Page images
PDF
EPUB

from each other in the depositories from which they were drawn ? If thrown up successively from separate repositories, would they naturally be deposited from the waters of the ocean in separate layers? If introduced into the ocean in that manner, would the slight intermixture of them naturally take place, that is now seen in the strata? What is the third fact which gives confirmation to this view? Show how, if injected into the waters of the sea in the manner we have supposed, they would be diffused over wide areas. What may be presumed to have been their form when ejected into the ocean? Did their union in granules and larger bodies take place then probably or at a later period ?

What explanations of important phenomena are furnished by these views that corroborate their truth? Could such elevations and depressions of the rocky surface of the earth as exist, have taken place, had the globe been as many geologists hold it once was, in a state of fusion ? State the reason. How is it that heat and expansive gases are generated ? Is all the latent heat evolved in matter that is in a state of perfect fusion ? Were the interior of the globe in a state of fusion, would it necessarily be in a state of repose, so far as the generation of gases is concerned ? Would volcanoes, be impossible in such a globe ? Is this consideration overlooked by the geologists, who hold that the earth is now a molten ocean, except a thin rocky crust which forms its surface? Are the phenomena of earthquakes, volcanoes, and the elevation and dislocation of the surface, explicable on the views we have advanced ? Show how these great processes may have been produced. Does this view of the causes of these great movements allow of their repetition as often as the strata indicate that they have taken place? Show how.

Do these views suggest an explanation of the great accumulation of vegetable matter in the localities where coal exists? Is it apparent that the materials generally, of which coal beds are formed, did not grow in the places where the coal lies? What is the proof of that fact? Is it clear also that the whole materials of a bed, must have been deposited at once, not slowly accumulated? What is the

proof of that fact? Can they have been borne to the places where they were buried, by rivers? Why not? What then is the only force that could have swept them together? State in what manner it might happen. How does it appear that the materials of the coal beds were deposited in a short space? How does it appear that the strata which lie next above the coal, were immediately formed over them? What indicates that the strata in which the relics of animals are buried, were deposited with rapidity? What is the testimony of Mr. Daubney respecting it? Would the larger animals have decayed if they had not been immediately involved in the earthy and mineral matter in which their remains are preserved ? Does the condition also of shells indicate that they were buried suddenly in the beds of mud which were their birth-place and residence; not swept from them by violent currents and long exposed to erosion and fractures before being interred in the strata in which they are now found ? What is the testimony of Sir T. H. De La Beche respecting it? Do all these facts confirm the view we have advanced, by showing that the strata were formed with rapidity ?

CHAPTER XVI.

The Materials of the Strata derived from the Interior of the Earth.

This view of the mode in which the materials of the strata were introduced into the oceans and seas, suggests the probable reason that those animals that were invested with a covering of silex or lime, swarmed at periods in certain localities, in infinite numbers. The infusion into the waters of the ocean at those points, of the elements of which their shells are formed, perhaps at a temperature equal to or above that of the equatorial seas, and that rendered their propagation practicable through the whole year, may have been the cause of their extraordinary multiplication. The slight animalcula whose silicious sheaths are in a few places accumulated in vast masses, cast their coverings periodically, and, like other creatures of that order, multiplied with a rapidity in an inverse ratio to their minuteness. The bulk of their relics is not greater, perhaps, in proportion to their power of increase, than that of some larger animals. There is, at least, no satisfactory explanation of their infinite multitude on any other theory. The supposition of vast ages during which they existed, is altogether

[ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors]

I starsze 1 ir tual art other of the Oro root out azi tiut salierous maris o TL Ernarist. Trust nara were unare TENCERE vider, from the interior of the eari: az. vir tue but i which they are saturated igre beel ejected work with ther! Temin tuat bola exist in the depths of the earrin at it it & DOLEDienas tiemeti in many of the Tocane rott: 210 a 2 as is an ele Lent of uriatic acis Wie is one of the most common and arout of the cases erined fron rolcs

Does.

“ Mariatie acid seems to be generated during almost all the phases of Tolcanie action ; for aithongh some have attempted to establish a class of volcanoes to which the production of muriatic acid was peculiar, yet it would par that there were done from which this gas is not in ter or less quantity disengaged.”Daubney's Droprown Volcanoes, p. 607.

from each other in the depositories from which they were drawn ? If thrown up successively from separate repositories, would they naturally be deposited from the waters of the ocean in separate layers? If introduced into the ocean in that manner, would the slight intermixture of them naturally take place, that is now seen in the strata? What is the third fact which gives confirmation to this view? Show how, if injected into the waters of the sea in the manner we have supposed, they would be diffused over wide areas. What may be presumed to have been their form when ejected into the ocean? Did their union in granules and larger bodies take place then probably or at a later period ?

What explanations of important phenomena are furnished by these views that corroborate their truth? Could such elevations and depressions of the rocky surface of the earth as exist, have taken place, had the globe been as many geologists hold it once was, in a state of fusion ? State the reason. How is it that heat and expansive gases are generated ? Is all the latent heat evolved in matter that is in a state of perfect fusion ? Were the interior of the globe in a state of fusion, would it necessarily be in a state of repose, so far as the generation of gases is concerned? Would volcanoes, be impossible in such a globe ? Is this consideration overlooked by the geologists, who hold that the earth is now a molten ocean, except a thin rocky crust which forms its surface? Are the phenomena of earthquakes, volcanoes, and the elevation and dislocation of the surface, explicable on the views we have advanced ? Show how these great processes may have been produced. Does this view of the causes of these great movements allow of their repetition as often as the strata indicate that they have taken place? Show how.

Do these views suggest an explanation of the great accumulation of vegetable matter in the localities where coal exists? Is it apparent that the materials generally, of which coal beds are formed, did not grow in the places where the coal lies? What is the proof of that fact? Is it clear also that the whole materials of a bed, must have been deposited at once, not slowly accumulated? What is the

« PreviousContinue »