| → has been explained, 1872 |
| explained in the last chapter, 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869 |
|
| → OMIT 1869 1872 |
| through natural selection 1859 1860 1861 1866 |
|
| →
Creation
.—
1866 1872 |
|
Creation
.
—
1869 |
|
| → clear in the case of 1869 1872 |
| distinctly limited in 1859 1860 1861 1866 |
|
| → OMIT 1869 1872 |
| such cases as 1859 1860 1861 1866 |
|
| → OMIT 1869 1872 |
| having been formerly united to Europe, and consequently 1859 1860 1861 1866 |
|
| → quadrupeds with the rest of Europe, for they were no doubt once united. 1869 1872 |
| quadrupeds. 1859 1860 1861 1866 |
|
|
must originally have proceeded from the same source, as they
descended from the same progenitor. In the case of those species, which have undergone during whole geological periods
little modification, there is not much difficulty in believing that they
have migrated from the same region; for during the vast geographical and climatal changes which
have supervened since ancient times, almost any amount of migration is possible. But in many other cases, in which we have reason to
that the species of a genus have been produced within comparatively recent times, there is great difficulty on this head. It is also obvious that the individuals of the same species, though now inhabiting distant and isolated regions, must have proceeded from one spot, where their parents were first produced: for, as
→has been explained,
it is incredible that individuals identically the same should
have been produced
→OMIT
from parents specifically distinct. |
|
→
Creation
.—
|
| We are thus brought to the question which has been largely discussed by naturalists, namely, whether species have been created at one or more points of the
surface. Undoubtedly there are
many cases of extreme
in understanding how the same species could possibly have migrated from some one point to the several distant and isolated points, where now found. Nevertheless the simplicity of the view that each species was first produced within a single region captivates the mind. He who rejects it, rejects the
of ordinary generation with subsequent migration, and calls in the agency of a miracle. It is universally admitted, that in most cases the area inhabited by a species is continuous; and
a plant or animal inhabits two points so distant from each other, or with an interval of such a nature, that the space could not
easily passed over by migration, the fact is given as something remarkable and exceptional. The
of migrating across
sea is more
→clear in the case of
terrestrial
than perhaps
any other organic beings;
accordingly, we find no inexplicable
of the same
inhabiting distant points of the world. No geologist
any difficulty in
→OMIT
Great Britain
→OMIT
possessing the same
→quadrupeds with the rest of Europe, for they were no doubt once united. But if the same species can be produced at two separate points, why do we not find a single mammal common to Europe and
or South America? The conditions of life are nearly the same, so that a multitude of European animals and plants have become naturalised in America and Australia; and some of the aboriginal plants are identically the same at these distant points of the northern and southern hemispheres? The answer, as
|
