Still a human after the human kind. Apes have little baby apes. Dogs have little baby dogs. If a puppy is born with an extra leg or a horn , it is still a baby dog. All animals are still producing after their kind. They may grow thicker fur to adapt to the cold or any other adaptation but they will remain a dog or an ape or what have you.

Copied off of a web page on the tail claims.... Monkeys generally have tails and apes don't. If evolutionists believe that the tail is evidence that we evolved from monkey-type creatures, why do they insist that we evolved from a common ancestor with apes, which don't have tails? Which tailed ape is this anomaly supposed to be throwing back to anyway? If you go through the apes and alleged ape-men claimed to be in humans' evolutionary lineage, you can't find one that had a tail like any human baby born with this appendage , because it is useless as a tail.

And isn't natural selection supposed to favor improvements, and not impediments? Why then would natural selection cause something as useful as a tail to wither into an encumbrance and then disappear?

The TalkOrigins website thinks that some “tail” abnormalities on humans are evidence of evolution, and at the time of writing they point out that there is “at least one known example of a primate tail that lacks vertebrae, as found in the rudimentary two-inch-long tail of Macaca sylvanus (the Barbary ape)”.

Rhesus macaqueUnfortunately, we could not find any other evolutionists who were willing to say that a tail that lacks vertebrae on a human is evidence that a Barbary ape turned into a human. And we must point out that the Barbary “ape” is actually a monkey, not an ape, and most monkeys have tails anyway. So how does it help the evolutionists' claim that ape-like creatures turned into humans by saying that a monkey has a tail?

We also could not find evidence that the Barbary macaque is considered to be closer to humanity than, say, the rhesus macaque, which has a long tail (see drawing above). But we will continue looking.

Evolutionists notoriously change their evidence to suit the occasion. So they can't blame people for treating evolution as something of a “fairy tail”.