This general assertion is not true, for we daily see rocks placed above clay, sand, coal, and bitumen, and which certainly are specifically heavier than either of these latter materials. If, in fact, we found throughout the earth that the first strata was bitumen, then chalk, then marl, clay, sand, stone, marble, and at last metals, so that the composition of the earth exactly followed the law of gravity, there would be an appearance that they might have been precipitated at the same time, which our author asserts with confidence, in spite of the evidence to the contrary; for, without being a naturalist, we need only have our eye-sight to be convinced that heavy strata are often found above lighter, and that consequently these sediments were not precipitated all at one time, but have been brought and deposited successively by the water. As this is the foundation of his system, and is manifestly false, we shall follow it no farther than to show how far an erroneous
principle may produce false combinations and erroneous conclusions.
All the matters, says our author, which compose the earth, from the summits of the highest mountains, to the greatest depths of mines, are disposed by strata, according to their specific weights; therefore he concludes the whole has been dissolved and precipitated at one time. But in what manner, and at what time was it dissolved? In water, replies he, and at the time of the deluge. But there is not a sufficient quantity of water on the globe for this to be effected, since there is more land than water, and the bottom of the sea itself is earth. This he admits, but says, there is more water than is requisite at the centre of the earth, that it was only necessary for it to ascend, and possess a power of dissolving every substance but shells, afterwards to find the means for this water to re-enter the abyss, and to make all this agree with the history of the deluge. This then is the system, of which the author does not entertain the least doubt; for when it is opposed to him that water cannot dissolve marble, stone, and metals, especially in forty days, the duration of the deluge, he answers simply, that nevertheless it did happen
so. When he is asked, what the virtue of this water of the abyss was, to dissolve all the earth, and at the same time preserve the shells? he says, that he never pretended that this water was a dissolvent; but that it is clear, by facts, that the earth has been dissolved and the shells preserved. When he was evidently shown that if he had no reason to give, or facts to support, for these phenomena, his system was useless, he said, we have only to imagine that, during the deluge, the force of gravity and the coherency of matter ceased on a sudden, and by this supposition the dissolution of the old world would be explained in a very easy and satisfactory manner. But, it was said to him, if the power which holds the parts of matter united was suspended, why were not the shells dissolved as well as all the rest? Here he makes a discourse on the organization of shells and bones of animals, by which he pretends to prove that their texture being fibrous, and different from that of minerals, their power of cohesion was different also; after all, we have, says he, only to suppose that the power of gravity and cohesion did not entirely cease, but that it was only diminished sufficient to disunite all the parts of minerals, and not those of
animals. To all this we cannot be prevented from discovering, that our author's philosophy was not equal to his talents for observation; and I do not think it necessary seriously to refute opinions which have no foundation, especially when they have been imagined against the rules of probability, and drawn from consequences contrary to mechanical laws.
FOOTNOTES:
[132:A] An Essay towards the Natural History of the Earth, &c. by John Woodward.