Replies

You're right. Evolution is a hoax. How do I know this? Because I was once an evolutionist, but at one of our midnight meetings in the basement of the Smithsonian, just as I was about to take another blood oath to the secret brotherhood of scientific deception, I had a moral awakening. I looked the evil devil-master S.J. Gould straight in the eye and uttered the forbidden words --"Noah's Ark," I said, and the cabal of satanic evolutionists surrounding me fled like rats. While the conspiracy remains alive and well (the primary and closely guarded secret objective, by the way, is to make to pocket-protectors mandatory), I am now a free man, and it is my goal to expose them whenever and wherever I can. Be warned, and be afraid.

You mean Haeckel's embryology? You're kidding, right?

Not at all. Whether nor not Haeckel's drawings were precise by modern standards matters not one bit. 'plusone' seemed to be making the point that minor micro-evolutionary anatomic variation such as beak size and shape in a finch is unrelated to major macro-evolutionary anatomic differences like the presence or absence of wings. I disagree. It is a difference of degree and not kind. Different types of vertebrate embryos are indistinguishable from each other early on, unless chromosomal and genetic analysis is performed. Change one gene sequence, you get a bigger beak. Change another, or a few more, and you get no wings, or grow a leg from out of the forehead. What basis is there to think that these are different processes?

-ccm