7. Variation is so slight as to be imperceptible, and, therefore, cannot account for the “survival of the fittest.” If the same progressive changes do not occur generally, if not universally, in the numbers of the same species in the same period, no new species can arise. Such general changes do not occur. 8. Natural selection could not make use of initial slight changes. “What would be the advantage of the first few hairs of a mammal, or the first steps toward feathers in a bird, when these creatures were beginning to diverge from their reptilian ancestors?” 9. Even if Darwinism should explain the _survival_ of the fittest, it does not explain the _arrival_ of the fittest, which is far more important. 10. Darwin says, “I am convinced that natural selection has been the most important but not the exclusive means of modification.” Many scientists think it of very little importance, and that it is not true. 11. “The fluctuating variations of Darwinism are _quantitative_, or plus and minus variations; whereas, the differences between species are _qualitative_.” Growth and development in one species does not produce a new species, which must be of a different kind. Miles Darden, of Tenn., was 90 inches tall, and weighed 1000 pounds, but remained a member of the human species, though he was as high and heavy as a horse. So did the giant Posius, over 10 feet tall, who lived in the days of Augustus. 12. “There is a growing skepticism on the part of biologists as to the extreme fierceness of the struggle for existence and of the consequent rigor of selection.” Overproduction and shortage of space and food might sometime be a factor of importance, but has it been so in the past? Has it affected the human race? 13. Darwin proposed the theory of gemmules. Prof. H. H. Newman says, “This theory was not satisfactory even to Darwin and is now only of historical interest.” 14. Darwin’s subsidiary theory of sexual selection has also been rejected by scientists as worthless. In view of these and other objections, is it any wonder that Darwin’s theory has been so largely rejected by the scientific world? And is it not amazing that self-styled “scientists” hold on to their precious theory of evolution, as if these objections had no weight? They can not save evolution even by rejecting Darwinism. 28. SCIENTISTS CONDEMN EVOLUTION Dr. Etheridge, famous fossilologist of the British Museum, one of the highest authorities in the world, said:—“Nine-tenths of the talk of evolutionists is sheer nonsense, not founded on observation and wholly unsupported by facts. This museum is full of proofs of the utter falsity of their views. In all this great museum, there is not a particle of evidence of the transmutation of species.” Is a man in that position not a credible witness?