Okay, I was listening to a debate of Hovind vs. Piggliuci.
Piggliuci and the infidel guy were using the example of a indian baby born with a tail. Has this been covered here before, please point me to the thread if it has, thanks.
Anyways, I looked through a couple articles:
http://www.users.bigpond.com/rdoolan/babytail.html
http://www.ijdvl.com/article.asp?issn=0 ... t=Inamadar
The creationist link states that its not a tail, that its just basically skin, yet the others state it is a tail due to some kind of genetic deficiency which prooves evolution. Has there been a conclusion to these two sided claims. They claim this is very good evidence for evolution, has this claim been added to the evidences of evolution.