The "Facts" of Some Scientists.
THE Sunday School Times pays its respects to what is commonly called "science," in the following vigorous manner:— "How rare it is for a scientist to keep his scientific observations distinct from his personal fancies and theories! How common it is for a scientist to build up a personal theory on his own limited knowledge of facts, and then to count every opponent of his theory as an opposer of science! Indeed, what is commonly called "science" is a succession of blunders and of changing theories, tending gradually toward knowledge, through the battlings of opposing visionaries and skeptics; and the so-called "conflicts of religion and science" are the conflicts of ignorant religionists on the one hand, and, on the other hand, of wild theorizers under the name of science—'falsely so called.' There is, for example, at the present time, no opposition to the scientific discoveries of Darwin and Huxley; and, practically, there is no denial of any facts claimed by them as proven facts. But there is a great deal of opposition to their wild theories in matters quite beyond the realm of their claimed discoveries. Nor is it fair for such a man as Professor Huxley to claim special respect for his opinions on theological dogmas, either vital or fossil, merely because of his familiarity with fossil horses. Yet just here is where most of the 'conflicts of religion and science' have their origin. A good illustration of the tendency of scientists to dogmatize beyond their knowledge even in their own realm of research, was given in a discussion among the geologists at the recent sessions of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, as reported in the daily press. Two well-known geologists referred to two fossil shells as found, sometimes, side by side in the same rocks. Thereupon the State geologist of New York, who had never seen those two fossils side by side in the same rock, and whose pet theory of geology would not admit the possibility of their being there, rose and dogmatized, in behalf of his theory, after the type of the narrowest theological bigot. 'If any one will show me the two spirifers side by side in the same rock,' he exclaimed, 'I will sacrifice my life's work. I will give up my reputation, eat my hat, and make the person who shows me the rock a present of my coat and boots.' Instead of dogmatizing on the other side, the defied geologist who was thus charged with geological heresy took the first train to his university, and shortly there came back a heavy box addressed to the defiant dogmatizer, containing a piece of rock with the two fossils imbedded side by side, and a note reading somewhat as follows: 'The inclosed rock contains the spirifer disjuncta and spirifer mesostrialis side by side. You can have it. Please eat your hat, and send me your coat and boots by express.' And this gives a good opportunity for the State geologist of New York to compare himself with the persecuted and maligned Galileo; while the entire skeptical world can groan in chorus over the bigoted hostility to men of science."