Are some humans born with true tails that serve as evidence for the validity of the theory of evolution?

Claims occasionally surface alleging that humans possess vestigial tails, citing rare cases of infants born with appendages at the base of the spine. Proponents of the theory of evolution attempt to use this as evidence for common descent. However, rigorous scientific examination proves the hollowness of these claims.

The Anatomical Difference Between Appendages and Tails

Any organ described as a "tail" in vertebrate creatures must contain vertebrae or cartilage. This is entirely absent in those fleshy appendages that appear in some humans; they are merely congenital malformations with no relation to the anatomical structure of true tails.

In this context, the scientist Fred Ledley confirms that nothing can be termed a tail in creatures that possess vertebrae unless that organ contains actual caudal vertebrae.

There is no fleshy appendage in humans that contains vertebrae, cartilage, or bony elements.

Source: Journal of Neurosurgery

Conclusion

The difference between the true tail in animals and these human appendages is clear and manifest; the former is an integral part of the skeletal system, while the latter are merely skin appendages lacking bony structure, which invalidates their use as evolutionary evidence.