Today's post is authored by Bob Sorensen with backing by an article by E. van Neikerk of Creation.com
The article ends with a YouTube video discovered by Bob. Bob is the Director of The Question Evolution Project and the Piltdown Superman blogger.
Bob Sorensen's work has drawn criticism and attacks from Darwinists. This is an indication that he is doing good work, for he is encountering opposition and even harassment! But Bob soldiers on and so do I...
One of the perpetually perpetrated propaganda pieces is the use of the Haeckel drawings that have been known to be fake for years. Jason Petersen at "Answers for Hope" has some interesting and very current material on this.
It would help curtail the embarrassment if they did not keep putting this nonsense in the textbooks!
I learned about the following article and video from a friend of the ministry. It is by E. van Niekerk, who has studied zoology and is finishing a degree in engineering.
Technical errors with Haeckel’s illustrations
Limb buds in embryos
“Interestingly, there was some discussion as to what exactly this stage was (Richardson 1995). This conserved stage was sometimes considered the neurula stage (Wolpert 1991), the ‘pharyngula’ stage (characterized by the branchial arches; Ballard 1981), the tailbud stage (Slack et al. 1993), or the stages between those of headfold and tailbud (Duboule 1994).”11
Yolk and photography
“Many animals (e.g. many insects, octopuses, fish, reptiles, marsupial mammals) use yolk sacs to feed the embryo … But there are also a number of animal groups (e.g. nematodes, sea urchins and almost all amphibians) that do not develop a yolk sac. In such organisms, the yolk is less conspicuous and is perhaps best defined as the nutritional reserves provided by the mother, including yolk platelets, fat droplets and glycogen [emphasis added].”19
“Monotremes, such as the platypus, and marsupials, such as kangaroos, have large, yolky eggs [since they actually lay eggs]. Placental mammals, by contrast, have small eggs without yolk platelets. … Even placental mammals still form extraembryonic yolk sacs and these are by no means useless vestiges [emphasis added].”20
“… several (but not all) of the photographed embryos retain the attached yolk sack and other maternal material; this exaggerates their differences from Haeckel’s images … . The bulge of the salamander is not part of the embryo; rather, it is the yolk sack, as is the case for the fish and the human embryos (though not for the chick and the rabbit, from which the yolk sacks [sic] have been removed) … .”21
“The extra-embryonic membranes were either missing or were removed by us. However the allantois was preserved where present.”22
Issues with editions of Anthropogenie
“In the subsequent editions, the images grew ever more refined, so that even by the 4th edition (1891), the differences among them became more pronounced … .”28
Issue with sizes of embryos
“… Richardson suggested that Haeckel ‘fudged the scale’ of the embryos, even though there was a tenfold difference in magnitude among them. Haeckel, however, quite explicitly stated in the caption to his illustration that he reduced all of the images to the same size to facilitate structural comparisons … .”36
“Parity of reasoning should logically have required another conclusion: if the indictment of fraud should be made against Haeckel because of too-similar images, then it ought to be brought also against His and the many modern embryologists whom Richardson and his colleagues cited, since they, too, supposed a phylotypic stage in embryogenesis [then citing the embryologists also cited by Gilbert, ref. 7].
“They maintained that not only did Haeckel’s images misrepresent the actual state of embryos but so did those of Wilhelm His, perhaps the most famous embryologist of his day and Haeckel’s bitter enemy. His, they contended, also exaggerated the similarities of embryos and ignored their differences.”37
“Haeckel’s young embryos look similar, whereas His’s look different.”13