Does Ontogeny Recapitulate Phylogeny?

Ont. does not recapitulate Phyl. in the strictest meaning of the phrase. However, various steps in overall phylogeny are present in embryonic development, and there are eerie similarities between the development of most vertebrates. This includes ossification centers, patterns of ennervation, and development of organs. Haeckel proposed that each step in embryo development EXACTLY copied the evolutionary history of that species. This is false. But there are important clues about genetic heritage and evolutionary pathways hiddden in embryo dev. In fact, embryo dev. is sometimes used to construct phylogenetic trees, especially with closely related species. Ont recap. Phyl. is still useful, but nonetheless falsified as a biologic law.

quote:

---

Comeon LM do you really think they are "eerie" or is that only meant for deep shaking in the online community?

---

From the stand point of special creation, the patterns in development are eerie. Perhaps "eerie" harkens back to the days when this information was still new (my favorite was cranial nerve development between vertebrates). Just to get a little more life out of my Behe thread, the movement of jawbones into the middle ear during mammalian development is also quite striking given the evolutionary history of those bones. Ontogeny is not like watching the film "Evolution over the last 100 million years" but it does have some nice highlights. If you like I could change "eerie" to "curiously intriguing".