Page 100 - Confessions of the Evolutionists

98 CONFESSIONS OF THE EVOLUTIONISTS

Well, I've studied bird skulls for 25 years and I don't see any similarities
whatsoever. I just don't see it... The theropod origins of birds, in my opin-
ion, will be the greatest embarrassment of paleontology of the 20th cen-
tury. 249
John H. Ostrom is Professor of Geology Chair at Yale University:
No fossil evidence exists of any pro-avis. It
is a purely hypothetical pre-bird, but one
that must have existed. 250
John H. Ostrom from Yale University,
who actively studied specimens, has said
that it is evident that we now need to look to
periods porior to Archaeopteryx in order to
seek the ancestor of flying birds.
John Ost rom
From Science magazine:
No dinosaur had an embryonic thumb, though all birds have them, on the
feet they use for landing … All dinosaurs have saw-edged teeth, with ra-
zor-like molars. Confuciosornis (a 142-million-year-old bird fossil) has no
teeth. Although Archaeopteryx has teeth, they are not saw-edged, but are
arranged in rows like nails. There are two wide spaces at the back of all
dinosaur skulls. Birds do not have these. There is no link between them at
all, not even down to the finest detail. 251
True birds have existed at least as long as Archaeopteryx so that the latter
could hardly have been their ancestor... 252
Carl O. Dunbar is professor of paleontology and stratigraphy at

Yale University:
Because of its feathers, [Archaeopteryx is] distinctly to be classed as a
bird. 253

Larry Martin is an American vertebrate paleontologist and curator
of the Natural History Museum and Biodiversity Research Center at the
University of Kansas:
To tell you the truth, if I had to support the dinosaur origin of birds with
those characters, I'd be embarrassed every time I had to get up and talk
about it. 254