups of similar forms were not connected in time and genetic relationship. It is really the reverse of this proposition that contains the most essential absurdity, and this is the very phase that is most essential to the whole succession of life idea. Huxley, indeed, seems to have caught a glimpse of this truth, for he says: "A Devonian fauna and flora in the British Islands =may= have been contemporaneous with Silurian life in North America, and with a Carboniferous fauna and flora in Africa. =Geographical provinces and zones may have been as distinctly marked in the Palaeozoic epoch as at present.=" Certainly; but if this be true, it is equally certain that the Carboniferous flora of Pennsylvania may have been contemporaneous alike with the Cretaceous flora of British Columbia and the Tertiary flora of Germany and Australia. But in that case what becomes of this succession of life which for nearly a century has been the pole star of all the other biological sciences--I might almost say of the historical and theological as well? Must it not be admitted that in any system of clear thinking this whole idea of there having really been a succession of life on the globe is not only =not proved= by scientific methods, but that it is essentially unprovable and absurd? Huxley, in point of fact, admits this, though he goes right on with his scheme of evolution, just as if he never thought of the logical consequences involved. His words are: "In the present condition of our knowledge and of our methods (_sic_) one verdict--'=not proven and not provable='--must be recorded against all grand hypotheses of the palaeontologist respecting the general succession of life on the globe." In view of these startling facts, is it not amazing to see the supernatural knowledge of the past continually and quietly assumed in every geological vision of the earth's history? FOOTNOTES: [1] "Illogical Geology; Illustrations of Universal Progress," pp. 329-380; D. Appleton & Co., 1890. [2] "The Glacial Nightmare and the Flood," Preface VII. [3] "Discourses Biol. and Geol.," pp. 279-288. CHAPTER II HISTORY OF THE IDEA Among the few stray principles that the future will probably be able to save from the wreck of Spencer's philosophy, is the advisability of looking into =the genealogy of an idea=. What has been its surroundings? What is its family history? Does it come of good stock, or is its family low and not very respectable?