[Cedric]

Archaeopteryx

[atlaw]

Archaeopteryx —

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/archaeopteryx/info.html

http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/diapsids/birds/archaeopteryx.html

[ColdWater]

Archaeopteryx

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/archaeopteryx/info.html

Much has been made in pseudoscientific circles about the position of Archae within the evolutionary scheme of things. The usual “argument” put forward is that Archae cannot be a transitional fossil between birds and dinosaurs because it is a bird. This simplistic line belies the fact that, whilst Archae is indeed classified as a bird, it has been done so on the strength of 4 main characters - 2 of which are not unique to birds. This classification ignores the fact that Archae has numerous characters which are unique, unique in that they are not possessed by birds. Archae’s avian affinities are allowable on the strength of the following 4 main characters:

[whattajoke]

I asked you what criteria you used to place Lucy with the two fakes (Piltdown/Nebraska) and you answered with, “Archaeopteryx.”

I struggle to understand how that is a viable answer to my question. It’s becoming very clear as to why you failed all your science classes in school.

Are you capable of answering a single question... ever? If so, try answering another one - what criteria did you use to place Lucy with the two fakes (Piltdown/Nebraska)?

[whattajoke]

Archaeopteryx

PS. You meant to write Archaeoraptor liaoningensis but you can't even get your goofy non-answers correct. Archaeopteryx was real. Get your frauds straight.