quote:
Mark:
Methinks you miss the point. A "fully developed bird" has what characteristics exactly? Feathers? A keeled sternum? Hypotarsus? Abdominal ribs, etc? Since you refuse to answer the question, "what represents a transitional form as predicted by the ToE", it is difficult to take your objections seriously.
Interestingly, a colleague of mine, an ornithologist, gave a talk yesterday about the evolution of birds.
Ornithologists seem to consider Archie a bird, albeit with reptilian features.
The fact that, as is apparent by the differing opinions expressed by, for example, my colleague and Mark, it is so difficult to reach definite conclusions about fossils like Archis is strong support for evolution.
If there were "archetypes" or "created kinds", it stands to reason that any and all extant (or extinct) organisms should easily fit within a certain 'type'.
Evolution predicts a continuum, and Archie and other reptile-like birds (or bird-like reptiles) fit nicely within that framework.
™ Version 4.2
