isphere, showing how they were changed by climate, food, etc., so that eventually animals coming from the eastern hemisphere to the western[1] would become new species. In this connection he emphasizes the fact, also pointed out by Kant, that man must study the changes taking place in his own period in order to understand those which has been accomplished in the past, and might be accomplished in the future.
Even at the time when he believed most thoroughly in evolution and variation, Buffon was troubled by the Bible account of creation, and wavered between the two. Some time after 1766 he abandoned his advanced stand on evolution, and concluded that species were neither static nor changeable, but instead that "specific types could assume a great variety of forms[2]," and that no definite assertions might be made regarding the origin of any particular animal or plant.
One cannot but wonder what was the cause for Buffon's confusion and changes of attitude. From special creationist to radical evolutionist, and then to conservative occupying a position
- ↑ In Buffon's day the Americas were still the "New World," and it was customary with naturalists of the time to consider it new, not only in discovery, but in its plant and animal inhabitants. For them, the animals of America came from the Old World, just as did its white settlers; the idea of opposite migrations was quite unheard of. How different this conception was from the actual state of affairs can be seen by reference to such books as Osborn's "Age of Mammals."
- ↑ Osborn, op. cit. p. 138.
