[atlaw]

I checked the citation:
http://www.press.jhu.edu/press/books/titles/sampler/chatjee.htm

I'm not finding that quote you provided, Boiler Plate. Would you please provide a little more direction? Chatterjee has had some fairly outlandish ideas, but the words you attribute to him seem way out of line.

[VadeRetro]

It's in there, 5th paragraph from the bottom. Chatterjee does not, that I can see, think that what he is saying makes Archaeopteryx go away. The presence of feathers used to be "diagnostic" of "bird." Now it isn't.

The other problem, as I pointed out to Dataman already on this thread, is that Chatterjee's Protoavis is based on a wretched-condition fossil which he has apparently still not allowed anyone else to examine. Nobody much believes it to be what he claimed for it around 1989. For sure, he hasn't moved it any closer to acceptance.

[VadeRetro]

429 and 445 on this thread raise problems with using Protoavis, especially as an early "modern bird."

[Boiler Plate]

The second prargraph in the main body of text and the 5th to last paragraph. Of course you could copy and paste into word and just do a word search.