not "legs", not "feet" - just [i]fins[/i], Full story at http://www.physorg.com/news82131768.html

http://www.physorg.com/news82131768.html

The idea that these extra fins are remains of legs is pure spin. And fossils have not been found of "four-footed" cetaceans.

Since you are obviously a kindergardener I will use playground language with you:

Liar, liar, pants on fire..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_cetaceans

Ambulocetus natans (early-mid Eocene, 50 Ma) -- A recently discovered early whale, with enough of the limbs and vertebrae preserved to see how the early whales moved on land and in the water. This whale had four legs! Front legs were stubby. Back legs were short but well-developed, with enormous broad feet that stuck out behind like tail flukes. Had no true tail flukes, just a long simple tail. Size of a sea lion. Still had a long snout with no blowhole. Probably walked on land like a sea lion, and swam with a seal/otter method of steering with the front feet and propelling with the hind feet. So, just as predicted, these early whales were much like modern sea lions -- they could swim, but they could also still walk on land. (Thewissen et al., 1994)

Basilosaurus isis, Protocetes, Indocetus ramani and similar small-legged whales of the mid-late Eocene (45-42 Ma) -- After Rodhocetus came several whales that still had hind legs, but couldn't walk on them any more. For example, B. isis (42 Ma) had hind feet with 3 toes and a tiny remnant of the 2nd toe (the big toe is totally missing).

Need more?