















The Daily Paul is a community website with no official affiliation with Ron Paul. The content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions of the original posters, and are not endorsed, approved, or otherwise representative of the opinions of the Daily Paul, its owner, site moderators or Ron Paul. This site may contain adult language and adult concepts. If you are offended by such content, or feel you may be offended by such content, point your browser to a different site immediately. For more, read the


Comment: evolutionist Lecomte du Mouy
evolutionist Lecomte du Mouy
evolutionist Lecomte du Mouy recognizes this. In the book Human Destiny (N.Y. 1947) he writes:
‘… we are not even authorized to consider the exceptional case of Archaeopteryx as a true link. By link, we mean a necessary stage of transition between classes such as reptiles and birds, or between smaller groups. An animal displaying characters belonging to two different groups cannot be treated as a true link as long as the intermediary stages have not been found, and as long as the mechanism of transition remains unknown.’
Furthermore, Archaeopteryx stands alone, uniquely himself with no fossil between himself and either birds or reptiles. The evolutionist Barbara Stahl, in her book Vertebrate History: Problems in Evolution (McGraw-Hill 1941) writes:
‘Since Archaeopteryx occupies an isolated position in the fossil record, it is impossible to tell whether the animal gave rise to more advanced fliers …’ (This section of her book was reviewed by Prof. Alfred Romer.)
The evolutionist A.J. Marshall writing in Biology and Comparative Physiology of Birds (Academic Press 1960 p.1) states that:
‘The origin of birds is largely a matter of deduction. There is no fossil of the stages through which the remarkable change from reptile to bird was achieved.’