Darwinist ignorance and confusion (Introduction)

by David Turell , Monday, June 14, 2010, 17:14 (5055 days ago) @ George Jelliss

This article on Wikipedia covers the history of this "recapitulation theory"
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recapitulation_theory
> 
> "Haeckel proposed that the embryonal development of an individual organism (its ontogeny) followed the same path as the evolutionary history of its species (its phylogeny)." 
> 
> "Darwin's more sophisticated view that early embryonic stages are similar to the same embryonic stage of related species ... has been confirmed by modern evolutionary developmental biology."
> 
> To a layman like myself the differences between these theories seem somewhat subtle and difficult to detect!
> 
> In the discussion about "gill slits" various different terms such as "invaginations", "gill pouches", "pharyngeal arches", "pharyngeal pouches", seem to be used to describe the same formations, so perhaps the use of the term "gill slits" does not actually imply that they are literally gill slits, but just look like gill slits.
> 
> "But these embryonic pharyngeal arches could not at any stage carry out the same function as the gills of an adult fish." (unless the embryo is that of a fish!)-In my embryology course in medical school we NEVER were taught that the human embryo had embryonal gill slits. Haeckel's drawings to support his theory have been shown to be falsely rendered. Perhaps the embryo of the heroine in the movie "Splash" might have had gill slits in the beginning, but the fishy part appeared at the wrong end of the body. Darwin's theory is much the better.