CREATIONISTS: if archaeopteryx is "just a bird", then how do you explain this long list of reprtilian traits?

Question

1. claws -- a few modern birds have claws, but usually only as babies.

2. teeth -- no modern birds have teeth.

3. flat sternum (no keel) -- the only modern day birds with flat sterna are flightless birds.

4. concave articulation points on the cervical vertibrae instead of the standard elongated, saddle-shaped articulations that most birds have.

5.free vertebrae in the truck region rather than the typical fused vertebrae seen in all modern birds.

6. presence of abdominal ribs. these are found in theropods and other reptiles but not in any modern birds.

7. a ribcage which lacks uncinate processes and does not articulate to the sternum. all modern-day birds have strut-like uncinates and sternum articulations.

8. only 6 vertebrae in the sacrum. modern birds have 11 to 23.

9. mobile joints in not only the fingers, but also in the elbow and wrist. in modern birds, all of the joints have been fused.

10. downward-facing shoulder socket (like the kind found in other theropod dinosaurs) rather than the typical outward-facing shoulder sockets found in birds.

11. solid bones. the bones of birds are hollow and allow air to permeate them.

12. long bony tail with freely moving vertebra, just like the sorts of tails found in reptiles. birds today lack tails. (they only have "tails" made of feather, which aren't really, truly tails.) and the vertebrae they do have down there are of course fused.

13. the fenestrae in the skull are arranged the same way is in other theropods. the fenestrae in bird skulls are arranged much differently.

14. a short, heavy quadratic bone with a forward inclination.

15. there is a bend in the jawbone behind the tooth row.

16. presence of a long retro-articular process. this is very reptilian and found in no birds.

17. the jugal bone is straight and thin as in other reptiles.

18. a preorbital bar that saparates the anteorbital fenestra and the eye socket.

19. the occipital condyle and foraman magnum are located above the dorsal end of the quadrate (as in theropods), rather than below the quadrate (as in modern birds).

20. slender, elongated cerebral hemispheres which do not overlap the midbrain. in birds, the cerebral hemispheres are much heavier and extend past the midbrain.


------- wouldn't it just be easier to call archaeopteryx a "dinosaur with feathers"??

===========
===========
===========

PEEKATCHOO,

actually, geese don't have teeth. they have what are called "tomia". they might look like teeth, but they're actually just serrations on the beak. --- archaeopteryx on the other hand, had actual rooted teeth that grew out of gums, just like how reptiles have.

===========
===========
===========

COLDSTREAM26,

well no, your dog is not your cat. but they are both placental mammals, and even more specifically, carnivorans. all the features you named (with the exception of domestication) were present in the common ancestor of all carnivorans.

by the way, don't be such a smart ***. you're clearly on the wrong side of the debate, and being a smart *** only makes you look that much more repulsive.

===========
===========
===========

BETHE,

calling it a different type of bird doesn't explain why it's so similar to reptiles.

Answer 1

Do you really think creationists are smart enough to answer thast question?

I can hear their answer now...GOD made them that way??

Answer 2

Birds have a totally different respiratory system than reptiles. For a reptilian respiratory system to change into an avian respiratory system would be analogous to a steam engine changing into an electric motor by randomly removing or modifying one component at a time, without disrupting the motor operation. It is simply an impossibility.
The hollow bones, muscle design, keen eyesight, neurological commands, instincts, feathers, and a hundred other unique bird features are completely different from reptiles. In particular a bird's lungs and feathers display brilliant design. Either would be totally useless to perform their designed function unless complete. A step by step transformation from scale to feather makes a nice story but "the devil is in the details". And the details simply do not add up to a workable intermediate creature. The building blocks of scales and feathers aren't even the same-they are made from different types of protein!Many recent dinosaur to bird "links" are "dated" between 120-140 million years. Yet archaeopteryx (which exhibits all the characteristics of a fully formed bird) is "dated" at 150 million years. Alan Feduccia, a world authority on birds (and evolutionist) states, "Paleontologist 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."University of Kansas paleontologist Larry Martin sums up the presentation of this dinosaur to bird fossils best: "You have to put this into perspective. To the people who wrote this paper, (linking dinosaurs to birds) the chicken would be a feathered dinosaur."

Those who reject the possibility of the sudden appearance of birds have no other alternative than to accept the inadequate evidence for evolution. However, the actual evidence for evolution does not support that this ever happened. Evolution is the only alternative (creation by God) has been arbitrarily eliminated.

Rather than blindly accepting the latest evolutionary find, dig into the details and determine if real science proves that reptiles could have turned into birds or lifeless chemicals could have ever "come alive". An honest scientist will follow the data wherever it leads-even if it leads to an encounter with a personal creator

Answer 3

your kidding, right?

there are two types of dinosaurs

1) bird hipped dinosaurs
2) lizard hipped dinosaurs

take a wild guess which kind the T REX that tweety was supposed to come from are

envelop please.... 2) LIZARD HIPPED
my daughter says that is so dumb

in the end there are mega problems with the T REX to TWEETY theory and even many evolutionists do not believe it. One extremely serious problem is the radically different bird lung system which is quite complex and allows air to flow one way continually... this is so radically different ... there is no serious of intermediate forms that can gradually change to become it

the bird lung issue has been succinctly discussed in the excellent book and video by the talented Medical Doctor and anatomist and musician and artist Vij Sodera, in One Small Speck to Man The DVD and book has really really good photography

but the radical differences go on... and feathers are incredible differnt, being like interlocking velcro, firm in one direction and free in another... the tounge of the woodpecker? in the case of the green european woodpecker is goes in wraps around the head over the skill down the beak and out.... a real mind bender for evolutionists to explain how that happened... see
Incredicle Creatures that Defy Evolution I by Job Martin
for cool critters that cannot be explained by macro evolution

Answer 4

If I base my beliefs on the Bible then.
1. Man was made in God's image.
2. I imagine Man was pretty smart.(God is)
3. I also imagine that within just a few years (after the fall of man) that Adams descendants had gene splicing down to an art form.
4. With that gene splicing they "created" different "species" which today we call dinosaurs.
5. After that God sent the flood and destroyed all the "Beings" that He didn't create

Answer 5

Julius- very handsome Jeremy "Jem"- love it! Jeremy just seems so friendly, and Jem is an adorable nic. Miles- soft but strong! My husband's cousin just had a baby and named him this. And he's adorable. Elliot- very sweet Wesley- used to be a fave. It's soft and occasionally at times I feel too soft. But, I still think it's a great name. Frederick- LOVE! Frederick is one of my fave names. Edward or Edmond- I'm not big on Edward, I mean it's nice, but I'm not in love with it. However, I LOVE LOVE LOVE Edmond. Henry- cute. Simon or Simeon- I think both are hansome, but I find Simon more apealing, and I think he seems more akin to your other names. Kenneth- not a fan, I wouldn't mind him as a middle name though. Alasdair- LOVE it. perhaps a bit too ethnic? seems a tad out of place in your list. Oliver- handsome Duncan- cute, if not a tad nerdy, but a cute nerdy. Callum "Cal"- love it. I also love Calvin "Cal" Lachlan- not bad, but not a fave. Caleb- nice Middle names (in honor of family): Arthur William Benjamin or Bennett Daniel I'm in LOVE with the names Arthur and Benjamin! the others are great too! If I were to make my own combos: Frederick Daniel "Ned" Jeremy Arthur "Jem" Simon Bennett Elliot William Julius Benjamin

Answer 6

hmmm by that logic, let me think....
My cat has fur,sharp teeth, gives birth to live young and nurses them. It has four legs, claws and two ears and two eyes. It has these cool little pads on the bottom of its feet, a tail, a brain, internal organs, it has been domesticated and serves as a great pet, .....ohhhhhh cooool wait!!! my dog has that too!!! Well that proves it, My dog was once a cat.

Answer 7

this is where they would claim a different species of bird or just fall back on species specific evolution not all life coming from one type of life form but specific genetic mutation in a species giving it its unique traits

Answer 8

actually, by typing in birds with teeth on yahoo search engine?
geese have teeth!
how do evolutionist's explain this?
so your claim "no modern bird has teeth", is false!

Answer 9

It is a different "just a bird".

Answer 10

do you want a long list of explainations .. or would it be easier for me to say ...
not all creationsits deny evolution