No. 46: Jul-Aug 1986
We have here what must be considered the evolutionists' reply to the claim of Hoyle and Wickramasinghe that overzealous followers of Darwin deliberately tampered with scientific evidence.
"Archaeopteryx lithographica might be regarded as the most important zoological species known, fossil or recent. Its importance lies not in that its transitional nature is unique -- there are many such transitional forms at all taxonomic levels -- but in the fact that it is an obvious and comprehensible example of organic evolution. There have been recent allegations that the feather impressions on Archaeopteryx are a forgery. In this report, proof of authenticity is provided by exactly matching hairline cracks and dendrites on the feathered areas of the opposing slabs, which show the absence of the artificial cement layer into which modern feathers could have been pressed by a forger."
(Charig, Alan J., et al; "Archaeopteryx Is Not a Forgery," Science, 232:622, 1986.)
Comment. The article itself offers some new evidence, but seems to fall a bit short of the proof promised in the Abstract. Let us wait for a rebuttal by Hoyle & Co. The Abstract's claim that many transitional forms exist at all taxonomic levels certainly does not square with the fossil record described by the punctuated evolutionists! In any event, the fossil record gap between dinosaurs and sophisticatedly feathered Archaeopteryx is still a Marianas Trench.