The DI Com­plaints depart­ment replies to my post call­ing them on their lies about Haeck­el.

Alas, they could­n’t be both­ered to link to my post, where their read­ers could have looked at actu­al evi­dence pre­sent­ed, not just their words. The image they pre­sent­ed is not Haeck­el’s, nor is it, as its cap­tion asserts, a “ver­sion of Haeck­el’s drawings.” 

Thus, it does not dis­prove the claim that “ ‘You don’t find’ Haeckel’s embryo draw­ings in mod­ern text­books,” as the DI insists “Olson con­fi­dent­ly asserts. ‘There’s no trace of [them] oth­er than a men­tion that Haeck­el once upon a time came up with this… idea that ontoge­ny reca­pit­u­lates phylogeny.’ ”

All the ani­ma­tions in the world won’t change the fact that their only evi­dence against Olson’s claim that draw­ings by Haeck­el don’t occur in mod­ern biol­o­gy texts is … a draw­ing that was­n’t done by Haeckel. 

Hope­ful­ly, Rob Crowther will at least be hon­est enough to link to my orig­i­nal post, and maybe spend some time on Dr. Myers’ post also.