How could you possibly know that - and what on earth would lead you to infer it? It must be your suspicion that any question raised about any purported evidence for the theory of evolution is intended as an attack on the theory itself. I think I know why you feel that way, yet it hardly seems a scientific outlook. In fact, it's every bit as dogmatic as the viewpoint you find so threatening.
BTW, and for what it's worth, I was not lying when I said I have no quarrel with the general theory of evolution. I am not a scientist myself, but I did raise a son who is now quite distinguished as a biologist, so I am not one of your fundamentalist foes. I do not think my son shares the "circle the wagons" outlook you guys exhibit here. Frankly, it's embarrassing.
1. Your bringing the subject up in the first place, as if it were relevant to the discussion. 2. Your failure to put the Haeckel episode in context when you did bring it up. I took high school biology in 1959, and Haeckel was presented in the same terms as he would be now.
I would like for you to present some evidence that Haeckel's "ontology" theory has had any support in mainstream biology in the last hundred years, much less support based on wishful thinking or fraud.
I'm looking back at your posts and thinking you are lying about your position, possibly lying about your son, and definitely lying about your support for evolution.
No one parroting so many creationist buzz words can claim to know anything about evolution.