Archaeopteryx and Dino-Bird Evolution

quote:

---

And, yet, here is a creature which is certainly not a bird. If you couldn't see the feathers, you'ld think this was simply a small dinosaur.

---

Exactly! That is what this specimen of Archaeopteryx most likely was, just a dinosaur, and engravings of feathers in the rock! Oh, and look at how straight and almost perfect like those feathers are, nicely spaced apart, rarely overlapping, OOOPS! The engraver was soooo busy making it perfect, that he/she forgot to make it REALISTIC! If that fossil was formed, there must have been a great force that did it, and if there was a great force, we would expect to see the feathers all overlapping and some broken and bent, etc, but this specimen doesn't seem to show this, does it? I mean, imagine a force strong enough to fossilize feathers, ( hmmm...) and what the creature's feathers would be like from such a tremendous force... This looks like a nice fraud done by some evolutionists desperately seeking for "proof" and wanting to get some big bucks from a museum...As for another specimen, the one with the reptile like fossil, and a feather next to it: That feather was most likely imprinited in rock and then put together with the reptile like fossil, as the slab grade and bubbles and color, etc, show. Most likely this was a fraud as well.AND, even if it was a genuine fossil, it's still not a transitional fossil! I don't see any developing structures here... And you don't have any fossils that are transitional leading to and from Archaeopteryx, to show evolution, and to show that Archaeopteryx was anywhere in the "line" of evolution.AND, it could be just a bird. Some birds have teeth you know... And claws on thier wings...

---

"If you’re living like there is no God you’d better be right!" - Unknown

Excuse me? Did you just say fossils form in quiet, still lagoons?!!?I don't think so! It takes a lot more force to leave an imprint of a creature in rock or mud! Do this experiment: Find some semi hard mud, take a tennis ball, set it in the mud and leave it there, then remove it, did it leave a noticeable imprint? Now throw the tennis ball into the mud, and take out your hose, set it to full throttle, and spray at the tennis ball. Now remove it, did it leave an imprint? See?A creature has to be covered quickly in order to fossilize, otherwise scavengers, bacteria, weather erosion, etc, will destroy any remains of the creature. A universal flood is perfect for this, the creature gets trapped in sediments. But a bunch of dying creatures in peace and quiet are not going to last more than a few months or years! How many buffalo were killed in Western America? Yeah, now tell me how many fossils you find of them... Hmmm...Oh, and, by the way, what would make a reptile/bird die in the bottom of a lagoon instead of on land?

---

"If you’re living like there is no God you’d better be right!" - Unknown

Exactly! That's why I hold to the position that the more distinct specimens with feather imprints are fruad! My point! Reptiles don't have feathers! But engraving them wouldn't be too hard, and it pays well in the museums for a "transitional fossil."

---

"If you’re living like there is no God you’d better be right!" - Unknown

quote:

---

And a lot of work to boot. You have no idea how hard it is to imprint a feather on limestone without damaging the adjacent reptile bones, and then getting the bubbles and grain to match so no one can tell under museum lighting. This kind of thing really keeps us busy.

---

No, they most likely made the feather imprint seperately, then combined the two fossils. And the grain DIDN'T match, and the bubbles were left as proof of fraud work, and using some kind of camera you could see the two different colors of the pieces.

quote:

---

Has anyone ever told you you have an amazing eye for art?

---

Actually, yeah, in web design class. My mom can draw well, and has a good artistic eye, I think it was passed on to me.

quote:

---

We have Hesperornis by William Henry Rinehart and Compsognathus by Evelyn Beatrice Longman. We're especially proud of our Velociraptor, an original by Camille Claudel.

​

The museum recently acquired a number of new pieces, of course, including a Microraptor and Protoavis by the renowned Chinese sculptor Liu Zhengde.

---

Hesperornis is a toothed marine bird, it's not anything like a reptile/bird. There are birds with teeth, and there are birds that can dive under water, a combo is nothing special and is definitely not any transitional.As for Compsognathus, that's just a dinosaur like creature. I don't see any evolving bird parts. Please understand, there are certain creatures with features of several groups of animals, like the platypus is a bird that feeds like a mammal, it has bird and mammal characteristics, that doesn't make it transitional. A transitional is to have evolving parts from one group to the other, with some becoming vestigial, and yet we do NOT find this anywhere!Same with Velociraptor, just a dinosaur, I don't see any evolving parts there, and I don't think it leads to archaeopteryx in any way, because no creatures evolved into different creatures in the first place, they were all created, and they have variations within their kinds. Putting a few similar creatures on a chart and saying they evolved one into the other, without showing ANY transitional fossils does not make evolution any more plausible! You can't even prove that any of those creatures even had offspring! It's just a few fossils! And they don't tell you which ones they evolved into!

quote:

---

You're telling me it's a dinosaur with fake feathers.... unless the feathers are real, and then it's just a bird?

---

I'm only offering all the possibilities, it could be just a reptile, just a bird, or a fraud, which is what I think it is. But there are just as many arguments for it being just a bird or just a reptile. BUT NOT BOTH! That's the point. It could be one of the three, but not a transitional as evolutionists claim.

---

"If you’re living like there is no God you’d better be right!" - Unknown

quote:

---

welcome back. i thought'd you'd left.

---

Oh, it's normal for me. I go to forums and leave depending on how busy I am and what mood I'm in. Right now I'm in a mood for a nice evolution debate, so I came here in hopes of getting it! Hi!

quote:

---

yeah? name some. or rather, name some that have fully formed digits that make an actual hand, and a full set of teeth, in their adult life.

---

You're coming to me for information? Wow.Hey, did you know that it is proposed to make a whole sub class of fossil birds called Odontornithes- birds with teeth? Yep. One group is Ichthyornidae. Check out this site for more info on this example, it is an adult, and it is a bird, and it has teeth: Birds with TeethHey, and as for birds with claws on their wings, we have Hoatzin, and Emus, and probably more.

quote:

---

sure we do. people just make a lot of fuss about archaeopteryx as if it's the only dinosaur with feathers. ask any competent paleontologist, and they'll tell the odds are that every theropod dinosaur had feathers. certainly all the ones we've found with skin impressions do.

---

Like I said above, there are creatures with characteristics from several groups of animals, but that doesn't make them transitional. We don't see any evolving "transitionals", but we see them complete, as Creationists would expect.

---

"If you’re living like there is no God you’d better be right!" - Unknown

quote:

---

do you have a lake by your house? perhaps a beach. go down and sit by the water for a while. what kinds of animals do you see?

---

Um, you must be lucky to live by a beach (that's what I am guessing from your post), but many of us don't, at least I don't. Nearest one is like 45 min. drive from here, so I'm not going to go out there right now.I can remember seeing seagulls, but no dino/birds flying around. But point is, dead birds float if they land in a lake.And, not all fossilized creatures lived near lagoons, how do you explain their fossilization? I say a big flood did it.

---

"If you’re living like there is no God you’d better be right!" - Unknown

quote:

---

Yes, I did. Yesterday the Word of the Day was taphonomy: today it's Solnhofen. You will get behind if you don't start looking them up pretty quick. Google is your friend.

---

Taphonomy happens after a creature's remains are buried, if I'm not mistaken. But what I'm saying is that dust and wind aren't enough to cover up remains before bacteria eat them up and other creatures smash them, etc. I believe a big flood covered up MANY animals, fossils of which we find today. But this is getting a bit off topic.As for the other word, you're joking, right?

---

"If you’re living like there is no God you’d better be right!" - Unknown

There are no transitional fossils with partially evolving bones or something. I have yet to see a scale/feather transitional fossil... All I see is complete creatures, just like I would expect since God Created them. Isn't it a bit odd that in all our fossil finds we find not ONE transitional fossil that in undebateable? You would expect to find at least a few hundred, but can't even produce one that is undebateable...

---

"If you’re living like there is no God you’d better be right!" - Unknown

How do you explain petrified trees found upright in the layers, protruding through "many different time periods", or a whale doing this? Doesn't a global flood and Creation better describe this?And I'm going to quote here, "Fossils of animals, for example, are formed when animals are buried quickly and under tremendous pressure so that their bones or imprint are preserved in rock. If living things are not buried quickly and under enormous pressure, they will not be fossilized. Most of the many millions of fossils in the world are found in rock which has been affected by water, and, therefore, the fossils of these animals were formed as a result of the animals being buried suddenly and quickly under tremendous water pressure." (Ranganathan, B.G. Origins?, Carlisle, PA: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1988, p.27)

---

"If you’re living like there is no God you’d better be right!" - Unknown

quote:

---

If you are insisting that reptilian fossils with feathers must be frauds, does that mean that you concede that such fossils, if genuine, would be transitional fossils that support evolution?

---

No, I explained in my above messages why creatures with features of several animal groups do not indicate transition.

---

"If you’re living like there is no God you’d better be right!" - Unknown

quote:

---

Such as?
And I mean teeth with proper enamel, like Hesperornis and Archeopteryx?

---

Already replied in above posts. There are fossilized birds with teeth. Please check above posts, I do not want to repeat myself over and over.

---

"If you’re living like there is no God you’d better be right!" - Unknown

quote:

---

Such as?
And I mean teeth with proper enamel, like Hesperornis and Archeopteryx?

---

Maybe it's classified as a mammal. But it's not certain whether the platypus is a bird or a mammal or a reptile, because it has features of all. It's debateable. But that's getting off subject here...

---

"If you’re living like there is no God you’d better be right!" - Unknown

quote:

---

What you have linked to there is another example of transitional fossils. As that website says:

---

Whether or not it's transitional is debateable, but point is that there are fossilized birds with teeth. This doesn't automatically make them transitional, you won't say the platypus is transitional because it has characteristics of reptiles, mammals and birds, would you?

quote:

---

Do you know of any modern birds that have true teeth?

---

Not yet. Did a search, only thing I found was a mutant chicken with teeth like an alligator, but that's a mutant...and it never hatched...

quote:

---

If you mean that there will be no non-functional "hopeful monster" transitionals, that's what evolutionary theory would predict, too. The idea that a transitional organism would be "incomplete" is a creationist strawman that is specifically NOT predicted by evolutionary theory.

---

But if you examine the fossil finds, you will see all animals and plants complete, with no evolving parts, like scale/feathers.

---

"If you’re living like there is no God you’d better be right!" - Unknown

quote:

---

Please check below post (edit: by which I mean Message 154), I've replied to your replies. You're running behind. It's okay to skip ahead in situations like that.

---

Yeah, it's hard to catch up with so many people replying to me. Yes, I was behind, but now I have come to your post and replied above. Hope you understand how hard it is for me to sit here and try to reply to material from yesterday, and have new material posted today that I have to reply to as well. It just takes soooo long and I go in order, so things like the above will happen often. I'll leave this as it is for now and move on to something different, I've spent too much time just on this topic...

---

"If you’re living like there is no God you’d better be right!" - Unknown