St Johns College - Ozanam Yearbook (Toledo, OH)

Page 23 text:

THE OZANAM 15 assistance to the ducks. Before their webby feet became of any use for swimming they were probably a hind- rance to their walking. So before the ducks showed any signs of being able to swim away Mother Nature could have laid hold of them and extin- guished their kind. Thus, says Chesterton, the two dogmas of Dar- winism together make the difficulty to Darwinism. It is dogma that only by degrees can a creature be complete- ly equipped. It is dogma that it per- ishes if it is incompletely equipped. That gradual changes are essential is certainly not borne out by figures or fossils in the earth's strata. The few of the latter Cin the case of ani- mals and menj that have been found have shown remarkable degrees of dif- ference rather than of similarity. The case of the horse, which the Darwin- ians point to as their best example, is founded on a few bones of very dis- tant relation to one another. We would expect them to furnish an ar- ray of fossils that would show no more striking differences than a line of yearly models of Fords. Instead they construct around a jawbone a skeleton that embodies their idea of what a horse of this or that period should look like. Chesterton thinks there is something queer in itself in the way in which the Darwinians have put all their money on this one par- ticular horse. Some of the arguments for Darwin- ism seem to be quite against it. Others are founded on absence of evidence. An arch-like structure is built, but the keystone is left out. A building is erected but no consideration is made for the foundation. The missing link is really missing in other words, and the fun is beginning now that peo- ple are realizing that it has never really been present. In Evolution then the failure of the theory is simply the failure to find these links. The absence of them is what renders the theory useless for working purposes. The links in the case of the horse are so far apart that there is no semblance of a chain. Those in the case of the evolution of man are even more so. It is this ap- palling scarcity of proof that is caus- ing the scientists to dismiss the great theories of universal evolution. The wonder is not that scientific men are giving up their belief in Evo- lution but that they have held to it so long. But they are a persevering lot, these men. As they go deeper into the subject they find the matter more and more complicated and Evolution more and more hard to prove. The more fair-minded scientists are begin- ning either tacitly or openly to re- verse their opinionsg the more obsti- nate cling to universal Evolution as a fact, without having any positive evi- dence for it. One wonders why intel- lects so great are content to spend their lives scratching the surface of truth-they cannot even agree among themselves on possible connections to the missing linkg if they had a greater passion for truth, and a little humil- ity, they would, undoubtedly, find it easier and more advantageous to bring God more into their scheme of things. In the case of the million dollar tooth, found recently in Nebraska and supposed to belong to an anthropoid, there is a slight diversity of opinion. One authority claims that it is more like a human than an ape toothg an- other that it is the tooth of an extinct bearg a third that it is that of a South American monkey. And yet the Amer-

Page 22 text:

Dying Theories By C.uu.1r'roN A. SoLoN For the past few years the spark of life that has been sustaining Darwin- ism in particular, and Evolution, in general, has been slowly dying out. The theories that at one time claimed the attention, if not always the belief, of men of science are losing their popularity, so much so, in fact, that the teaching of them is being rather violently suppressed in the schools of many of our states. With something more than casual concern the people of the nation are following the legal proceeding that will decide whether such theories will be taught in the future or not. Their fate lies in the hands of a court in Tennessee. Wheth- er it is policy to legislate against the teaching of such subjects is a ques- tion. That it is being done is a fact. And this fact shows clearly enough that the tide of feeling is turning against Evolution. These theories are more than losing their popularityg they are being attacked with a ven- geance. Having seen several philosophies rise and collapse in his own day, Mr. G. K. Chesterton, writing in the Co- lumbia, is not at all surprised at what is taking place. After observing how beliefs become popular, flourish a while, and pass away, he is convinced that Darwinism came to be adopted as a fad rather than as a proven hypo- thesis. I am as certain, he writes, as one can be of concrete things that all society was chattering about Dar- win like a monkey-house before it knew whether Darwin traced men to monkeys or monkeys to men. I am sure that the eyes of society ladies sparkled, and grave bankers nodded and smiled, and great crowds in thea- ters and public halls were swayed eas- ily to laugh and cheer, by the mere name of Darwin without the vaguest notion of Darwinism. Is it any won- der that these dogmas are about as fleeting as the very styles of the day. People are not likely to cling to some- thing vague, especially if they have no particular reason for so doing. And when they awaken to the fact that they don't even know what they have been believing, they feel sheepish, they feel as if they had been swindled. And they abandon their beliefs. So it is that the democratic reaction is setting in against Darwinism, what Chesterton considers one of the most interesting events in all modern history. Perhaps the best way to show some of the weak points in the Darwinian theory is to take a typical example of it. Mr. Chesterton has one of these to bring out the idea effectively. Mother Nature, having to satisfy the appetites of her customers, suggested to her ducks that they come and be killed for the purpose. As this was not in keeping with the ducks' ideas of self-preservation they swam away to some well removed island in the lake. Those not so well fitted for swimming were caught, those better fitted got away, laid their eggs on an island, and brought forth a race of swimming ducks. That is the Darwinian's conception of how that particular type of water- fowl came into existence. Chester- ton's difficulty is briefly this: the ad- vantage of being able to swim at some future time would be of no practical

Page 24 text:

16 THE OZANAM ican Museum of Natural History val- ues this tooth so highly as a clue to the missing link that it sends out an expedition to find another like it. That's downright devotedness to a cause, even if it is a hopeless cause. Not so long ago a new link was dis- covered in South Africa. Embedded in rock in a cavern were found the remains of the figure, said to be not ofean ape-man but of a man-ape. Rev. R. J. McWilliams, S. J., commenting on it in America, finds Dr. Hrdlicka believing it probable that the remains date from Tertiary times. Only a probability exists. The Jesuit con- cludes that unless he is of Tertiary times he is no ancestor of man, in the evolutionary sense. And since it is not certain that he lived in Tertiary times, it is not certain that he is the forerunner of man. After a time the investigators will become convinced that the skull is only that of an ani- mal after all. The world will enjoy the little joke and the scientists will dig up another-skull or joke, which- ever way you take it. In the Commonweal of May 13, Rev. William L. Hornsby points out the case of prominent men of science changing their ideas on Evolution. He is surprised to find Louis T. More publishing a volume entitled the Dog- ma of Evolution and he inquires, Is evolution losing even its dubious status as a scientific hypothesis, and sinking to the level of a mere dogma, a teaching accepted only on author- ity? In the book under discussion Professor More points out inconsis- tencies in the terms and methods of reasoning employed by such men as Huxley, Professor Conklin, and oth- ers. He shows how some of them to hold the theory of Evolution are il- logical and untruthful. The theory gives them plenty of difficulties to contend with. In the same article a Chicago Uni- versity professor is quoted as saying that the question of the transforma- tion of species is no longer important to biologists. Going through a long list of English, French, German, and American scientists, Father Hornsby gives the attitude of these men toward Evolution and their reasons for as- suming an adverse position. In his opinion the theory of the transforma- tion of species will gradually be aban- doned as certain facts, irreconcilable with the theory, are established as they are being established right along. If not only the great mass of people but the men of science as well are turning away from Evolutionary the- ories, their end is assured. People who took to these theories as a fad are no longer interested now that the novelty has worn off. The arguments advanced in support of the hypotheses have proved suicidal. The missing links, as one critic remarked, have met one of two fates: they con- tinued to be missing or they ceased to be links. The evidence was lament- ably lackingg scientists disagreed on what little there was. Men began to see how utterly insupportable their theories really were. The Evolution- ary hypothesis has had its day.