Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 1



Wayne Jackson, M.A.
While it certainly is true that many evolutionists still desperately appeal to this ancient bird as a missing link, the better informed scholars are considerably more restrained. W.E. Swinton, an evolutionary expert on birds, wrote: The origin of birds is largely a matter of deduction. There is no fossil evidence of the stages through which the remarkable change from reptile to bird was achieved (Biology and Comparative Physiology of Birds, 1960, p.1) . Another evolutionist, du Nouy, is even more specific regarding this ancient bird. He wrote that we are not even authorized to consider the exceptional case of the Archaeopteryx as a true link. By link, we mean a necessary stage of transition between classes such as reptiles and birds, or between smaller groups. An animal displaying characters belonging to two different groups cannot be treated as a true link as long as the intermediary stages have not been found, and as long as the mechanisms of transition remain unknown (Human Destiny, 1947, p. 74). Lecomte du Nouys observation, though made almost two decades ago, is still valid. It is certainly no wonder, then, that scholars like Stephen Jay Gould and Niles Eldredge are forced to concede that curious mosaics like Archaeopteryx do not count (Paleobiology, 1977, 3:147). And so the missing link between reptiles and birds is just thatmissing! Always has been missing, and will continue to be missing, for it never existed. Finally, this point: we do not render a service to the cause of truth when we pick up and carelessly use the jargon of evolutionism. A writer recently stated: It is fairly well agreed among all who have investigated the evidence that the first true bird on this planet from known evidence was a bird known as the Archaeopteryx (John Clayton, Does God Exist?, December, 1980, p. 13, emp. added). What does the expression, the first true bird, mean? Was there some sort of pre-bird or proto-bird or untrue bird? Of course not! The birds of the fifth day of creation (Gen. 1:20-23) were simply that, birds, no more and no less. Let us thus refrain from thoughtless language that accommodates antibiblical and unscientific evolution.


Those who advocate the theory of evolution contend that all living organisms derive from a primitive life source. Evolutionists argue that proof for this notion is to be found in the fossil record. This record in the rocks is alleged to reveal, among other things, certain intermediate forms which bridge the gaps between the various kinds of living creatures. One of the more famous transitional links is Archaeopteryxa now-extinct, supposedly reptile-like bird. Some prominent evolutionists declare: Perhaps the most famous intermediate is that between reptiles and birds...Archaeopteryx (Simpson, Pittendrigh, Tiffany, LifeAn Introduction to Biology, 1957, p. 31). Again, The oldest known fossil birds (Archaeopteryx, ancient wing) were still almost reptilian except in one respect: they had feathered wings (p. 591, emp. added). While it appears to be true that this ancient creature had some features which are common to both birds and reptiles, this by no means establishes an evolutionary link between the two groups. That link exists only in the minds of certain zoologists who already have determined that reptiles and birds are biologically related! Consider the following facts about this matter: (1) Archaeopteryx possessed feathers analogous to those of modern birds. Peduccia and Turdoff, two evolutionists, have admitted: The shape and general proportions of the wing and wing feathers in Archaeopteryx are essentially like those of modern birds. The fact that the basic pattern and proportion of the modern avian wing were present in Archaeopteryx and have remained essentially unchanged for approximately 150 million years [according to evolutionary dating methods]...and that the individual flight feathers showed the asymmetry characteristic of airfoils seems to show that Archaeopteryx had an aerodynamically designed wing [just who designed it?WJ] and was capable of at least gliding (Science, March 9, 1979, p. 1022). (2) In 1977, a startling discovery was made which stunned evolutionists. Science magazine of January 20 , 1978 , reports: Although Archaeopteryx is generally considered the earliest bird on record, a recent find suggests that the creature...may not have been the only bird alive then. A new fossil found by James Jensen of Brigham Young University dates back to the same period...and appears to be the femur (thighbone) of a bird.... The fossil resembles the thighbone of modern birds more closely than the comparable Archaeopteryx bone does.... The hypothesis that Archaeopteryx represents a direct link from reptiles to birds has been generally accepted. The existence of another birdone that was an adept flyer and thus more advanced on the evolutionary scale would present a challenge to that hypothesis (p. 284). In other words, if modern birds were contemporary with Archaeopteryx, that creature could hardly have been a link in route towards modern birds! (3) It is said that Archaeopteryx had claws on its wingsa reptile trait. However, several modern birds, which are not considered to be transitional links, also have claws on their wings, e.g., the Hoatzin, Touraco, and Ostrich. And that disposes of the claw argument!

Originally Published In The Christian Courier August 1984, 20[4]:15-16

Distributed by Apologetics Press, Inc. 230 Landmark Drive Montgomery, AL 36117-2752 (334) 272-8558