Haeckels' Drawings Part II

The last time I ever gave the function of the embryonic pouch thought, I thought it functioned homologically with cell death in the tail"" region. I havent thought of that lately.

Mod below is the closes image I have ever seen to rasing a rebutal image to Haeckels'!I attached the paraphyletic trait to draw attention to the croc's egg the snake is eating but notice the intertwined TAILS.There is no "underbelly" here. I dont have time to drawn in all of my thinking that makes this a rebutal to the pics of Haeckel as I am actively working out a thought on the evolution of dominance instead.I forgot to bring the book title along. I will edit the reference in. It was a picture book on snakes in Human History. The alligator is not a snake.

The picture was published in "SNAKE CHARM" 1995 by Marilyn Nissenson and Susan Jonas at A Times Mirror Companyof Harry N. Abrams.It is not an error to misdraw nature with an some artistic latitude if a "deception" was not intended. I dont know if this painter actually witnessed this "red in tooth and claw" between (an anaconda?) and a caman but I HAVE SEEN a water snake in the process of consuming frog in the wild. It was quite a sight.It is interesting to notice HOW the drawing was made. It is in color and clearly shows off "black and white" at what would be the natural contention in Haeckel's thought of ontogeny recapiulates phylogeny for the reptiles. If you dont have any idea how a picture of the competition in this clade correctly naturally represented is evidence contra Haeckel then I dont have this kind of time just now to explain it. The picture itself struck me IMMEDIATELY.What IS important to notice, as to the content of this thread, is that if one puts oneself alternatively in Haeckel's or this painter's mind when composing the picture(s) it is obvious to me, and I fail to see how it would be to you etc, that Haeckel HAD to DRAW IN the stomach area (on the embryos in his pictures where HERE the color contains any such attribute since no detail about the embrogeny is indicative outside of blacks and whites (space for Haeckel). Thus if Haeckel KNEW he was misdrawing ON PURPOSE he could not not know that this space is not just an extra brush stroke etc.