I think he once taught embryology at a college once, but I don't think really qualifies him for that title. But that, of course, is an aside.
He says "When an egg's genes are removed and replaced by those of another type of animal, development follows the pattern of the original egg until the embryo dies from the lack of the right proteins".
Did he provide evidence for this claim?
However, when reading about cloning, it was mentioned that cat DNA was put into a rabbit egg, and the outcome was a cat clone. I thought that was impossible based on Wells' description. What am I missing here? Is Wells wrong, or is something else going on in cloning that isn't relevant to what Wells is talking about?
It seems the opposing claim does have evidence. I'd go with the evidence. Wells being wrong sounds like a reasonable conclusion to make, he's often in the position of having the evidence against him.