Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site decwrl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!prls!amdimage!amdcad!decwrl!arndt@lymph.DEC
From: arndt@lymph.DEC
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Why did the Archaeopteryx cross the road . . .
Message-ID: <155@decwrl.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 26-Aug-85 18:59:54 EDT
Article-I.D.: decwrl.155
Posted: Mon Aug 26 18:59:54 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 30-Aug-85 00:16:27 EDT
Sender: daemon@decwrl.UUCP
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Lines: 42


I would like information on the continuing debate in scientific circles about
the fate of ARCHAEOPTERYX as it is currently being carried on in the British
Journal of Photography and elsewhere.

Archaeopteryx, as you may recall, is a major piece in the weight of evidence
for the theory of evolution as it is viewed as the (the ONLY one?) remains of
an animal progressing from one class of vertebrates (reptiles) to another 
(birds).  Its reptilian skeleton, replete with avian feathers, was found in
Jurassic lithographic limestone (160 million yrs. old) in Bavaria in 1861.
It was installed in the British Museum (Natural History) within 14 months
of its finding.  Of the six known specimans, the two finest-feathered were
collected by members of the same family.  The first was sold to the British
Museum and the second went to the Berlin Natural Science Museum.

Now a scientist, Lee Spetner, an American Israeli physicist who specialized in
military electronics, has come forward to call for an examination of the 
fossils using modern technology.  He and five co-authors, including the British
astrophysist Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe have attacked the fossils
in the above mentioned journal in a series of articles.  They have used 
enlarged photographs of the fossils which they claim show that the feathered
sections were ADDED to a genuine reptilian fossil by applying a layer of cement
and making feather impressions in it.

It should be noted that none of the mentioned critics are 'creationists' per se 
although Spetner is an Orthodox Jew.  This is a case of scientists 'themselves'
looking at the evidence again and raising a debate.  The British Museum is 
taking new photographs to examine the questioned areas and doing some work with
19th C glues, etc.                                   

None of the critics of the fossils are paleontologists and they, to the best
of my knowledge, have yet to convince paleontologists of the strength of their
claims although they have caused the fossils to be looked at again.

I only raise the issue here for the sake of following an interesting debate
within the scientific community.  Has anyone been following this series of
articles and is there any followup in other journals that they could post
for our enlightenment??

Regards,

Ken Arndt