I've thought about this a bit and I may be wrong, but doesn't the fact that embryology hasn't developped a complete theory relating it to Darwinian evolution (since embryonic recapitulation) speak about the reticence of embryologist to associate their field to the ToE. Principally because of the errors of the past ?
In this thread was the first time I encountered an attempt to relate embryology and evolution aside from embryonic recapitulation, by Dr.Adequate, and I do not find it very expressed as other aspects of evolution are.
All this suggests to me is that you don't know anything about modern embryology/ developmental biology. One of the hottest and most productive approaches in modern biology is evolutionary developmental biology, colloquially known as evo-devo. One would be hard presed to find an article in any current developmental biology journal which doesn't look at the comparative aspects of the developmental mechanism and genetics involved and place them into an evolutionary context. Indeed developmental biology is perhaps the only way to understand how such small genetic changes as a single base pair substitution can cause gross morphological changes in an organism, a key point in any discussion of the progression of evolutionary phenotypic/morphological change.
Theodosius Dobzhansky famously said, "Nothing in Biology makes sense except in the light of evolution." This is especially true of developmental biology. Indeed Gould wrote extensively about the relationship between developmental biology and evolution.
TTFN,
WK
™ Version 4.2