[[Image:archaeopteryx{{Taxonomy|name=Archaeopteryx|image=Archaeopteryx1.pngjpg|thumbnailcaption=|rightdomain=Eukaryota|0pxkingdom=Animalia|Birdsubkingdom=Bilateria|branch=Deuterostomia |superphylum=|phylum=Chordata|subphylum=Vertebrata|infraphylum=Gnathostomata |microphylum=|superdivision=|division=|subdivision=|superclass=Tetrapoda|class=Aves|subclass=|infraclass=|superorder=|order=Archaeopterygiformes|suborder=|infraorder=|superfamily=|family=Archaeopterygidae|subfamily=|supertribe=|tribe=|subtribe=|genera=|genus=Archaeopteryx|subgenus=|species=A. lithographica<br/>A. macrura<br/>A. recurva<br/>A. siemensii|binomialname=|sub=|alt=|regionimg=|pop=|conservation=Extinct}}'''''Archaeopteryx''''', or dinosaur?an extinct [[bird]]known from a small number of [[fossil]]ized remains found in southern Germany, is claimed by [[evolution]]ary biologists to be the first species of bird to appear on Earth,<ref>[http://www.discovery.org/a/1106 "Archaeopteryx is the oldest bird in the fossil record." - John Wells]</ref> as well as a so-called "[[transitional form]]" between reptiles and birds.
'There are two criticisms of ''Archaeopteryx''' is a theoretical [[bird]] based on a few [[fossil]] fragments. This theoretical bird The first is sometimes presented that the fossils are an elaborate hoax as evidence of evolution because claimed by the bones have some characteristics reminiscent of British astronomer and physicist, Sir [[reptile | reptilesFred Hoyle]]; the second is that ''Archaeopterix'' is a true bird, making it appear to be and not a so-called "transitional" form between reptiles and birdssuggesting evolution.
There are two criticisms ==Description==''Archaeopterix'' was roughly crow-sized, with an over-all body length of the Archaeopteryx18 inches. One criticism is that Discounting the feather impressions in some of the fossil fragments are fraudulent. Another criticism is that even if Archaeopteryx existedspecimens, it was ''Archaeopterix'' had a true bird and not build generally-similar to that of a transitional form suggesting evolutionsmall theropod dinosaur, with the species ''Compsognathus'' cited. Both wings ended in three-fingered claws. The tail was long, feathered on either side. Evidence that the legs were feathered as well was shown in the Berlin specimen as recently as 1880, prior to that fossil's preservation.
Only 7 specimens suggesting the existence of Archaeopteryx have been presented.<ref>http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/archaeopteryx/info.html#specimens</ref> The source of specimens seems unlikely: six came from Germany and one from Englandbill, where the highest prices could be obtained on auction from evolutionistslike modern birds, and none from anywhere else in the world. Two was capable of those independent movement in Germany came from both the same familyupper and lower jaws; unlike modern birds, 16 years apart, who both jaws 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 studded with evolution claims (e.g., [[Piltdown Man]]) were commonsmall teeth.
In 1983, a halfThe hip bones are fully-dozen leading [[British]] scientists including [[Fred Hoyle|Sir Fred Hoyle]] carefully studied the two best Archaeopteryx specimen, front formed and back, and declared them to be fakes.<ref>Sarfati, 2000</ref> They discovered that the front and back slabs of each specimen do not match.<ref>British Journal of Photography (Marchbird-June 1985).</ref><ref>W.J. Broadlike, "Authenticity of Bird Fossil is Challenged," Ni.Ye. Times C1the pubic bone points to the rear, C14 unlike theropod dinosaurs (May 7, 1985which had a forward-pointing pubic bone)from which evolution claims an ancestry.</ref><ref>T. Nield Despite this contradiction, "Feathers Fly Over Fossil some authorities prefer to place 'Fraud'," New Scientist 1467:49-50.</ref><ref>G. Vines, "Strange Case of Archaeopteryx Archaeopterix'Fraud'within the order Avetheropoda," New Scientist 1447:3.</ref> They found that an alteration had been made to the left wing which includes such theropods as depicted in an 1863 drawing.<ref>See references [[Tyrannosaurus|''supraTyrannosaurus rex''.</ref> They concluded that the feather markings had been imprinted by hand.<ref>See references ]] and ''supra[[Spinosaurus]]''.</ref> They also found that etching process had used cement blobshttp://paleodb.<ref>See references ''supra''.<org/ref> When the scientists requested the ability to use an electronic microscope and carboncgi-14 dating, the museum refused and withdrew the specimens from the scientists.<ref>See references ''supra''bin/bridge.pl?a=basicTaxonInfo&taxon_no=55483</ref> The same [[British]] Museum had been responsible for the [[Piltdown Man]] fraud.
The second criticism of the Archaeopteryx, that it is not a transitional form even if it did exist, has been strengthened by the work of anatomist Dr. David Menton[http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/bios/d_menton.asp] 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 All known fossils -approximately thirteen - a number were found in the Solenhofen limestone formation of extinct birds had teethsouthern Bavaria, 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 movesGermany.<ref name="cw94" />
== Evidence Criticism == ===Fraud dispute=======Charges of fraud====In 1983, a half-dozen leading [[British]] scientists led by noted British [[Fred Hoyle|Radio-astronomer Sir Fred Hoyle]] carefully studied the plates and counter-plates from the two best ''Archaeopteryx'' specimens, and found evidence of forgery.<ref>Sarfati, 2000</ref> They discovered that the front and back slabs of each specimen do not match.<ref name="four">British Journal of Photography (March–June 1985).<br />W.J. Broad, "Authenticity of Bird Fossil is Challenged," N.Y. Times C1, C14 (May 7, 1985).<br />T. Nield, "Feathers Fly Over Fossil 'Fraud'," New Scientist 1467:49-50.<br />G. Vines, "Strange Case of Archaeopteryx 'Fraud'," New Scientist 1447:3.</ref>They found that an alteration had been made to the left wing as depicted in an 1863 drawing.<ref name="four" />They concluded that the feather markings had been imprinted by hand.<ref name="four" />They also found that etching process had used cement blobs.<ref name="four" />When the scientists requested the ability to use an electronic microscope and carbon-14 dating, the museum refused and withdrew the specimens from the scientists.<ref name="four" />The same [[British]] Museum had been responsible for evolution? the [[Piltdown Man]] fraud.====Assertions of authenticity====Scientists who have since inspected the London ''Archaeopteryx'' and other specimens have conlcuded these fossils are not forgeries.<ref>Charig et al. 1986. Archaeopteryx is not a forgery. Science 232: 622-626</ref> In particular, the found the feathers on the Maxburg fossil continue underneath the bones - precluding the possibility of them being added to a reptile fossil, tiny fractures that could not have been seen at the time of Archaeopteryx's discovery matched in the plate and counter-plate and the 'blobs' cited by Hoyle are also have matching impressions on the counter plate (suggesting they weren't added). The evidence that ''Archaeopteryx'' is not a fraud is so strong that creationist site [[Answers in Genesis]] suggests creationists don't use this argument <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/get-answers/topic/arguments-we-dont-use</ref>
''Archaeopteryx'' is often presented as evidence of evolution because the bones have some characteristics reminiscent of [[reptile | reptiles]] including teeth and incomplete evolution of the wing structure{{fact}}, making it appear to be ===Not a [[transitional form]] between reptiles and birds. ===The second criticism of the ''Archaeopteryx'' as , that it is not a transitional form , has been strengthened by the work of creationary anatomist Dr. David Menton <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/bios/d_menton.asp</ref> suggesting that ''Archaeopteryx'' was is a true bird with flight [[feather]]sfeathers, not a transitional form at all. In 1994, an article explained that the ''Archaeopteryx'' was essentially 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 (the South American [[hoatzin]], ''Opisthocomus hoazin'', also shares with ''Archaeopteryx'' clawed digits in its wings, albeit as juveniles).
== Evidence for evolution? ==
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<ref>Feduccia, 1993</ref>
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''<ref>"The tenth skeletal specimen of Archaeopteryx," ''Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society,'' 149:97-116, 2007.</ref> Specimens such as the Thermoplis Specimen <ref>Wyoming Dinosaur Center.</ref> 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 == Specimens ==There are currently only thirteen known specimens of ''Archaeopteryx'' was essentially that of a flying bird.<ref>Wikipedia claims an eleventh specimen, with a large cerebellum but only lists ten.</ref>All were allegedly found in the limestone of the [[Solnhofen]] area in Germany and visual cortexhave not been substantiated by any discovery anywhere else in the world.<ref name="cw94CFM">WielandMagovern</ref>{| class="wikitable"! Image || Specimen || When found || Location found || People involved || Current location || Comments|-| [[File:ArchaeopterixFeather.jpg|100px]] || Feather<ref name="CN">Nedlin, 19941999 (The TalkOrigins Archive)</ref>|| 1860 || Near Solnhofen || Described by H. von Meyer || Humboldt Museum für Naturkunde in [[Berlin]] || Single feather only.Creationists argue that |-| [[File:ArchaeopteryxLondon.JPG|100px]] || London specimen<ref name="CFM" /><ref name="CN" /> || 1861 || Near Langenaltheim || Announced by H. v Meyer || [[British Museum of Natural History]], [[London]] || Missing the fact that it had teeth is irrelevant to its alleged transitional statushead and neck; detailed feather impressions.|-| [[File:Archaeopteryx1.jpg|100px]] || Berlin specimen<ref name="CFM" /><ref name="CN" /> || 1877 || Near Blumenberg || Described by W. Dames || Humboldt Museum für Naturkunde || The most complete specimen|-| [[File:ArchaeopterixMaxberg.jpg|100px]] || Maxberg specimen<ref name="CFM" /><ref name="CN" /> || 1958 || Near Langenaltheim || Found and owned by Eduard Opitsch || Maxberg Museum; currently lost or stolen || Torso, wings, and feather impressions|-| [[File:ArchaeopterixHaarlem.jpg|100px]] || Haarlem Specimen<ref name="CFM" /><ref name="CN" /> || 1855 || Near Riedenburg || Described by H. von Meyer || Teylers Museum, [[Haarlem]] || Not classified as a number ''Archaeopteryx'' until 1970. Remains of extinct birds had teethwing claws and leg bones.|-| [[File:ArchaeopteryxEichstätt.jpg|100px]] || Eichstätt Specimen<ref name="CFM" /><ref name="CN" /> || 1951 || Near Workerszell || Described by Peter Wellnhofer || Jura Museum, while many reptiles do not[[Eichstätt]] || Smallest specimen|-| [[File:ArchaeopteryxSolenhofen.jpg|100px]] || Solnhofen Specimen<ref name="cw94CFM" /><ref name="CN" /> || 1960s || Near Eichstätt || Described by Wellnhofer || Bürgermeister-Müller-Museum in Solnhofen || Nearly complete; no feather impressions.Furthermore|-| [[File:ArchaeopterixMunich.jpg|100px]] || Munich specimen or Solnhofen-Aktien-Verein specimen<ref name="CFM" /><ref name="CN" /> || 1992 || Near Langenaltheim || Described by Wellnhofer || Paläontologisches Museum München, [[Munich]] || First specimen to be found with an intact sternum, proving ''Archaeopteryx'' was capable of powered flight like other modern birds, both its maxilla |-| [[File:Archaeopteryx (upper jawDaiting Specimen) and mandible .jpg|100px]] || Daiting specimen || 1990 || Near Daiting || || || The youngest specimen|-| [[File:Archaeopteryx (lower jawChicken Wing) moved.In most vertebrates, including many reptilesjpg|100px]] || Bürgermeister-Müller specimen || 2000 || || || Bürgermeister-Müller Museum, Solnhofen || Single wing only the mandible moves|-| [[File:ArchaeopterixThermopolis.jpg|100px]] || Thermopolis specimen<ref >The Wyoming Dinosaur Center</ref><ref>Hartman, 2005</ref> || || || Described by Mayr, Pohl, and Peters || Wyoming Dinosaur Center in Thermopolis, [[Wyoming]] || Had been privately owned in Switzerland|-| [[File:Archaeopteryx lithographica - 11 specimen.jpg|100px]] || ''no namegiven yet''<ref>http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/paleontologists-unveil-the-11th-archaeopteryx-112131580/?no-ist="cw94" </ref>|| || || || || Currently studied by Paleontologists of Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitaet.|-| || ''no name given yet'' || 2010 || Near Altmannstein<ref>http://www.donaukurier.de/nachrichten/bayern/Schamhaupten-Der-naechste-Archaeopteryx;art155371,2880263</ref> || || || |}
== Bibliography ==
* Anon., [http://www.wyodino.org/research/?item=archaeopteryx ''Archaeopteryx'': The Thermopolis Specimen] The Wyoming Dinosaur Center
* Bakalar, Nicholas, [http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/12/1201_051201_archaeopteryx.html 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 ([http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0036-8075%2819930205%293%3A259%3A5096%3C790%3AEFCGIA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-1 abstract])
* [[Duane Gish|Gish, Duane]], [httphttps://www.icr.org/article/321/ As a Transitional Form Archaeopteryx Won't Fly] ''Impact'', September 1, 1989* Hartman, Scott, [http://skeletaldrawing.com/Archaeopteryx/archaeo.htm Clarification statement on Thermopolis specimen] 1 December 2005 (The Wyoming Dinosaur Center).* Magovern, Charlie and Florence, [http://www.stonecompany.com/fossils/casts/archaeopteryx/data.html Archaeopteryx]* Nedlin, Chris, [http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/archaeopteryx/info.html#specimens All About Archaeopteryx], 1999 (The TalkOrigins Archive)
* [[Jonathan Sarfati|Sarfati, Jonathan]], [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3653 Archaeopteryx (unlike Archaeoraptor) is NOT a hoax—it is a true bird, not a “missing link”], Creation Ministries International, March 24, 2000
* Sarfati, Jonathan, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3833/106/ Bird evolution?], Chapter 4 of ''Refuting Evolution''.
* [[Carl Wieland|Wieland, Carl]], [http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v1/i1/archaeopteryx.asp Archaeopteryx], ''Creation'' 1(1):12–16, June 1978.
* Wieland, Carl, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/909/ Bird evolution flies out the window], ''Creation'' 16(4):16–19, September 1994
==See also==
*[[Feathered dinosaurs]]
==References==
<references/>
[[Category:Evolution]][[Category:Extinct animalsAnimals]][[Category:Theory of Evolution and Cases of Fraud, Hoaxes and Speculation]][[Category:Birds]][[Category:Extinct Birds]]