|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
 Posted - 07/09/2004 : 09:54:00 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Baza
There has for about six years now been a creation/ evolution debate ongoing now for about six years in our local news paper. There has been recently a defence of creation. Within its evidence the work of a M.K. Richarson was quoted (although no reference was given) who with his team has done an exhustive comparision of foetuses of differing species -"showing them to be very distinctive" and thus disproved the work of Haeckel. I have tried to pin down this reference without success. Does any one here have a clue. Also the writer has suggested that Haeckel work were instumental in the rise of Nazi Germany?
M K Richardson is a developmental biologist. He did write a critism of Haeckel's embryology in 1998 for Science (vol 279 page 88 and vol 281 page 1289). Specifically, Haeckel's contention that intermediate embryonic stages are resistant to evolutionary change. Since Haeckel published his work in 1874, it is likely that some of the concepts with could be proven to be inaccurate. Richardson admits that early embryonic stages are identical, but disagrees that some later intermediate embryonic stages are similar.
http://www.mk-richardson.com/PDFs/Anat%20Embryol.pdf
Haeckel's work is blamed for Nazi's destruction of the Jews, but no supporting evidence has been presented in any website (mostly fundie) which makes this claim. Racism was nothing new in these days. Haeckel was definately racist. Judging the theory by the man is a common tactic of fundies.
http://atheism.about.com/library/glossary/evolution/bldef_haeckelernst.htm
Haeckel was not an evolutionary biologist. He was a developmental biologist. Richardson and others have discounted his theories on embryonic development.
|
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
 |
|
Topic Locked
