This is the fossil of the "microraptor" found in China in January, 2003.

On January 22, Chinese researchers announced the discovery of the fossil of

"A feathered dinosaur that glided on four wingsthat could be a long-sought evolutionary link between dinosaurs and the first true birds" ( Los Angeles Times,January 23, 2003, p. A1).

The discovery of this fossil has the evolutionists ecstatic with joy. Dr. Kevin Padian, a paleobiologist at UC Berkeley, said, "It's an incredible discovery, the kind of thing we've wished for, well, for centuries now" (ibid., p. A6).

But the same Los Angeles Times article went on to say,

"Even if the animal could glide effectively, there is no reason to assume that ability led directly to the evolution of flight in birdsmultiple sets of wings [on the front and back legs] could have been fairly common - or, just as easily, an evolutionary dead end" (ibid.).

These two statements show the incredibly flimsy "proof" that lies behind the theory of evolution.

In their book, Darwin's Demise (Master Books, 2001), Dr. Joe White and Dr. Nicholas Comninellis say,

"If reptiles turned into birds, as claimed, then we should also expect to find fossils with gradual extending of the front feet of the reptile into the form of wings like a bird, along with the reptile's leathery skin transforming into feathers. The fossil record ought to reveal many millions of transitional, intermediate life forms. They should fill museum collections" (ibid., p. 15).

But there are not "many millions" of transitional fossils between reptiles and birds. The evolutionists present us with just one - this one! That is why the evolutionist Dr. Kevin Padian called this "an incredible discovery, the kind of thing we've wished for, well, for centuries now." But wait. Dr. Padian, you need literally millions more "missing links" to prove that your theory is true! The evidence is just not there - in the fossil record. As Dr. White and Dr. Comninellis observe, "The fact that some creatures show similarities with other creatures is insufficient to prove that they evolved from one another" (ibid.).  In fact, I'm not even sure this was a reptile.  I looked carefully at a large photograph of the fossil, and it didn't look any more like a reptile than the emus my boys kept as pets a few years ago.  An emu is like a small ostrich.  The head of those birds looked the same as this fossil.  How can they be sure that this wasn't just a bird?  I say that's what it was!

But even if it was a small dinosaur, one reptile with feathery scales on its legs and feet does not prove the outdated theory of evolution. Charles Darwin and his theory belong on the ash heap of history, along with the idea that you can discover a person's emotional make-up by the shape of his head, or the idea that you can cure someone's illnesses by bleeding him. Darwinism has no more credibility than these moth-eaten "scientific" ideas from the Victorian age.