Evidence of evolution?

Fang zhouzi

According to Darwin's theory of evolution, life evolves gradually. If this view is correct, then we should hopefully find a continuous fossil record, which evolved from an ancient biological form to a more modern biological form. But when Origin of Species 1859 was published, paleontologists had not found a so-called transitional fossil that could directly prove biological evolution. Why can't the fossil record reflect the gradual change of organisms? Darwin explained that this is because the fossil record is extremely incomplete. The formation of fossils is a very accidental event, and it is even more accidental that transitional organisms are preserved and discovered by people. But Darwin was very lucky. Only two years later, the first transitional fossil-Archaeopteryx was unearthed in Germany. It has the characteristics of both reptiles and birds, and is obviously a transitional type from reptiles to birds. As early as 1833, French paleontologist Joffrey Saint-Tyrrell proposed that birds evolved from reptiles, and archaeopteryx fossils confirmed this prediction. In his later book On the Origin of Species, Darwin modestly and happily mentioned this "strange bird with a long tail like a lizard, feathers on every joint and two free claws on its wings" as strong evidence to refute the argument that the whole biota suddenly appeared.

Archaeopteryx, as an intuitive and vivid evidence of biological evolution, has been written into almost every ordinary biology textbook and become the most famous fossil known to all. Therefore, it became the target of anti-evolutionists. They either deny that Archaeopteryx is a transitional fossil, or simply accuse Archaeopteryx of being forged. There is an untrue and unforgivable cult that attacks Darwin's theory of evolution as "the greatest shame and scandal of mankind", and its followers have written many propaganda articles to slander the theory of evolution. This cult has no market in China now, but these propaganda articles are still spread on the Internet in a new guise. For example, I recently found the article "Evolution-A False Belief" on the website of a famous university's applied ethics research center, and I refuted it five years ago. This article, which claimed to be written by a student of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, created archaeopteryx fossils in this way: "Six archaeopteryx fossils came out one after another, causing a sensation in the world and becoming a model of transitional species between birds and reptiles. Later, five were identified as artificial, and the remaining 1 resolutely refused any identification. The original' discoverer' confessed one of the reasons for fraud: too much belief in evolution created the most powerful evidence. "

As long as we review the discovery process of archaeopteryx fossils, this rumor will be broken. Up to now, 1 feather fossils and 7 archaeopteryx fossils have been found, both of which were found in the limestone stratum near Sorenhofen, Bavaria, Germany in the late Jurassic (about10.50 billion years ago). During the Jurassic period, the area around Sorenhofen was a lagoon, and the water at the bottom of the lagoon had extremely low oxygen content, which contributed to the formation and preservation of fossils. /kloc-in the 0/9th century, Sorenhofen became the main producing area of high-quality limestone used in lithography. When quarrying and selecting stones, quarrymen can easily find specimens. 186 1 In August, German paleontologist Hermann vonMayer announced the discovery of a feather fossil in this stratum. Before people could respond to this news, more than a month later, von Meyer announced that a relatively complete fossil specimen (lacking a head) had been found in the same place, which clearly showed that this ancient creature had a pair of feathered wings, and he named it Archaeopteryxlithographica Painting. The Latin scientific name archaeopteryx means "ancient wings", and the Chinese translation is archaeopteryx. Lithography means "printing stone". The owner of the quarry where the archaeopteryx fossil was unearthed gave it to Karl Haberlein, a local doctor and fossil collector, as a reward for treating diseases. In order to make a dowry for her daughter, Haberlander offered to sell the specimens to the outside world. At that time, J. Andreas Wagner, a German paleontologist, claimed that there were no transitional creatures between reptiles and birds in the world, so archaeopteryx fossils could not be transitional fossils and were of little value. This statement makes it difficult for German research institutions to raise funds to buy this fossil. Richard owen, director of the Natural History Department of the British Museum, was recognized as an authority on paleontology at that time and was also the main opponent of Darwin's theory of evolution. He regarded archaeopteryx fossils as a great threat and decided to buy them at all costs, control them in his own hands, and make an authoritative appraisal by himself. Harper Dragon offered 750 pounds to sell Archaeopteryx, while the British Museum Council was only willing to pay 500 pounds at most. Owen sent someone to negotiate with harbert for six months. Without informing the Parliament, the deal was made at a price of 700 pounds, and more than 700 other specimens of Harboland were obtained together. 1 862 65438+1October1archaeopteryx arrived in the British Museum and remained there, which is called "London Specimen".

1877, the second archaeopteryx fossil was unearthed in another quarry. It is more complete than the "London Specimen", and almost 100% of the bones, including the skull with teeth, are preserved, and there are clear feather marks. The owner of the quarry sold it to Haberlander's son at a price of 140 mark, and the young Haberlander offered 36,000 marks for sale, which was later reduced to 26,000 marks. However, none of the German research institutions at that time could afford the money. After purchasing the first pterosaur specimen unearthed in the same area, O.C.Marsh, a famous American paleontologist, was prepared to buy this archaeopteryx fossil specimen at any cost. Seeing that another archaeopteryx fossil was about to fall into the hands of foreigners, German industrialist Siemens agreed at the last minute to pay 20,000 marks for this specimen and leave it in Germany. This specimen is now in the Humboldt Museum in Berlin and is called "Berlin Specimen".

1958 A fragmented archaeopteryx fossil with fuzzy feather marks was unearthed. It was once exhibited in a small museum in Masburg and was called "Masburg Specimen". 1992, after the death of its discoverer and owner, the whereabouts of this specimen were unknown. 1970, in order to explain how pterosaurs flew, J. Ostrom, a famous American paleontologist, traveled around the world, studied pterosaur specimens collected in museums around the world, and went to the Haram Museum in the Netherlands. When he observed a pterosaur specimen in the museum under natural light, he found a fuzzy feather mark and recognized that it was actually an archaeopteryx specimen. This specimen is actually the earliest archaeopteryx specimen unearthed in 1855, which is 6 years earlier than the feather specimen. It was once identified by von Meyer, but he mistakenly thought it was a pterodactyl with a strange "wing membrane". This specimen is now called "Haram specimen". This is not the only archaeopteryx fossil specimen that has been mistaken. 195 1 A specimen was first identified as a megajaw specimen and kept in a museum in Eita. It was not until 1973 that the founder of the museum recognized it as an archaeopteryx specimen and called it "Eita specimen". This archaeopteryx specimen is smaller than other archaeopteryx specimens and has some different characteristics. Some people think it belongs to another archaeopteryx, but it may also be a larva of the same creature. The head of this specimen is best preserved. A complete specimen unearthed in 1960 was also mistaken for a specimen of megagnathus. 1988 When the specimen was cleaned up, it was identified as an archaeopteryx specimen and kept in the Sorenhofen Museum, which was called "Sorenhofen specimen". The last archaeopteryx specimen was unearthed in 1992 Sorenhofen Mining Company quarry. It is smaller than the specimen of Eita, but it seems to be an adult and is considered as a new species.

After studying the archaeopteryx fossils with ulterior motives, Owen held a report meeting on 1862, 165438120 October, and came to the conclusion that archaeopteryx was undoubtedly a kind of bird, not a "missing link" between reptiles and birds, and predicted that. Originally, it was expected that Darwin's fighting dog Huxley would have an argument with Owen on the spot, but surprisingly, Huxley remained silent throughout the lecture, because at that time, he also thought that Archaeopteryx was just an abnormal bird, not a missing ring. It was not until 1868 that Huxley published a report in London and proved that birds originated from dinosaurs with fossils that Archaeopteryx was a transitional bird: it looked like a bird, but it was a transitional bird with many reptilian characteristics. He also pointed out that archaeopteryx's feet were very similar to a small dinosaur that walked on two feet-Megatron. Birds originated from dinosaurs, which is probably Huxley's greatest contribution to the theory of evolution, but it was soon forgotten after entering the 20th century. Since the beginning of the 20th century, paleontology generally believed that birds originated from serrated reptiles, and serrated reptiles were considered to be the same ancestor of birds and dinosaurs. It was not until 1970s that orstrom, an American paleontologist, put forward the theory that birds originated from dinosaurs again, which was gradually accepted by academic circles.

But until now, some creationism propagandists still insist that Archaeopteryx is a complete bird, not a transitional bird, just like Irving 100 years ago. Archaeopteryx does have some characteristics of birds. The most important thing is that it has feathers, followed by the wishbone on the chest. In addition, the carpal bones of its forelimbs partially healed. The mother toe of the hind limb is opposite to other toes, which is convenient for perching on branches. But its characteristics are mostly reptiles, the most obvious is that there are three separate phalanges on the long coccyx (up to 20 pieces) and forelimbs (wings), and developed claws on the fingertips. In addition, reptiles are characterized by: no keratinization in the front jaw and lower jaw (that is, no beak), and teeth in the mouth; The skull is the structure of reptiles; The nose is far from the eyes; There are only six sacral vertebrae (birds have 1 1 to 23); There is no air cavity in the bones (there are air-filled gaps in the bones of birds); The fibula is as long as the tibia (the fibula of birds degenerates); Metatarsal separation (metatarsal fusion in birds) and so on. In fact, if Archaeopteryx didn't have feathered wings, it would easily be considered a reptile. As mentioned earlier, three archaeopteryx specimens were wrongly classified as pterosaurs or monitor lizards. It can be seen that Archaeopteryx is obviously a transitional type from reptiles to birds.

So some anti-evolutionists accused Archaeopteryx of being forged instead! As early as 1980, Israeli physicist Lee speight claimed that Archaeopteryx was a fake, and the only reason was that the London Specimen and the Berlin Specimen were sold by Harperron and his son respectively. 1985, in order to provide a more adequate basis for the forgery theory, speight, British astronomer Huo Yier, mathematician Chandra Wickramasingha, doctor R. Watkins and photographer J. Watkins went to the British Museum. After taking some photos of the "London Specimen", they thought that their feather marks were crushed by chicken feathers. These people are not paleontologists and are not qualified to identify fossils. No academic journals are willing to accept their papers. They were finally published in the British photography magazine, and then a monograph was published to promote forgery. The British Museum organized a team to re-examine this specimen, and the results showed that its authenticity was beyond doubt, which refuted the forgery basis put forward by Huo Yier and others. "Sorenhofen Specimen" and "Sorenhofen Mining Company Specimen" were found in 1988 and 1992 respectively, which further proved the authenticity of archaeopteryx fossils. Although the academic circles have already reached a clear conclusion, creationists are still clamoring for the fable that "scientists think archaeopteryx is forged", and even the more strange it is, the more vivid it is, and "five were later identified as man-made, and the rest 1 resolutely refused any identification". As for "the original discoverer confessed to fraud", it was a shameless rumor, because Archaeopteryx was first discovered in 186 1, and when it was suspected of fraud, its discoverer had no idea how many years had passed.

The reason why these anti-evolutionists insist that Archaeopteryx is forged is due to a false assumption that Archaeopteryx is the only transitional fossil among different groups of vertebrates, so if they deny the authenticity of Archaeopteryx, they deny the existence of transitional fossils of vertebrates. In fact, Archaeopteryx is only a transitional fossil between reptiles and birds, and many transitional fossils have also been found among other vertebrate types. For example, there are many transitional fossils between reptiles and mammals, forming a fairly complete transitional pedigree, which clearly shows how mammals gradually evolved from reptiles. Only these transitional fossils are not as famous as archaeopteryx fossils. On the other hand, because anti-evolutionists think that archaeopteryx is too perfect as a transitional fossil, they think that archaeopteryx fossils are forged. Therefore, the accusation of forgery was denied. Should they admit that archaeopteryx fossils are perfect transitional fossils?

In the past, Archaeopteryx was attacked by creationists because it was the only transitional fossil from dinosaurs to birds. However, in recent years, many transitional fossils similar to Archaeopteryx have been found in China, Spanish and French, especially in western Liaoning, China. The species and quantity of these fossils are even more amazing. Some are transitional types between dinosaurs and archaeopteryx, such as "feathered dinosaurs" such as Chinese dragon, Beipiao dragon and Tailfeather dragon, and some are transitional types between archaeopteryx and birds, such as Confucius bird and Huaxia bird. They are not necessarily the direct ancestors of birds (more likely to be the dead end of evolution), but they have the characteristics of reptiles and birds at the same time, belonging to the transitional type, but this is for sure. These fossils fully prove that birds evolved from a dinosaur (osteophyte). Should creationists continue to forge these fossils?