Page 138 - The Errors the American National Academy of Sciences

The Errors of the American National Academy of Sciences

2. Despite Haeckel's biased selection of embryos, even the exam-
ples he picked did not fit his claims. He therefore resorted to counter-
feiting. In 1995, the British embryologist Michael Richardson
produced a detailed study revealing that Haeckel's drawings were
not correct and that they were incompatible with other data available.

Richardson arrived at the following conclusion: "These famous im-
ages are inaccurate and give a misleading view of embryonic devel-
8
opment." In 1997, Richardson and an international team of experts
compared Haeckel's embryos with real specimens from the seven
classes of vertebrates. It was thus demonstrated that Haeckel's draw-
ings were full of major distortions.
3. In addition, Richardson and his team found major variation
among the embryonic morphologies (shapes) of amphibians. Yet,

Haeckel selected only the salamander from amongst the amphibians
so that it would fit his theory. Had he selected the frog, for instance,
the great differences in embryonic stages would have been apparent,
and his theory would have been falsified.
4. Richardson and his team also observed extraordinary varia-
tions in the dimensions of vertebrate embryos, of between 1 and 10

mm. Haeckel, however, had drawn them all with the same dimensions.
5. Finally, Richardson and his colleagues observed tremendous
variation in somites—blocks of muscle tissue that form along each
side of the embryo's developing backbone. Although Haeckel's draw-
ings had portrayed all the classes as having more or less the same
number of somites, in reality the number varied between 11 and 60 in
actual embryos. Richardson and his team arrived at the following
conclusion:
"Our survey seriously undermines the credibility of Haeckel's

drawings." 9
When Haeckel's embryos were compared to actual embryos it

136