[BIRD-LIKE REPTILE DISCOVERED BY DARWIN.]
But we are asked, is it not true that the most accurate and reliable geologists, have discovered in the rocky records of former ages the most undeniable evidence that the earliest birds were of a strangely reptilian character, and that many of the reptiles of that age were of an extraordinary bird-like character? That in some cases it is difficult to determine which predominated to the greatest extent, the characteristics of the reptile, the bat or the bird? These animals were evidently amphibious, living either on land or in the sea. Some specimens still extant which were found in Mexico and South America and which are identical with, or closely resemble the extinct species, possess the double character of an aquatic and terrestrial animal. Some of them advance beyond the development common to the class, and from gill-breathers, fitted, only to inhabit the water, become lung-breathers adapted to live on land.
[REPTILIAN BIRD BY HUXLEY.]
Is it not also true that the remains of the earliest birds indicate them to have been of an aquatic character similar to the cranes, gulls and pelicans of the present time? Some of these were destitute of horn bills which birds of the present age possess. On the other hand their heads resembled those of reptiles. Neither were their wings always covered with feathers, but in some cases their wings resembled those of the bat, and their feet closely resembled those of reptiles. Now, says the skeptic, is it not possible that reptiles and birds lived upon the earth previous to the creation of beasts? And, further, is it not possible that birds and reptiles may have been developed from the same original type, whereas Moses declares that God made the beast of the earth after his kind?
Not so fast, my friend. It is well known that these declarations of science are mere speculations, plausible indeed, but nowhere proven to be true. Granting all that the infidel asks, let us carefully read the sacred record and see if there really is any contradiction: "And God said. Let the waters bring forth abundantly the living creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven." (Gen. i, 20). Had Moses written, "And God now created every living thing that moveth in the waters," there might have been some reason for infidel objections. We should therefore especially notice that Moses does not say that this was the first dawn of animal life upon our globe, but simply that the waters were now to "bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl," etc. In all this there is no inconsistency between the geological and Biblical statements. On the other hand the wording of the text is such as to lead the student to believe that birds were of aquatic origin, that is, lived on the water.
In the twenty-first verse we are told that God created great whales (literally sea-monsters) "and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind and every winged fowl after his kind." And here we also perceive that the waters are again represented to be as it were the nursing mother of both birds and the lower orders of animal life. Mark also that the term "created" is used only three times in the whole of this record; first in reference to the creation of the earth, second in reference to sea-monsters, and third in reference to the creation of man.
[PIECE OF CHALK HIGHLY MAGNIFIED.]