Allthis, simplytaken, isbeyondcavil, unlesstheattempttoexplainscientificallyhowanydesignedresultisaccomplishedsavorsofimpropriety.
Intheotherplace, Darwiniscontemplatingthepatentfactthat "perfectionherebelow" isrelative, notabsolute—andillustratingthisbythecircumstancethatEuropeananimals, andespeciallyplants, arenowprovingtobebetteradaptedforNewZealandthanmanyoftheindigenousones—that "thecorrectionfortheaberrationoflightissaid, onhighauthority, nottobequiteperfecteveninthatmostperfectorgan,theeye." ? Ifheinsiststhatgreenwoodpeckerswerespecificallycreatedsoinorderthattheymightbelessliabletocapture, musthenotequallyholdthattheblackandpiedoneswerespecificallymadeofthesecolorsinorderthattheymightbemoreliabletobecaught? Andwouldanexplanationofthemodeinwhichthosewoodpeckerscametobegreen, howevercomplete, convincehimthatthecolorwasundesigned?
Astotheotherillustration, isthereviewersocompleteanoptimistastoinsistthatthearrangementandtheweaponarewhollyperfect (quoadtheinsect) thenormaluseofwhichoftencausestheanimalfatallytoinjureortodisembowelitself? Eitherwayitseemstousthattheargumenthere, aswellastheinsect, :
"Weshouldinlikemannerobjecttothewordfavorable, asimplyingthatsomespeciesareplacedbytheCreatorunderunfavorablecircumstances, atleastundersuchasmightbeadvantageouslymodified."
