And if Archeopteryx is a dead end with derived traits from a transitional between dinosaurs and birds - the existence of more fully formed actual “birds” slightly (as these things go) before it evolved would hardly be surprising.
Kind of like the existence of Neanderthal at the same time as modern man. Or the existence of Australopithecus Robustus at the same time as Australopithecus Afarensis.
The fact that reality doesn't comport well with a creationists simplistic misunderstanding of what evolution actually is isn't a problem with the theory of evolution through natural selection of genetic variation.
You can start by googling Protoavis.
This one is from an article on archaeopteryx that can be found on creation.com:
A bird which is unquestionabiy a true bird has been found which dates (by the evolutionists’ own methods) at some 60 million years older than Archaeopteryx. This was announced in Science-News 112:198, Sep. 1977) The find was assessed as above by Dr. James Jensen of Brigham Young University. The article also quotes Prof. John Ostrom of Yale:
‘… we must now look for the ancestors of flying birds in a period of time much older than that in which Archaeopteryx lived.’
An attack on creation.com won’t help you here..... they are not the original source.
The fact is that it was the link between dinosaurs and birds. Then it was shown that this was not so.
The relationships are based on conjecture. Conjecture isn’t a scientific basis.