As the whale embryo grows, it grows two little hind legs before they are resorbed into the animal. Is this better explained by Evolution or Creation?

Evolution accounts for this easily with the maxim that ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny. That is to say that an organisms development from zygote to adult reflects their evolutionary heritage.
Whales evolved from land-going mammals which of course hand hind legs.

But how does the Creationist explain this pointless, redundant growth and loss of hind limbs?

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

canusernamebemyusername · M

How about creation but the designer is stupid😏

Pikachu

@canusernamebemyusername

Honestly, a fallible creator would be a much easier proposition to defend. But Abrahamic religions cannot take that route.

canusernamebemyusername · M

@Pikachu It's odd cause God was losing when he wrestled Jacob in the OT until he cheated and kicked him in the nuts.

Pikachu

@canusernamebemyusername

It's confusing in the Bible depending on the translation but we often get an ambiguous translation between god and an angel of god.
Although that still must have been a wimpy angel.