Archaeopteryx

File:Archaeopteryx.png

Bird, or dinosaur?

Archaeopteryx is a theoretical bird based on a few fossil fragments. This theoretical bird is sometimes presented as evidence of evolution because the bones have some characteristics reminiscent of reptiles, making it appear to be a so-called "transitional" form between reptiles and birds.

There are two criticisms of the Archaeopteryx. One criticism is that the fossil fragments are fraudulent. Another criticism is that even if Archaeopteryx existed, it was a true bird and not a transitional form suggesting evolution.

Only 7 specimens suggesting the existence of Archaeopteryx have been presented. The source of specimens seems unlikely: six came from Germany and one from England, where the highest prices could be obtained on auction from evolutionists, and none from anywhere else in the world. Two of those in Germany came from the same family, 16 years apart, who were amateur collectors. A third specimen is missing and has not been seen in years. Still more specimens lack much detail and were initially described as other species. Frauds in Germany and England in connection with evolution claims (e.g., Piltdown Man) were common.

Preeminent British scientist Sir Fred Hoyle declared the feather impressions on Archaeopteryx specimens to be a fake.

The second criticism of the Archaeopteryx, that is not a transitional form even if it did exist, has been strengthened by the work of anatomist Dr. David Menton[1] suggesting that Archaeopteryx is a true bird with flight feathers, not a transitional form at all. In 1994, an article explained that the Archaeopteryx was essentially that of a flying bird, with a large cerebellum and visual cortex. The fact that it had teeth is irrelevant to its alleged transitional status -- a number of extinct birds had teeth, while many reptiles do not. Furthermore, like other birds, both its maxilla (upper jaw) and mandible (lower jaw) moved. In most vertebrates, including reptiles, only the mandible moves.

Evidence for evolution?

Archaeopteryx is often presented as evidence of evolution because the bones have some characteristics reminiscent of reptiles including teeth and incomplete evolution of the wing structure^{[Citation Needed]}, making it appear to be a transitional form between reptiles and birds.

The criticism of the Archaeopteryx as a transitional form has been strengthened by the work of creationary anatomist Dr. David Menton suggesting that Archaeopteryx was a true bird with flight feathers, not a transitional form at all.

In 1993, an article was published in Science magazine arguing that the Archaeopteryx had fully-formed flying feathers (including asymmetric vanes and ventral, reinforcing furrows as in modern flying birds), the classical elliptical wings of modem woodland birds, and a large wishbone for attachment of muscles responsible for the downstroke of the wings

While most evolutionary scientists agree that the flight feathers of Archaeopteryx were essentially modern, several papers since have argued against Feduccia's claims about the anatomy of Archaeopteryx Specimens such as the Thermoplis Specimen are thought to clearly show that the arms, wishbone, tail, feet, hips, and palate of Archaeopteryx were more like meat-eating theropod dinosaurs than modern birds.

The brain of Archaeopteryx was essentially that of a flying bird, with a large cerebellum and visual cortex. Creationists argue that the fact that it had teeth is irrelevant to its alleged transitional status, as a number of extinct birds had teeth, while many reptiles do not. Furthermore, like other birds, both its maxilla (upper jaw) and mandible (lower jaw) moved. In most vertebrates, including many reptiles, only the mandible moves.

Bibliography

• Anon., Archaeopteryx: The Thermopolis Specimen The Wyoming Dinosaur Center
• Bakalar, Nicholas, Earliest Bird Had Feet Like Dinosaur, Fossil Shows, National Geographic News, 1 December, 2005
• Feduccia, A., "Evidence from Claw Geometry Indicating Arboreal Habits of Archaeopteryx," Science, 259(5096):790-793, February 5, 1993 (abstract)
• Gish, Duane, As a Transitional Form Archaeopteryx Won't Fly Impact, September 1, 1989
• Sarfati, Jonathan, Archaeopteryx (unlike Archaeoraptor) is NOT a hoax—it is a true bird, not a “missing link”, Creation Ministries International, March 24, 2000
• Sarfati, Jonathan, Bird evolution?, Chapter 4 of Refuting Evolution.
• Wieland, Carl, Archaeopteryx, Creation 1(1):12–16, June 1978.
• Wieland, Carl, Bird evolution flies out the window, Creation 16(4):16–19, September 1994