"Feathered dinosaurs are theoretical transitional forms required by the evolutionist worldview, which holds that birds have evolved from reptiles in the distant past."
(Source)
NOT TRUE. "Feathered dinosaurs" is just a bogus fantasy cooked up between Jurassic Park and imaginative evolutionist who don't critically think about issues like the time-line.
The argument is against "cretaceous dinosaurs" as ancestors of birds. To say otherwise is a denial of the fossil record. Crocodiles and many other "reptiles" among the archosaurs were not "true dinosaurs"... Some of us uphold evolution as a means to explain the "basal archosaur" which lead to common ancestry between birds, crocodiles and dinosaurs, but certainly not a "dinosaur" from the Cretaceous.
See the following chart which contains some primitive birds (in red) in contrast to dinosaurs (in green). Birds already existed and predate dinosaurs which are sadly referred to as the dinosaurs in which birds supposedly "evolved from."
Birds evolved from a common archosaurian ancestor shared with dinosaurs, in the early Jurassic or Triassic? Well who knows? But definitely not after Archeopteryx (in the late Jurassic), a true bird. And should Protoavis turn out to be a fully formed bird, living in the Triassic then that pushes back the timeline even further.
Protoavis"Throughout the years, there have been many excavations that claim to have discovered dinosaurs with feathers. While there is no evidence rejecting the idea that there could have been feathered dinosaurs, there is also no evidence proving, without doubt, that there were. There is evidence that in at least some cases these so-called feathered dinosaurs are really misidentified birds."
TRUE. The farther back one goes into the fossil record you will encounter:
- Bird-like dinosaurs.
- Dinosaur-like birds.
Due to shared common ancestry between Dinosaurs, Crocodiles, Birds- if you go back far enough -- you will reach the "common ancestor threshold" where neither bird nor dinosaur exist, but on the contrary, only an ARCHOSAUR.
"Also, most of these fossils are from China, of which they are known to have a fake fossil industry. This places a question mark on all such finds. While some evolutionists believe that dinosaurs are ancestors to our modern day birds, there is no evidence to prove it, but all the evidence against it."
Fake fossils, true. Some as high as 80%. Thank goodness he understands that only "some evolutionists" believe the myth that "birds evolved from Cretaceous dinosaurs."
The dino-bird hypothesis is a separate and independent hypothesis apart from Charles Darwin's theory of natural selection -- of which we have legitimate fossil evidence and actual examples upon which to found it as a valid theory.
"These birds are primary examples of how evolutionary dating is all speculative."
The dino-bird hypothesis has cast a dark shadow over all scientific credibility and lead to a meltdown in paleontology. The hypothesis does not follow standard scientific protocol and is rejected, or judgment withheld by many scientists, knowing the hypothesis poses direct conflict with the fossil record. His observations are correct... except that the "dino bird hypothesis" is an independent hypothesis, promoted by some very vocally outpoken non-scientists who are mainstream journalists, and has no bearing on the whole of Charles Darwin's theory of natural selection and the fossil evidence for evolution.
"...A feather found fossilized in amber by evolutionary paleontologists has been dated to be around 100 million years old. By evolutionists, it is said to represent the intermediate stage of the development of feather evolution. In disagreement with these dated facts are previous findings, such as the archaeopteryx. The archaeopteryx was said to be the link in dinosaur-to-bird evolution and was then dated to be 150 million years old.[1] It was also supposed to be the very first recognizable feathered bird. Another example that shows a flaw in the evolutionary theory of this feather is the confuciusornis. This beaked bird was dated to approximately 135 million years ago.[2] All the Chinese fossils indicating transitional forms from theropods to birds are dated to about 121 millions years old,[note 1] but they are 29 millions years after the first true bird. Therefore these creatures found in China couldn't possibly be the missing links to an already existing animal.[3] These birds are primary examples of how evolutionary dating is all speculative."
The Creation Wiki article takes one of the many failures of the dino-bird hypothesis -- which many legitimate scientists of notable reputation have vocally pointed out such numerous flaws, themselves... because they know the hypothesis contradicts the standard method of dating organisms and scientific dating methods in the fossil record. Extrapolating the FLAWED LOGIC of the dino-bird hypothesis as though it were somehow representative of legitimate dating methods like carbon-14 dating... is a non-Sequitur argument fallacy.
Creationists, like the dino-bird hypotheses crowd... do not care about science and seek to destroy Paleontology.
No comments:
Post a Comment