You may have seen the news recently. Here’s a ten-day old article about it at PhysOrg: 250-million-year-old evolutionary remnants seen in muscles of human embryos. Briefly, they say:
A team of evolutionary biologists, led by Dr. Rui Diogo at Howard University, and writing in the journal Development, have demonstrated that numerous atavistic limb muscles — known to be present in many limbed animals but usually absent in adult humans — are actually formed during early human development and then lost prior to birth. Strikingly, some of these muscles, such as the dorsometacarpales shown in the picture, disappeared from our adult ancestors more than 250 million years ago, during the transition from synapsid reptiles to mammals.
This is the journal article they’re talking about: Development of human limb muscles based on whole-mount immunostaining and the links between ontogeny and evolution. All you can see without a subscription is the abstract Here’s one more excerpt from PhysOrg, and then we’ll get to the fun stuff:
Also remarkably, in both the hand and the foot, of the 30 muscles formed at about 7 weeks of gestation one third will become fused or completely absent by about 13 weeks of gestation. This dramatic decrease parallels what happened in evolution and deconstructs the myth that in both our evolution and prenatal development we tend to become more complex, with more anatomical structures such as muscles being continuously formed by the splitting of earlier muscles. These findings offer new insights into how our arms and legs evolved from our ancestors’, and also about human variations and pathologies, as atavistic muscles are often found either as rare variations in the common human population or as anomalies found in humans born with congenital malformations.
And now, from the pen of Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo) — the ayatollah of Appalachia, the world’s holiest man who knows more about religion and science than everyone else, we find this at the website of Answers in Genesis (AIG), Hambo’s creationist ministry: Lizard-Men Evolution or Rubbish Theory? Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:
You may have seen headlines recently with phrases like “lizard-men evolution,” “leftovers from our lizard evolution,” or even “human embryos go through lizard stage.” These headlines were reporting on a study that claims that human embryos (babies in the early stages of development) supposedly have muscles not found in adult humans, but are found in lizards. Therefore, these evolutionists [The fools!] believe this is a throwback to 250 million years ago when we shared a common ancestor with lizards. [Gasp!]
If Hambo ain’t no kin to no monkey, then he’ll never agree that his ancestors were lizards. He spends a paragraph praising the qualifications of David Menton, one of AIG’s creation scientists, and then says:
Dr. Menton explained that, since muscles are the result of the fusion of muscle cells throughout development, attempting to build an evolutionary case is simply not possible. [Oh, okay.] Dr. Menton went on to say,
[Hambo quotes Menton:] Evolutionists have historically used embryology to try to support their idea, going back as far as the 1700s — before even Darwin. But embryology tells us how something develops, not how the process of development itself formed. In this case, these researchers looked at presumably aborted human embryos up to thirteen weeks gestation and found that there are about thirty muscles in the hand, when there are about 19 muscles in the adult human hand. They claim that these are vestigial leftovers from our evolutionary ancestors. This is simply not true.
There’s more to that quote, but you’ve seen enough. Now Hambo comes back in and tells us:
No, human embryos don’t go through a so-called lizard stage in the womb. There is no lizard-men evolution. [That settles it!] The idea that we go through (i.e., recapitulate) our supposed evolutionary ancestry in the womb is a tired old belief I was taught in school that simply isn’t supported by the evidence. It’s an evolutionary interpretation imposed on what we observe.
And he finishes with this:
An important lesson here: Evolutionists use their worldview to impose it on the evidence to try to brainwash people into believing the evidence is consistent with an evolutionary view of origins. But in doing so, they ignore observational science that contradicts their worldview [Huh?] Creationists who start with the Bible have a worldview that they apply to the evidence, but look at observational science to see if it confirms their worldview — and it does!
That ends the debate, dear reader. Human embryos don’t reflect evolution. Why? Because evolution never happened! End of story.
Copyright © 2019. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.