Feathered dinosaurs...now there's a concept. As I mentioned in an earlier post, it seems like every dinosaur uncovered suddenly has "evidence" of feathers. Until recently, dinosaurs were thought to have had rough, heavy skin since they were "reptiles, not lizards". But then the most amazing thing happened: they found a dinosaur with feathers (dramatic music here)! So, they uncovered a fossil of an ancient specimen of a dinosaur with skin, feathers and small teeth! Did you find it at the pond? Um...it might have been a Canadian Goose...just thinking out loud here.
No, really! Scientists put out material, including full-motion 3D animated films designed for children showing with complete certainty that dinosaurs evolved into birds. One documentary I saw showed 3D dinosaurs morphing into birds; something that's much easier to do on computers than in the real world. But among themselves, they still hotly debate the evidence that badly contradicts itself. In one frank statement, a
Not everyone agrees. "Vegavis was originally described as belonging to an extinct group; now all of a sudden it's a duck," says Alan Feduccia of the University of North Carolina, who proposed the big bang idea.
Yixian's birds have scarcely helped. The 20 or so species have a bewildering mix of primitive and advanced features - the toothed jaws and long tails of dinosaurs, plus the short tails and horny beaks of modern birds. The controversy will only be solved when more fossils come to light.
Do you mean there's controversy within the scientific community? Then aren't the 3D movies kinda' jumping the gun a bit? Now I can at least understand this sort of journalistic infidelity from the New York Times. After all, they're trying to beat the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post to the punch. Minutes matter in their field. But I don't understand this sort of "jumping the gun" from scientists who are studying topics that they believe span billions of years of evolution! Shouldn't "getting it right" trump "getting it fast" where scientific discovery is concerned?
The similarities between "feathered dinosaurs" and modern birds are so striking that to call them anything else but birds is kind of a leap. Their only reasons for calling them feathered dinosaurs are that they were buried in rock that Darwinists claim is a hundred+ million years old, which is before birds evolved! Now isn't that scientific (rhetorical "no.")!
Imagine a forensic pathologist is studying a murder crime scene (I know, ...more symmetry than analogy!), and decides that the victim has been dead for approximately 48 hours based on certain physical hints. Then, a young lieutenant produces a surveillance video tape from the hallway camera that details the struggle and subsequent murder, as well as contains a time-date index in the upper right corner of the film showing the murder to be only 6 hours earlier. So the investigator asserts the only logical conclusion: the body must have fallen into a time-altering worm hole that caused the body to experience 48 hours decay in only 6 hours! No! The only logical conclusion is that the forensic pathologist was wrong. The indicators that he relied upon to form his conclusions were wrong!
This is precisely the kind of leaps that evolutionary biologists and paleontologists routinely rationalize. They see feathers in a fossil that they've always thought pre-dated the evolution of birds. So they conclude exactly the wrong thing: that dinosaurs turned into birds. From the evidence, birds obviously did exist along side the dinosaurs. Their rationalizations that dinosaurs turned into birds are nonsensical, nearly random unless you also take into account their unwavering belief in evolution itself. These sorts of illogical rationalizations permeate all of modern evolutionary sciences. The formula basically looks like this: Since evolution is definitely true, whatever conclusion satisfies the truthfulness of evolution, however unlikely, must, therefore be true (a twist on Sherlock Holmes).
The gradual development of feathers also violates evolutionists assertion that evolution happens through long series of beneficial changes, often imposed by environmental factors. Feathers served no purpose until they were at a point where they could be used to fly. Why would dinosaurs carry around non-beneficial feathers for millions of years while unable to make use of them? Perhaps they were anticipating flight? "I know they're hot sweetie, but someday your great, great, great grandchickens will be able to fly"...oh wait.
Perhaps God created them the way they are. Did dinosaurs have feathers? Perhaps, but not because they evolved that way. They'd have them for the same reason that chickens, turkeys, ostriches, emus still have them today: because God liked them that way.
Genesis 1:21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
Posts
2 comments:
http://pterodactylfossilsforsale.com/
take A look at A pile of pterodactyl and rhamphamorps in A nest of 14 ! to note pterpdactyl and rhamphamorph ontop of each other , is to easily confuse parts of one with another in fossil digs!
maybe the dinosaur had A bird by the neck hanging from its mouth!Giving the ilusion of feathers on A lizard!
This comment is in reponse to the original post, not the first comment made on it, I just could not find a 'leave comment' under the original post.
There is actually a very good reason dinosaurs evolved feathers that predated flight. Feathers are modified scales, and also act as insulation, much like the hair of mammals. In order to be as active as they were, therapod dinosaurs would have needed a speedy metabolism (speedy in comparison to reptiles) and so were most likely not cold-blooded, but were probably not quite warm-blooded, either. To keep up with the rigors of hunting prey, keeping their big brains (by comparison with reptles and other dinosaurs) functioning, and looking after their young (nest, egg and infant evidence found with parents next to or nearby) they would have needed a way to keep warm. Protofeathers, which more closely resembled down and were symmetrical, would have acted to hold warmth against the skin of the active dinosaurs so they could keep active even in cool weather. You could call it a scientific coincedence that flight evolved from creatures with traits that adapted for flight later on (these are called derived characteristics, which are traits inherited from an ancestor that became modified in successive species: feathers, hollow bones, a wishbone, inner ear structure that promotes excellent balance, bones in the arms [many therapods held their arms folded against their bodies like birds do and the ability for them to grasp prey by flexing their wrists is the same motion in the downstroke of a flying bird.) I'm not saying that proves dinosaurs evolved fom birds, I'm just telling you what the use and reason for early feathers could have been for dinosaurs, along with other derived traits to support the caim.
Post a Comment