MAN OR APE?

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 90, 9 January 1908, Page 5

MAN OR APE?

AN ANCIENT SKELETON IN SUMATRA. PRONOUNCED NOT SIMIAN, "OPPOSED TO'THE DARWINIAN theory!" ■ BY TELEQIUIHI—IHIEJEB ASSOCIATION—COTTRIGIIT. Port Darwin, 'January,B. News from Sumatra, a Dutch-owned island in the Malay Archipolago, states that Dr. Elbert, a German geologist, who has been conducting researches in South Sumatra, reports tliat the story of the discovery by him of an ape-man is false, Dr. Elbort has found human remains, which he estimates are twenty thousand years old. They are human, not simian. His discoveries are said to be' directly opposed to tho Darwinian theory. , EVOLUTION. A FRUITFUL SCIENTIFIC THEORY. The information contained in the above cablegram is '• interesting, and may provo of some importance from a scientific point of view; but it is not likely to upset tho Darwinian 1 theory as to tho descont.of man. It is, of course, truo that subsequent scientific investigation has 1ed...t0 certain modifications! of Darwin's great hypothesis, but in its "fundamental principles it remains unshaken. As a matter of fact, Darwin's methods have proved so fruitful in other branches of seionce that his teaching regarding tho origin of man is now only one phase of tho all-embracing theory of evolution. This theory hap been built up on such broad foundations of ascertained fact that the cumulative evidence in its favour is almost overwhelming. ■ As a modern writer points out:—"Tho geologist investigating the strata' of the earth, the anthropologist studying the human species, .the surgeon studying auatomy, the astronomer investigating the. origin 'of worlds, the philologist tracing the genesis of language,'the biologist searching'out; the origins of life'; the botanist, the chemist, tho natural historian, the psychologist, all arrived at tho same conclusion, namely, that everything in tlie Universe was evolved out of something lowor, i.e., from something more simple and rudimentary.'' Man's Descent. /■ According to tli§ theory of evolution, man's pedigree does not stop at somo ape, or like animal, but goes right back : to the most remote "ancestors of ;ill living organisms, which, were beings of tho simplest imaginable kind, organisms without organs, like the still existing monora. By slow stages •of development, extending over vast periods of time, the ape eventually appeared, and the last stage, before man, is that of tho pithecanthropi, the pithecanthropus ereetus boing thus described by Haeckel :r-"In adaptation to a more erect gait, the lem have become stronger, and the hindhand has been'turned iijto n ; flat-soled walking -foot.' Tlio braiii is considerably enlarged. Presumably, it , is still devoid of so-cailed articulate speech j .this is indicated by the fact that children have to learn the language of tholr parents, and by the circumstance that comparative philology declares it impossible to reduce tho chief human languages to anything like one common origin." Haeckel sums up tho matter as follows"If we look at tho resnlts of modern anthropogeiiy from the highest point of view, and compare all its empirical arguments, wo are justified in affirming that the descent of man, from an extinct tertiary series of primates, is not a vague liypfithesis, but an historical fact." , > An Intermediate Form. Great interest was aroused in tho scientific world in 1801.,, when Dr. Eugene Dubois disr covered in Java the pithecanthropus' ereetus. This famous ape-like man, or man-like . apo, provoked an animated discussion'at the International Zoeological Congress at Leyden. Unfortunately the fossil remains nro very scanty sk'ullTCapJ a femur, and two teeth. Tho result of the' discussion was that of twelve experts present, three hold that the remains belonged to a low race of man; 'th)ee declared them to be those of ri man-like ape of great size; tho rest ■maintained, that, they"be, longed to an intermediate for pi, which directly connected primitive man ■ with the anthropoid apes, ' ■'■■. Tho Apo of Man. , It is 1 hard to'see, apart from' further information, . lioiv the discovery ■ of human remains ' 20,000 years Old can ,tend to disprove ■the Darwinian t theory. ■ On the Wr of it, the discovery simply' moans that a skeleton, which some people thought might be a "piissing'.link,"'is pronounced by Dr.' Elbort to be that of a human being, and not of ari apo, op of an ape-man. Of course, it seems to show that 20,000 years ago, man was still man, where,is, about that time, according to somo estimates, ho ought to have been a "lower animal.'.' But such estimates are nover supposed to be anything like exact, and, in any case, a period of from 20,000 to 100,000 years since man's'firs? appearance is generally .regarded as 4 minimum..