by Charles Darwin
I recently read Mr. Darwin’s On the Origin of Species, and I thought Mr. Darwin made some very good points, but as someone who is not scientifically inclined, I wanted to get the opinion of someone who knows more about the topic. So I have enlisted the help of my acquaintance, Mr. Rodney Chesterton*, a colleague of Mr. Darwin’s, who can perhaps shed some more light on the subject. Without further ado, Mr. Chesterton …
Thank you, Ms. Ver Halen. As you all know, Mr. Darwin’s new book has created quite the sensation, not just in the scientific community, but in the world at large. It has caused significant dispute in the Church of England, which I feel cannot be soon healed. I therefore feel it is my duty, as a scientist, to bring to light what I consider to be some very serious flaws in Mr. Darwin’s theory.
To begin with, his theory of a Glacial Era allowing organisms to travel across oceans and continents is preposterous, and he provides absolutely no evidence to back up his claim. It seems to me that this theory is nothing more than a convenient device for him to explain away some substantial holes in his theory, namely how members of the same genus ended up on different continents. He claims that, by believing in his theory, the mystery is easily solved, but I must beg to differ. Without a sound foundation, there can be no solution. Without solid evidence, science devolves into the realm of speculation and superstition and we, as scientists, cannot allow this to happen.
I have another, similar complaint, and that is his theory that the history of the world provided to us by fossils is grossly incomplete. In this he does not quibble about arguing with some very prominent members of the geological community. The presumptuousness of this assertion astounds me. To be sure, most of us can agree that the geological history provided to us is incomplete, but to assume that it is incomplete to the degree which Mr. Darwin’s theory requires us to go, cannot be borne on the evidence given to us. Like his insistence on a supposed Glacial Age, I can see this as nothing more than a convenient invention, which Mr. Darwin can use to explain away some of the rather large holes in his theory.
Sadly, failing to provide a proper lack of evidence for his theory appears to be a theme for Mr. Darwin’s new book. Throughout his work, he claims that numerous instances exist to support his theory, but sadly, he never seems to have the time to articulate them all. Instead, he is content to provide one or two examples and expects us to take his word for it that others such exist. Such lazy science may be enough for the layman, but it will never be sufficient for the true student of nature.
I must take issue with but one more of Mr. Darwin’s statements: that certain anomalies can be explained only by belief in his theory. Not only does this strike me as extremely presumptuous, but it sounds, to me, as if Mr. Darwin suffers from a severe lack of faith, for who can ever truly know the plan of our Divine Creator? His intentions are well beyond our understanding, and for Mr. Darwin to suppose that he understands all of nature, which was created by a being far more powerful and knowledgeable than ourselves, is beyond my limits of tolerance. Mr. Darwin would be well advised to return to the limits of experimentation and leave the rest to fortune-tellers and writers of fiction.
*Rodney Chesterton is a figment of my imagination, created purely for the sake of argument, and not a true source of scientific knowledge.