Editing Embryo drawing (section)

==Controversy==
The exactness of [[Ernst Haeckel]]'s drawings of embryos has caused much controversy among [[Intelligent Design]] proponents recently and Haeckel's intellectual opponents in the past.  Although the early embryos of different species exhibit similarities, Haeckel apparently exaggerated these similarities in support of his [[Recapitulation theory]], sometimes known as the [[Biogenetic Law]] or "[[Ontogeny]] recapitulates [[Phylogenetics|phylogeny]]". Furthermore, Haeckel even proposed theoretical life-forms to accommodate certain stages in embryogenesis. A recent review concluded that the "biogenetic law is supported by several recent studies – if applied to single characters only".<ref>{{cite journal |author=Richardson Michael K., Keuck Gerhard |year=2002 |title=Haeckel's ABC of evolution and development |journal=Biol. Rev. |volume=77 |issue=4 |pages=495–528 |doi=10.1017/s1464793102005948 |pmid=12475051 |s2cid=23494485}}</ref>

Critics in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, [[Karl von Baer]] and [[Wilhelm His, Sr.|Wilhelm His]], did not believe that living embryos reproduce the evolutionary process and produced embryo drawings of their own<ref>{{cite web |title=Developmental Similarities: Karl von Baer |url=http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/history_10 |access-date=13 March 2012 |publisher=University of California Museum of Paleontology}}</ref> which emphasized the differences in early embryological development. Late 20th and early 21st century critic [[Stephen Jay Gould]]<ref>Gould, Stephen Jay. "Abscheulich! (Atrocious!): Haeckel's distortions did not help Darwin". Nat. Hist. 109 (March 2000): 42–49.</ref> has objected to the continued use of Haeckel's embryo drawings in textbooks.

On the other hand, Michael K. Richardson, Professor of Evolutionary Developmental Zoology, [[Leiden University]], while recognizing that some criticisms of the drawings are legitimate (indeed, it was he and his co-workers who began the modern criticisms in 1998), has supported the drawings as teaching aids,<ref>"Haeckel's much-criticized drawings are important as phylogenetic hypotheses, teaching aids, and evidence for evolution. While some criticisms of the drawings are legitimate, others are more tendentious.", M. K. Richardson and G. Keuck, "Haeckel's ABC of evolution and development", ''Biol. Rev.'' (2002) '''77''', 495–528 (quote from abstract)</ref> and has said that "on a fundamental level, Haeckel was correct."<ref>Letter to ''Science'', '''280''', (15 May 1998), 983–984.</ref>