It's the closest thing to a transitional form that they have even though its 75 million years too late.
Why doesn't evolution go backwards as well as forward?
That is the 64 million year question, especially in light of the evo claim that a few mutations are beneficial. If a few are beneficial, the rest are not. Those that are not, the creative and inventive minds assume, die because all non-beneficial mutations must die in order that the theory not be embarrassed.
A typical page on Protoavis.
Have another one!
Here's a goodie!
Some bones may belong to a pterosaur, others to some kind of theropod.Chatterjee's reconstruction is a controversial one from remains in very poor shape, an unarticulated pile of bone fragments that may well represent the remains of more than one animal. However, you need it exactly as Chatterjee claimed it and that's what counts. As far as you're concerned, it's golden.
Here's an absolutely uncritical one based totally on Chatterjee.

"A bird! Just a modern bird!" With teeth and a bony tail any modern lizard would envy. No real evidence for flight except a "maybe" on a supracoideus pulley.
That is the 64 million year question, especially in light of the evo claim that a few mutations are beneficial. If a few are beneficial, the rest are not. Those that are not, the creative and inventive minds assume, die because all non-beneficial mutations must die in order that the theory not be embarrassed.
Since the environment plays such a big part in evolutionary theory (or more properly excuses) one must really wonder about that. Geology tells us that there are periodic glaciations on earth with the ice cap moving back and forth throughout the ages. One would expect that with 'survival of the fittest' some would go back to the prior state in order to survive the reversed conditions.