| Biology: The Living Science
pretends it does support evolution …
|… but evolutionary scientists
admit it does not:
"Compare the fish, pig, and human embryos. Which animals are probably more
closely related and why? |
(Human and pig are more closely related because the embryos share common development for a longer period of time.)"
— p 223, right margin, "Ideas Through Images," par. 4, Teacher's Edition
"…we no longer believe we can simply read in the embryonic development
of a species its exact evolutionary history."
— Hubert Frings and Mable Frings, Concepts of Zoology (Toronto: Collier Macmillan Canada Ltd., 1970), p. 267.
"The type of analogical thinking that leads to theories that development is based on the recapitulation of ancestral stages or the like no longer seems at all convincing or even very interesting to biologists."
— C.H. Waddington (University of Edinburgh), Principles of Embryology, 1965, p. 10.