Ha, huh because.... Science says so!

[Mister Agenda]

Please provide a citation to show that someone here actually made the claim.

All one need do is search for 'snake legs.'
http://atheistforums.org/search.php?acti...desc&uid=0
Here is a page of examples:
http://atheistforums.org/thread-29989-pa...snake+legs  (This is a good one as several different people are making fun of the idea that snakes have legs.)

since we are not allowed to call people out here is a link to the search I did.

If you take 10 mins you will find people saying 'Snakes do not have legs.'

Snakes don't have legs, sir. But everyone who accepts evolution figured their ancestors had legs, based on the available evidence.

And the rules against calling people out do not prevent you from linking to a particular post in which someone makes the claim to which you refer.

Here's what I think happened: you confused the observation that snakes don't have legs with a claim that the ancestors of snakes did not have legs, and thought an ancestor of snakes having legs would throw the atheists int confused disarray. Now you're trying to sweep your mistake under the rug, as you always do, because you equate admitting a mistake with weakness.