Now, does not this sample show, as far as human common sense can be
depended on, that the great majority of these stones come from the
Lake mountains, sixty or seventy miles north of Liverpool? I think
your common sense will tell you that these pebbles are not mere
concretions; that is, formed out of the substance of the clay after
it was deposited. The least knowledge of mineralogy would prove
that. But, even if you are no mineralogist, common sense will tell
you, that if they were all concreted out of the same clay, it is most
likely that they would be all of the same kind, and not of a dozen or
more different kinds. Common sense will tell you, also, that if they
were all concreted out of the same clay, it is a most extraordinary
coincidence, indeed one too strange to be believed, if any less
strange explanation can be found--that they should have taken the
composition of different rocks which are found all together in one
group of mountains to the northward. You will surely say--If this be
granite, it has most probably come from a granite mountain; if this
be grit, from a grit-stone mountain, and so on with the whole list.
Why--are we to go out of our way to seek improbable explanations,
when there is a probable one staring us in the face?
Next--and this is well worth your notice--if you will examine the
pebbles carefully, especially the larger ones, you will find that
they are not only more or less rounded, but often scratched; and
often, too, in more than one direction, two or even three sets of
scratches crossing each other; marked, as a cat marks an elder stem
when she sharpens her claws upon it; and that these scratches have
not been made by the quarrymen's tools, but are old marks which
exist--as you may easily prove for yourself--while the stone is still
lying in its bed of clay. Would it not be an act of mere common
sense to say--These scratches have been made by the sharp points of
other stones which have rubbed against the pebbles somewhere, and
somewhen, with great force?
So far so good. The next question is--How did these stones get into
the clay? If we can discover that, we may also discover how they
wore rounded and scratched. We must find a theory which will answer
our question; and one which, as Professor Huxley would say, "will go
on all-fours," that is, will explain all the facts of the case, and
not only a few of them.
What, then, brought the stones?
We cannot, I think, answer that question, as some have tried to
answer it, by saying that they were brought by Noah's flood. For it
is clear, that very violent currents of water would be needed to
carry boulders, some of them weighing many tons, for many miles. Now
Scripture says nothing of any such violent currents; and we have no
right to put currents, or any other imagined facts, into Scripture
out of our own heads, and then argue from them as if not we, but the
text of Scripture had asserted their existence.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account