Chicago Promotes Archaeopteryx from Missing Link to Flying Bird
One of the most exploited fossils used
to prove Evolution, Archaeopteryx
was a flying bird, not a transitional
form between reptiles and birds
by Jerry Bergman, PhD
One of the most famous—and one of the earliest claimed transitional fossils between reptiles and birds—was the crow-sized Archaeopteryx. This extinct bird was discovered in the Solnhofen Limestone deposits located in southern Germany.[1] The fossil’s combination of reptilian and avian traits, including teeth in its beaked mouth, a long bony tail, hyper-extensible second toes, and two-foot-long feathered wings, made it a prime candidate for a transitional form to support the belief that birds evolved from dinosaurs. It was discovered in 1861, only two years after the Origin of Species was published, and was cited by Darwin in later editions of the book. Archaeopteryx is also important because it was, until recently, viewed as evidence—actually “the only direct evidence … of the earliest stages of avian evolution,” said J.H. Ostrom in 1974.[2]
Archaeopteryx, a Leading Transitional Fossil
The Archaeopteryx fossil was used for over a century as powerful evidence supporting Darwin’s theory of evolution. Gerhard Heilman, in his classic book The Origin of Birds, even wrote in 1927, “We may now stop talking about the ‘missing link’ between birds and reptiles. So much so is Archaeopteryx this link that we may term it as a warm-blooded reptile disguised as a bird.”[3]
Part of the evidence decisively disproving this view was the discovery of a new fossil of Archaeopteryx, the Chicago specimen, which supports the conclusion that it could fly like other birds, agrees the New York Times.[4] It is a bird, pure and simple, and not evidence of evolution, says Todd Wodd,[5] who commented that it reminds one of the duckbilled platypus (a mammal) in that Archaeopteryx is composed of a curious mosaic of features like the platypus.
The Chicago Archaeopteryx
The Chicago specimen shows exquisite detail of feathers and skull under UV light and CT scans. From the Smithsonian article.
As of this writing, fourteen specimens or fragments of Archaeopteryx have been confirmed. Despite 164 years of extensive study, they “remain a controversial taxon with regards to aspects of its anatomy, ecology, and biology.”[6] The newest fossil discovered, the Chicago Archaeopteryx, as is true of most Archaeopteryx fossils, was found in the Solnhofen Limestone deposits located in southern Germany. This limestone produces excellent fossil preservation. The Chicago specimen was discovered by a private fossil collector sometime before 1990 and was acquired by the Field Museum in Chicago in 2022.
The exceptionally preserved and prepared fossil revealed crucial insights into the species, including strong evidence that it could fly and was more bird-like than once believed.[7] More than any other Archaeopteryx specimen, it retained many delicate skeletal details, including soft tissues and beautifully preserved feathers.[8]
For the first time, the soft tissue of the hand and foot has also been observed in detail, supporting the conclusion that it was a bird. Like some other Archaeopteryx fossils, this specimen had fully modern feathers that were nearly identical with those of modern birds – in spite of the fact that Archaeopteryx was a very different kind of bird compared to modern birds.[9] For this reason, I said in 2003 that Archaeopteryx “does not provide much information about the origin of feathers because its feathers are almost identical to those of living birds.”[10]
Archaeopteryx Could Fly and Move Its Head
A careful detailed analysis of the fossil determined that the long-debated question, “Could it fly?,” has now been answered. Yes, it could fly. O’Connor observed that “These new feathers seen in this beautifully preserved specimen along with their asymmetric nature, confirm it could fly.”
Watch and share a Short Reel about this article! Click to view.
One key finding which convinced paleontologists that it could fly much like modern birds was the presence of specialized tertial feathers located on the upper arm bone. These tertial feathers were designed to create a smooth aerodynamic line from the wing to the body. Importantly, they are present only in birds that are able to fly. The feathers are asymmetric (one side of the central shaft is wider than the other), which is essential for generating the thrust required to take off from the ground.[11] Consequently, the tertial feathers were a crucial requirement for ground lift-off.[12]
This design was important because, compared to most living birds, Archaeopteryx has a very long upper arm bone, which can create a gap between the long primary and secondary feathers of the wing and the rest of its body. If air passes through this gap, lift flight is not possible.[13]
The Chicago specimen was the first Archaeopteryx preserved well enough to allow not only the examination of its long tertial feathers but also analysis of the bones in the roof of the mouth to determine if cranial kinesis could occur. Cranial kinesis allows the bird’s beak to move independently from the braincase, a feature that allows for multifunctional beak use and effective food acquisition. This advantage allows expansion of the palate, enabling birds to use their beaks as tools for cracking nuts. Also preserved were the small, tightly packed scales on the foot pads that lend support to the belief that it spent a significant amount of time walking on the ground, just like modern birds.
Summary
Clear evidence now exists that Archaeopteryx was an ancient but now extinct flying bird, not a transition between reptiles and birds as touted for over a century by evolutionists.
The Chicago Archaeopteryx. It looks very much like a bird, not a dinosaur. Drawing From the Chicago Museum of Natural History. Drawn by Delaney Drummond.
References
[1] Coyne. Jerry, Why Evolution is True, Oxford University Press New York, NY, p. 43, 1909.
[2] Ostrom, J.H., “Archaeopteryx and the Origin of Flight,” Quarterly Review of Biology 49(1):27-47, p. 27, 1974.
[3] Heilman, Gerhard, The Origin of Birds, D. Appleton and Company, New York, NY, p. 32, 1927.
[4] Elbein, Asher, “This Dinosaur Had Feathers and Probably Flew Like a Chicken,” https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/14/science/archaeopteryx-dinosaur-feathers-flight.html, 14 May 2025.
[5] Wood, Todd, “Was Archaeopteryx a Bird or a Dinosaur?,” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WopQDQvoTEk, 16 March 2021.
[6] O’Connor, Jingmai, et al., “Chicago Archaeopteryx informs on the early evolution of the avian bauplan,” Nature, https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-025-08912, 14 May 2025. –
[7] Schultz, Issaac, “The Famous, Fearsome Archaeopteryx Was More Bird Than We Knew,” https://gizmodo.com/the-famous-fearsome-archaeopteryx-was-more-bird-than-we-knew-2000601981, 14 May 2025.
[8] Bassi, Margherita, “The Famous, Feathered Dinosaur Archaeopteryx Could Fly, Suggests New Study of a ‘Beautifully Preserved’ Fossil,” https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/the-famous-feathered-dinosaur-archaeopteryx-could-fly-suggests-new-study-of-a-beautifully-preserved-fossil-180986634/, 15 May 2025.
[9] Prum, Richard O., “Development and Evolutionary Origin of Feathers,” Journal of Experimental Zoology (Molecular, Developmental, Evolution) 285:291-306, p. 291, 1999.
[10] Bergman, Jerry, “The evolution of feathers: A major problem for Darwinism, Journal of Creation 17(1):33–41, April 2003.
[11] O’Connor, et al., 2025.
[12] Ostrom, 1974.
[13] O’Connor, et al., 2025.
Dr. Jerry Bergman has taught biology, genetics, chemistry, biochemistry, anthropology, geology, and microbiology for over 40 years at several colleges and universities including Bowling Green State University, Medical College of Ohio where he was a research associate in experimental pathology, and The University of Toledo. He is a graduate of the Medical College of Ohio, Wayne State University in Detroit, the University of Toledo, and Bowling Green State University. He has over 1,900 publications in 14 languages and 40 books and monographs. His books and textbooks that include chapters that he authored are in over 1,800 college libraries in 27 countries. So far over 80,000 copies of the 60 books and monographs that he has authored or co-authored are in print. For more articles by Dr Bergman, see his Author Profile.
Comments
Ah, yes, indeed, “Archaeopteryx was a very different kind of bird compared to modern birds.” Bird? What’s in a name? As Shakespeare noted, “A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.” In the Bible “bird” probably includes everything we’d call a flying vertebrate: bats and pterosaurs as well as birds. As the quote calling Archie a “warm-blooded reptile” indicates, discoveries about some dinosaurs have changed our idea of what a reptile is. Going by the practice of assuming evolution and analysis of shared traits, evolutionists hardly need a specific “missing link” such as Archie or any one of the others more or less like it — birds are dinosaurs by this method of classification, so in evolutionary thinking they must have descended from flightless dinosaurs. The only question is which. “Aye, there’s the rub.”
In 2011, a study of Xiaotingia bumped Archie out of avialae, but a 2013 study of Aurornis put it back — but with Aurornis as an earlier bird. I seem to recall a similar shift between that and this new study. So what’s said to be the truth today may be rejected tomorrow.
Still, some things haven’t changed in a while. Nobody would be willing to say, when pressed, that any of these deep Mesozoic birds, including enantiornithines (which were much more like extant birds), must be the actual ancestor of extant birds. Only in the very last Mesozoic deposits are there a few birds that look like they probably are, and these are all very similar to living waterfowl, waders, and/or shorebirds. There’s no line of gradual changes in fossils from non-flying dinosaurs to these, and all the other orders of extant flying birds “suddenly” appear in their identifiable forms as fossils several layers of rock higher. (I don’t know of any cases where such fossils are literally stacked above others, I’m using the standard arrangement/dating of rock layers.)
A growing (if unacknowledged) problem for evolutionists is that these fully-fledged, flying dinosaurs are assigned dates that are earlier than those of most, if not all, flightless dinosaurs that have been used to “show the evolution” of feathers and birds! They have to appeal to missing fossils, i.e., “ghost lineages” — and as more of the fully-feathered, flying or at least gliding types are found in Jurassic deposits, the ghost lineages must get longer to account for all the diversity — and some of them are very diverse.
So, while the evolution from (flightless) dinosaurs to (flying dinosaurs) birds has become a star of the show, it’s all assumption, imagination, technicalities, and nomenclature shifts, while the solid evidence that something flightless evolved over generations into something that could fly still isn’t there.