| → with 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869 |
| by intermediate varieties with 1872 |
|
| → respects. 1866 1869 1872 |
| points of structure. 1859 1860 1861 |
|
| → be compelled to 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869 |
| OMIT 1872 |
|
| → believe that the great majority of naturalists are wrong and that that the 1866 |
| believe that the great majority of naturalists are wrong and that the 1861 1869 |
| admit, in opposition to the judgment of most naturalists, that these 1872 |
|
| → frequent occurrence of 1866 |
| a very general 1861 |
| the frequent occurrence of 1869 1872 |
|
|
B and C, it would simply be ranked as a third and distinct species, unless at the same time it could be
closely connected
→with
either one or both
Nor should it be forgotten, as before explained, that A might be the actual progenitor of B and C, and yet
not
necessarily be strictly intermediate between them in all
→respects. So that we might obtain the parent-species and its several modified descendants from the lower and upper beds of
formation, and unless we obtained numerous transitional gradations, we should not recognise their
and should consequently
→be compelled to
rank them
as distinct species. |
|
| It is notorious on what excessively slight differences many palæontologists have founded their species; and they do this the more readily if the specimens come from different sub-stages of the same formation. Some experienced conchologists are now sinking many of the very fine species of
and others into the rank of varieties; and on this view we do find the kind of evidence of change which on
theory we ought to find. Look again at the later tertiary deposits, which include many shells believed by the majority of naturalists to be identical with existing species; but some excellent naturalists, as Agassiz and Pictet, maintain that all these tertiary species are specifically distinct, though the distinction is admitted to be very slight; so that here, unless we believe that these eminent naturalists have been misled by their
and that these late tertiary species really present no difference whatever from their living representatives, or unless we
→believe that the great majority of naturalists are wrong and that that the
tertiary species are all truly distinct from the recent, we have evidence of
→frequent occurrence of
slight
of
the kind required.
we look
|
