Difference between revisions of "Archaeopteryx"
(added balance to the entry; do not remove information from this entry) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[Image:archaeopteryx.png|right|Archaeopteryx fossil]] | [[Image:archaeopteryx.png|right|Archaeopteryx fossil]] | ||
| − | '''Archaeopteryx''' is a [[bird]] | + | '''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 [[reptile | 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. | |
| − | + | The indications of fraud are as follows. A great deal of money is paid for fossils suggesting evolution, because such fossils are so rare. Accordingly, there is tremendous money to be made by patching together phony fossils and auctioning them at a high price in the name of evolution. | |
| − | + | 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 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. | |
| + | |||
| + | The criticism of the Archaeopteryx as 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. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Articles claiming that the Archaeopteryx proves evolution are over a decade old. 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>A. Feduccia, "Evidence from Claw Geometry Indicating Arboreal Habits of Archaeopteryx," Science, 259(5096):790-793, February 5, 1993.</ref> | ||
| + | |||
| + | In 1994, another publication supportive of evolution asserted that the brain of 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.<ref>D. Mentonand C. Wieland, "Bird Evolution Flies out the window," Creation Ex Nihilo, 16(4):16-19, September-November 1994.</ref> | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
<references/> | <references/> | ||
Revision as of 00:01, February 26, 2007
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.
The indications of fraud are as follows. A great deal of money is paid for fossils suggesting evolution, because such fossils are so rare. Accordingly, there is tremendous money to be made by patching together phony fossils and auctioning them at a high price in the name of evolution.
Only 7 specimens suggesting the existence of Archaeopteryx have been presented.[1] 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.
The criticism of the Archaeopteryx as 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.
Articles claiming that the Archaeopteryx proves evolution are over a decade old. 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[2]
In 1994, another publication supportive of evolution asserted that the brain of 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.[3]
References
- ↑ http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/archaeopteryx/info.html#specimens
- ↑ A. Feduccia, "Evidence from Claw Geometry Indicating Arboreal Habits of Archaeopteryx," Science, 259(5096):790-793, February 5, 1993.
- ↑ D. Mentonand C. Wieland, "Bird Evolution Flies out the window," Creation Ex Nihilo, 16(4):16-19, September-November 1994.
