New Forum | Museum of Hoaxes | Login | Register as a Member | Search

Embryo similarities hoax - good one
Posted By:
Higon
Dec 13, 2004

That�s a good one, and counts back to 1874. Seems like Mr. Ernst Haeckel used crude forgeries to come up with some "proofs" of evolution.

Quoted from "M.K. Richardson, Haeckel's Embryos, Continued, letter to Science 281(5381):1289, 28 August 1998":

"The core scientific issue remains unchanged: Haeckel's drawings of 1874 are substantially fabricated. In support of this view, I note that his oldest �fish� image is made up of bits and pieces from different animals�some of them mythical. It is not unreasonable to characterize this as �faking.� ... Sadly, it is the discredited 1874 drawings that are used in so many British and American biology textbooks today.�"

You can find more information here:

E. Pennisi, Haeckel's Embryos: Fraud Rediscovered, Science 277(5331):1435, 5 September 1997; Embryonic Fraud Lives On, New Scientist 155(2098):23, 6 September 1997.

M.K. Richardson et al., There Is No Highly Conserved Embryonic Stage in the Vertebrates: Implications for Current Theories of Evolution and Development, Anatomy and Embryology 196(2):91�106, 1997.
Category: Science; Replies: 2

Comments
Listed in chronological order. Newest comments at the end.
Page 1 of 1 pages
Higon
Posted: Mon Dec 13, 2004 | 09:50 AM
Oh! Btw, that«s a good ilustration to follow up the information:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/RE1/images/embryos.jpg

"Above, top row: Haeckel's drawings of several different embryos, showing incredible similarity at their early ÔtailbudÕ stage.

Bottom row: Richardson's photographs of how the embryos of these same animals really look at the same stage.18

From left: Salmo salar, Cryptobranchus allegheniensis, Emys orbicularis, Gallus gallus, Oryctolagus cuniculus, Homo sapiens."

Quoted from: http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/re1/chapter6.asp
Maegan
Posted: Mon Dec 13, 2004 | 11:07 AM
"If this new evidence is applied to ÔMitochondrial Eve,Õ it indicates that she would have lived only 6,000Ð6,500 years ago.25 Of course, this is perfectly consistent with the biblically indicated age of the Ômother of all livingÕ (Gen. 3:20),26 but an enigma for evolution/long age beliefs."

See...the Jews have it right. They started their clock when the flood ended. It's in the 5660s or so according to the Jewish Calender (might be off by a hundred or so years). The world had only been around a thousand or so years before the flood. (That's why God was so ticked.) But the good news is, he'll never destroy the earth again with a flood...so the polar ice caps thing'll never happen.
Page 1 of 1 pages

Name:

Email (if you want to be notified of responses):

Location:

URL:

Note: To prove that you're a human being, not an automated spam bot, you've got to type in the word you see below. If you register as a member of the site you won't have to do this. Once registered, you'll then also need to login. If you're seeing this notice, and you've already registered, that means you haven't logged in. As a member you also won't have to enter your personal info every time you leave a comment.

Submit the word you see below:


Smileys

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?