[the_doc]

The question of whether the Hox protein effect can block limb develoment at the beginning of embryonic development is significant. The guy in the article seems to be claiming that the Hox protein effect does not do this, and the other journal snippets don't seem to be contradicting him.

(In any case, I still think the evolutionists are grasping for straws ton support their theory that mutations explain everything.

For example, I notice their originally very excited claim that the valine-leucine switch at position eight in hemoglobin improves malaria survivability. Well, I would gladly take my chances with malaria rather than have sickle-cell anemia.)

[Nebullis]

The question of whether the Hox protein effect can block limb develoment at the beginning of embryonic development is significant.

I don't think it's significant at all. Embryonic development is all about timed sequential expression of genes. These segmentation and homeobox genes are dependent on morphogenetic gradients at precise points in development. Suppression of limb development simply can't occur at the beginning of development, it has to occur at that point in development when the normal sequences for limb development are activated.

Wells, trained as an embryologist, knows better. He seems to imply that genic suppression is not a critical factor in embryogenesis. I suspect he is bothered by the results in these papers.