EVOLUTION.

Manawatu Standard, Volume LIII, Issue 263, 4 October 1933, Page 2

EVOLUTION.

(To the Editor.) Sir,—ln replying to your correspondent, W. E. H. Creamer, who presumes to write in defence of the evolutionary hypothesis, may I say it is tiie usual kind of defence that is put up from this source. In having to use such words as. "ignorant," "halfwitted" and "fanatical"' (and this by dragging in a subject which has nothing at all to do with the matter under consideration) betrays the greatest weakness in one's' cause. However, wo are presented with another evolutionary monstrosity. Herbert Spencer did start us off at a supposed indefinite something and led us up to the conclusion of "continuous differentiations and integrations," whatever, that might mean. And the other evolutionist writer quoted in my letter of the 29th ult. started us off unrolling a tiny piece of jelly for, a few million years and witli remarkable dexterity, although in the natural order of things unrolling brings about diminution. Yet with our evolutionists' begetting scheme, the thing unrolled grows larger and takes to itself a tail, and after a few more million years of unrolling throws its tail away—not its nose in this case—and goes on unrolling until it unrolls itself up to man, and then a dead stop. In all the guesses of the evolutionists quoted in my former letter there seemed to be some attempt to convey the notion that there was a rising from the mysterious jelly to what we know as man. Some German scientists in later years have reversed the evolutionary machine and set it running backwards so that monkey is now claimed to be a degenerate man. But your correspondent's monstrosity beats the lot, for in his fertile imagination ho has hatched something which surely entitles him to a topmost position amongst scientific guessers, for he has found a man that was made both before and after the animals. These animals surely then must have, broken in the middle, half evoluting downward to a man on the downward side, the other half evoluting upward to a man on the upward side, producing a man at both ends. This queerest creature, | too it is claimed, was produced by; God's creative power, your correspon- j dent quoting Gen. 1: 20-26 and Gen. I 2: 18, 19 in support of his anamor-! phosis. We will give him the full benefit of his own statement, which is, "I read that man was made both before and after the animals." If he will read those Scriptures again, apart from his evolutionary and devolutionary bias, he will read no such nonsense., He will notice in Gen. 1: 20-26 that man was created (not evoluted) after all the animals, and then in Gen. 2: 19 he will read an amplification of the account of man's and animals' creation as set forth in Gen. 1: 20-26, showing that man's body and the beasts were made from the dust of the earth, and not protoplasmic jelly out of the sea. Thus we have the majestic statement of man being created in the imago of God, as set over against the invented fable of men in the socalled "working hypothesis, evolution." Truly, "God hath made man upright" (not a little animal wriggling along on its belly) "but they have sought out many inventions." —Eccles. 7: 29.—1 am, etc., WESLEY RICHARDS. DRAINAGE BOARD DISCUSSION. (To the Editor.) Sir. —In the report of the meeting of the Manawatu Drainage Board of yesterday, alarm was expressed by members at the slowness of the work on the Mangaone Stream job. The relief workers on this job were taken to task for not being 100 per cent, efficient navvies. Do not the members of the board know that all classes of workers are unfortunate to be on the unemployed list? Do they realise that relief work is especially for unemployed whether first-class navvies or not? Now, sir, the money for this work is being provided by the Unemployment Board from the wages tax and levy imposed on all for this purpose. Is it in the province of any one body to say what class of man they shall employ, when the money is provided free by another body? The members of the Unemployed Workers' Movement realise that this alarm is so much nonsense, as it is only paving the way for the piecework or contract system that is shortly to be brought into operation by the Unemployment Board backed up by such bodies as the Manawatu Drainage Board. Why all this camouflage? Why not tell the people, especially the relief workers, that they are going to put into operation the contract system on relief works? Is it that too many relief workers have too much time on their hands and that in the opinion of the members of the Drainage Board they should be made to work a full week under the contract system for the same allocation as at present, because this is just what their expressions convey. Possibly it may also be the paving of the way for married men's camps. The farmers are crying out that they cannot get labour for their farms, because men prefer camps to farm work, yet farmers still persist in advocating further camps for the unemployed. Where are we drifting to ? Soon under the .present system and the policy of the Government and its supporters all workers will-be unemployed and doing rationed work at the expense of the public. This was the downfall of Home. Our organisation claim the only solution of the problem to get the unemployed back into useful channels of employment and off the rationed labour market is> trade union rates of pay on all work. This can be done if the Unemployment Board spent all the money collected on the unemployed. Work begets work, unemployment begets unemployment.—We are, sir, PUBLICITY COMMITTEE, UNEMPLOYED WORKERS' MOVEMENT. 3/10/33.