Baby born with tail
Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 8:42 pm
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.
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.