The disciples of Jesus were asked, “Have any of the rulers of the Jews believed on him?” Perhaps before you purchase you ask, Have any men of scientific notoriety endorsed these views? Of the many scores of good words given by editors, lawyers, doctors, ministers, teachers, and professors in colleges, I have room only for a few. Prof. David Swing of Chicago said: “The Neptunian theory of creation, as presented in Dr. Woodman’s book, is the most logical presentation of cosmology that I ever read. He writes in a calm and truthful style.” The late Prof. Norton of the Cal. State Normal said: “You have chosen an opportune time for the presentation of your book, for the theories of cosmology are on the eve of a mighty revolution, in which the water theory is likely to come to the front.” Prof. Reid, President of the State University, said: “The subject, as you present it, is wonderfully in accordance with what we see in Nature; and it is still more wonderful that you should find it so beautifully set forth in the Bible.” Prof. LeConte, of the same University, said: “Your theory is a wide departure from everything hitherto written upon the subject. I will say this of it; it accounts for more unexplained phenomena than any theory before presented. I will give you this item, which I know to be correct. The Magnolia tree in the Tertiary period, grew and blossomed as far as 80 degrees north.” Numerous bodies of clergymen have endorsed the theory as a just and beautiful presentation of Scripture; many as the “only theory with which Moses’ Genesis of Creation can be reconciled.” The say-so of others may satisfy the indolent and careless, but to enjoy the subject you must read and digest these grand truths for yourself. CHAPTER I. Three Theories Reviewed in the Light Of Scientific Facts. In the study of Nature, aided only by natural phenomena, effect, suggesting cause, is everywhere apparent. These effects variously compounded point with accuracy only to secondary causes. First causes are hidden far behind all existing appearances. Unaided nature leaves man to seek first causes only by hypotheses. As might be expected, on the same subject scientists widely differ in theory. Such reasoning must ever leave a large margin for opinion. Notwithstanding the uncertainty of all such modes of reasoning, still that hypothesis must ever possess the greatest weight, that best accords with the largest number of existing facts. Reasoning _a priori_, from the providing care of nature’s God, as seen in stores of coal, oil, iron, copper, and various kinds of precious metals, we might reasonably conclude that he who created the intellectual as well as the religious nature in man would carefully provide for the full gratification of both. Knowing God’s nature, reason would suggest that what is wanting in nature must somewhere be supplied by special revelation of God.