Embryos are used as a corner stone for its bench markers proving evolution true in the science community. The science community purposely uses only eight species to set its argument: a fish, salamander, tortoise, chicken, hog, calf, rabbit, and a human. Any student studying this material of embryos would conclude that “Darwin prevails!” As evolution claims that species are similar have they should share common ancestry, and have the same point of origin in the fossil record. Like for example tigers, jaguars, cheetahs, domesticated cats, and Siber Tooth Tiger. Evolution not only should explain the rapid transformation of this species but its embryonic stages should share similar characteristics to each other. But that is not that’s not always the case at all with the Haeckel’s embryos stage model. Dr. Jonathan Wells an embryologist at Princeton University concluded that this idea of Ernst Haeckel’s embryo’s model ‘falls flat on its face.' Dr. Wells also remarked that he hand selected his original eight species. So if we make the assumption that evolution is true. Then we can assert that Salamanders, Frogs, toads are close evolutionary relatives, and they should develop similarly to each other. But that’s when the argument of embryonic evolution falls apart, because they don't look alike at all compared to the original eight species Haeckel’s model used. This is a major problem with evolution so far.
Evolutionists will try announce that human embryos have gills similar too fish, but that’s not the truth at all. Science has proven that something can share common physical traits but not be used in the same way. Allow me to put this into picture for you. A Fruit fly, a mouse, and an Octopus carry the same genetic material for its eyes. But yet that gene plays a different physical role in how it develops. So that means something can appear to be something but carry a whole different purpose. As a British embryologist Lewis Wolpert claimed this coincidence as a “resemblance of illusion.” The rapid growth of a fetal stage can explain why the excess skin folds exist around the neck. So to put this into perspective for everyone, look at the back of your fingers. If you notice that there are folds in the middle of your fingers. Incidentally, no one debates that they could be possibly gills because that would be considered completely ludicrous. Rather the skin gives extra volume for your finger to make a downward angle. If you pinch the skin at the folds it would prove to be more difficult to bend. That holds true to the fetal stage. The fetus is growing extra skin to co inside for its rapid expansion it will have to under go for later development. But it only gives the illusion that it is. So these “Gills” are not based off of the scientific method if other explanations could be used. So it’s merely a biased opinion that used for the support claims of evolution. Nothing more.
To put a nail into this coffin on this subject, the Haeckel’s model was a “forgery” at its time. The claim came from he altered some of his embryos to look more similar than they do. Furthermore, he only used favorable times in which the embryo development that would resemble more closely to his model. This created a big backlash in the science community at that time. But till this very day its still being taught and the modification to his model was every so slight. This forgery has been kept. So provide a comment why you think that is.
Evolutionists will try announce that human embryos have gills similar too fish, but that’s not the truth at all. Science has proven that something can share common physical traits but not be used in the same way. Allow me to put this into picture for you. A Fruit fly, a mouse, and an Octopus carry the same genetic material for its eyes. But yet that gene plays a different physical role in how it develops. So that means something can appear to be something but carry a whole different purpose. As a British embryologist Lewis Wolpert claimed this coincidence as a “resemblance of illusion.” The rapid growth of a fetal stage can explain why the excess skin folds exist around the neck. So to put this into perspective for everyone, look at the back of your fingers. If you notice that there are folds in the middle of your fingers. Incidentally, no one debates that they could be possibly gills because that would be considered completely ludicrous. Rather the skin gives extra volume for your finger to make a downward angle. If you pinch the skin at the folds it would prove to be more difficult to bend. That holds true to the fetal stage. The fetus is growing extra skin to co inside for its rapid expansion it will have to under go for later development. But it only gives the illusion that it is. So these “Gills” are not based off of the scientific method if other explanations could be used. So it’s merely a biased opinion that used for the support claims of evolution. Nothing more.
To put a nail into this coffin on this subject, the Haeckel’s model was a “forgery” at its time. The claim came from he altered some of his embryos to look more similar than they do. Furthermore, he only used favorable times in which the embryo development that would resemble more closely to his model. This created a big backlash in the science community at that time. But till this very day its still being taught and the modification to his model was every so slight. This forgery has been kept. So provide a comment why you think that is.
Very analytical. Good information.
ReplyDelete