Bah, you should see Chick's
Big Daddy tract. Filled with distortions of science, appeals to ignorance, appeals to ignorant authorities (like Kent Hovind) and outright lies regarding evolution to get its message across. Presenting the loss of legs in a completely aquatic creature as the "opposite" of evolution truly exposes the ingorance of both the author and anyone gullible to think that the author is on to something.
outright lies regarding evolution That is a foolish concept. How can there be lies about something that is mainly speculation and wish? One could be lying, I suppose, about what the evolutionists say or about who they are but it would be terribly difficult to lie about evolution except to deny that the word means "change".