ARCHAEOPTERYX: A "missing Link?"

   Archaeopteryx is an extinct, flying bird which had wing claws and
teeth.  Evolutionists have widely promoted this animal as a definite
transitional form between dinosaurs and birds.  On the other hand,
Creationists (and even some Evolutionists) maintain there are
significant problems with this claim.---> see the below list:

-  Michael Denton, Evolution,: A Theory in Crisis( Bethesda, Maryland:
Adler & Adler, Publishers, 1986), 368pp
- Luther D. Sunderland, Darwin's Enigma: Fossils and Other Problems
(El Cajon, California: Master Book Publishers, 1984), pp 69-76
- Francis Hitching, The Neck of the Giraffe: Where Darwin Went Wrong
(New Haven: Connecticut: Ticknor and Fields, 1982), pp 34-36 (Shows that
"every one of its supposed reptillian features can be found in various
species of undoubted birds").
- Colin Brown, "Another Look at the Archaeopteryx," Creation Research
Society Quarterly, Vol. 17, No. 2 (Terre Haute, Indiana: 1980), pp. 87,
109)
- Frank W. Cousins, "The Alleged Evolution of Birds," in Donald W.
Patten, editor, A Symposium on Creation III (Grand Rapids, Michigan:
Baker Book House, 1971) pp 89-99

   Some biologists say the teeth and wing-claws of Archaeopteryx are not
conclusive details in distinguishing reptiles from birds.  Some
reptiles have teeth, and some do not.  Some fossil birds had teeth, and
some did not.  (L.D. Martin, et al "The Origin of Birds: Structure of
the Tarus and Teeth, "The Auk, Vol 97 (1980), pp. 86-93 [Shows that
"Archaeopteryx had unserrated teeth with constricted bases and expanded
roots like those of other Mesozoic birds"]).
   The claws on the wings are not a distinguishing factor, either.  Some
living birds have them, such as the ostrich, the touraco, and the
hoatzin.  There is no question that these are 100% birds.

   Most importantly, this creature had feathers.  Feather impressions
found with Archaeopteryx indicate they were fully-developed and
functional.  There is no evidence of reptilian scales developing into
feathers.  No animal except a bird has ever been known to have feathers.

   The wings of Archaeopteryx are said to be fully-developed and
completely functional, and the bones were hollow, just as in other
birds.

   True, Archaeopteryx did have a breastbone that was "shallow."
However, some living birds, also, have very small breastbones.
(hoatzin) And, on the other hand, Archaeopteryx did have an extremely
robust furcula which is interpreted by many as evidence that it was a
strong flier, and therefore was a bird --- not an unfinished
transitional dinosaur evolving into a bird.

  FURCULA: the bone where the muscles attach which give the power
           stroke in flight.

   Bones and futher evidences of other birds (which their Evolutionist
discoverers have said were essentially identical with those commonly
living today) appear to have been found in formations which
Evolutionists estimate are as "old" as or "older" than Archaeopteryx.
The inference is that the Archaeopteryx specimens could not have been
any sort of "missing link."  Archaeopteryx was too late, if birds
already existed.

  - Paleontologist and Evolutionist expert Dr. John Ostrom:

 "There can be no doubt that Archaeopteryx was a true bird..."

(John Ostrom in the Beginning of Birds (Eichstatt, West Germany: Jura
Museum, 1985), p. 174 -- as cited by Ronald C. Calais, "Response to
Padian," Creation Research Society Quarterly, Vol. 25, No.4 (Terre
Haute, Indiana: March 1989), p.203