Pastor Dave wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 00:12:49 -0400, Augray
>
spake thusly:>> I'm trying to keep the subject on Archaeopteryx.
>> Why doesn't *it* qualify as evidence?
>
> Thank you for proving my point! With evolutionists,
> it's never "here's the proof". It's always, "Why isn't
> it proof?".
Your reply would have gone over a whole lot better for you, Dave, if
Augray hadn't already posted 6 hours *before* you mentioning the many
ways in which Archeopteryx is nor "just a perching bird".
Augray said in article
4ax.com>:
>Why not? Why isn't his expertise good enough now? What about these
>quotes that don't mention evolution?:
>
> There are no skeletal features of _Archaeopteryx_, except the
> furcula, that are not also found in Jurassic reptiles.
> - Feduccia, A. 1980. The Age of Birds. Cambridge, Massachusetts:
> Harvard University Press, pg. 24.
>
> [Archaeopteryx is] a bird that has anatomical features of a
> reptile, feathers, and a long, lizard-like tail.
> - Feduccia, A. 1996. The Origin and Evolution of Birds. New
> Haven: Yale university Press, pg. 29.
>
>Do you still believe that "he is an expert in the fields required"?
and then Augray said:
>So will you accept his expertise now?:
>
> ...the ancient anisodactyl foot was less efficient anatomically
> than the foot of modern birds, and the [perching toe] of
> _Archaeopteryx_ was slightly elevated above the plane of the
> anterior toes and decidedly shorter.
> - Feduccia, A. 1996. The Origin and Evolution of Birds. New
> Haven: Yale university Press, pg. 13.
after which Augray said:
>- Archaeopteryx lacked an alula (used to reduce wing turbulence during
>low speed flight), which is found in living birds.
>
>- Its metacarpal bones were not fused into a carpometacarpus, as in
>living birds.
>
>- The ulnare (a carpal bone in the wrist, AKA the cuneiform) of
>Archaeopteryx was not V-shaped. In living birds this helps keep the
>wing rigid during the downstroke, preventing it from buckling.
>
>- It lacked a triosseal canal in the shoulder for passage of the
>tendon of the supracoracoideus muscle (which assists in the wing's
>upstroke).
>
>- In living birds, the position of the acrocoracohumeral ligament
>prevents dislocation of the shoulder during the upstroke. This is not
>the situation in Archaeopteryx, where the ligament was situated as it
>is in crocodiles.
>
>- The shoulder joint of Archaeopteryx was oriented in such a way so
>that the wing could not be raised above the horizontal position.
>
>- Archaeopteryx lacked an ossified sternum for the attachment of the
>flight muscles, and so would not have been a very powerful flyer.
>
>All of the above shows that Archaeopteryx was a poor flyer at best,
>and lacked the refinements for flight found in living birds. An
>excellent example of an intermediate form.
Odd that you never responded to that post by Augray, don'tcha think?
