Archaeopteryx! OK, now click your heels together 3 times and say, "I wish I was in Kansas." That is an even better fantasy.
Look back in one of my previous posts for MY evolutionary professor who disagrees...kay, you guys boor me.
What Bible college is your evolutionary professor in?
Archaeopteryx! OK, now click your heels together 3 times and say, "I wish I was in Kansas." That is an even better fantasy.
Look back in one of my previous posts for MY evolutionary professor who disagrees...kay, you guys boor me.
B: I did and already refuted it. First off, Feduccia does not, that I've read, claim Archeaopteryx is not a transitional form. Certainly the little snippet you provided doesn't indicate that. Feduccia argues that birds didn't evolve from theropods, but from a more primitive group of dinos known as, if memory serves me, Pelycosaurs. Second it is laughable to suggest that in order for science to come to a consensus all scientists must agree. In the case of the birds are dinos hypothesis, the overwelming majority of paleontologists as typified by the likes of Kevin Padian regard the issue as settled. The number of dissenters, like Feduccia, can be counted on the fingers of one hand. And given recent work on the development of bird embryos, Feduccia no longer has a supportable argument. He's an important scientist, so I figure eventually unless he comes up with a good argument to support his hypothesis, he'll eventually give up on it. Thats a hard thing to do when you've staked much of your professional career on it. There's no harm in being wrong, however.
B: Sorry, you still lose. But feel free to continue and play pretend you didn't read what I wrote.
You promised to cite an evolutionist who denies Arcaheopteryx is a transitional form. Now you want me to go find one in your old posts. No dice. Do what you promised. Cite please.
Evidently Jehu is referring to this post (number 657), in which he says
Note the following from Dr. Alan Feducia of University of Northern Carolina, one of the world's leading bird experts AND an evolutionist. ‘Paleontologists have tried to turn Archaeopteryx into an earth-bound, feathered dinosaur. But it’s not. It is a bird, a perching bird. And no amount of “paleobabble” is going to change that.’2 Archaeopteryx is the premier (and just about the only species) put forth as a "transitional" form. And yet one of the leading experts on birds who IS an evolutionist himself is honest enough to admit "it is a BIRD!" And this labeling game just goes on anyway.
Feduccia’s ‘The Origin and Evolution of Birds’ is a wonderful book. While it’s by no means mainstream, it’s interesting, and opinionated, and chock-full of facts, a commodity creationists are starved for. Let’s start with Chapter 1, Paragraph 1….
The creature thus memorialized was Archaeopteryx lithographica , and, though indisputably birdlike, it could with equal truth be called reptilian….The Archaeopteryx fossil is, in fact, the most superb example of a specimen perfectly intermediate between two higher groups of living organisms – what has come to be called a ‘missing link’, a Rosetta Stone of evolution.
It is clear from the above that Jehu, either from malice or from willful disregard of the truth, has represented Feduccia as saying the exact opposite of what Feduccia in fact said. Feduccia explicitly refers to Archaeopteryx as a missing link, the epitome of a transitional form. Jehu tried to pretend he said the opposite. You might say Jehu has borne false witness; me, I just call Jehu a liar.