Posted on 10/14/2009 7:23:23 PM PDT by SunkenCiv
The first fossil of the raven-size species was an immediate sensation when it was excavated in 1860, in southern Germany. It had feathers and a wishbone, like birds, but teeth and a long, bony tail, like reptiles. Coming the year after publication of "The Origin of Species," the discovery swayed many scientists into accepting Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection.
Thomas Henry Huxley, Darwin's staunch ally, recognized the fossil in a limestone slab as a transitional species between dinosaurs and birds. Over time, the 10 known specimens of Archaeopteryx became widely regarded as examples of the earliest bird, which lived about 150 million years ago.
Now scientists examining tiny pieces of a specimen's long bone under powerful microscopes for the first time said they found unexpected patterns indicating that the species grew at a rate faster than living reptiles but only one-third as fast as that of modern birds. The evidence, they reported Thursday, challenges the hypothesis that Archaeopteryx had already developed characteristics of a physiologically modern bird.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
"Physical, mental, and moral peculiarities go with blood and not with language. In the United States the negroes have spoken English for generations; but no one on that ground would call them Englishmen, or expect them to differ physically, mentally, or morally from other negroes." -- Thomas Huxley, "Darwin's Bulldog" [Erik Trinkaus, Pat Shipman, The Neandertals pp 46-47]
|
|
|||
Gods |
Archaeopteryx site:freerepublic.com |
||
|
· Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google · · The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · |
|||
Another day, another part of the CERTAINTY of the THEORY of Evolution fails.
“Mark A. Norell, a co-author who specializes in dinosaur research at the American Museum of Natural History in New York, said the findings showed that “the transition to physiological and metabolic birds happened well after Archaeopteryx.” As a result, he added, the evolutionary emergence of birds “is still a huge mystery.”
Whenever evolutionists are challenged to produce fossils of all those transitional living creaturs that MUST be somewhere if the theory of evolution is true, they ALWAYS - in the past - have referred to Archaeopteryx.
No more.
Why? Because there ARE NO FOSSILS of TRANSITIONAL creatures.
Why? Because MACRO-EVOLUTION is a LIE.
THE CENTRE HOLDS
http://www.kronia.com/library/journals/center.txt
PALEONTOLOGY AND BIOLOGY
Inseparable from the geological record is the paleontological and biological.
This touches a part of Velikovsky’s work which can legitimately be called a theory -that of catastrophic mutation. The bulk of his effort has been towards a reconstruction of specific events, while theterm “theory”, is better applied to a general account (verifiable by experimentation).
Darwinian evolution lays claim to the status of a theory not because it can be experimentally verified, but only because it claims that processes that occurred in the past are also occur- ring unnoticeably in the present.
Velikovsky’s theory of mutations, on the other hand, is supported by experiments al- ready performed (cf. Muller’s subjection of vinegar flies to x-rays).3 Here future possibilities are endless. It is even a bit frightening to speculate how techniques of inducing mutation might be sophisticated through experiments. From the point of view of historical reconstruction, however, knowledge thus gained will be invaluable. Like the geologist, the biologist will have to face more seriously the fact that between strata many new species appear abruptly. His task is to devise laws of mutation refined enough to explain how a given species came from onepreceding it and why it took the form it did.
The early 19th century evolutionist, Etienne Saint-Hilaire, speculated that birds might have been
generated directly from fish through sudden mutation in catastrophic circumstances, but he was not prepared to explain the mechanics.
A second large subject for biological experimentation is the old Lamarckian theory of inheritance of acquired characteristics. It has never been decisively disproven. If anything, increased experimental sophistication has only revealed greater complexity in genetic structures leaving the possibility of the subtlest kinds of transmission wide open. Inheritance of behavior patterns laid down in catastrophic circumstances might explain a
number of biological enigmas-bird migration; swarming; acute sensitivity of many species to the subtlest earth tremors, solar eclipses, etc. The inheritance of memory has already been suggested by experiments on rats and
worms.
Thanks FWI for finding this one...PING!
Thanks for the ping!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.