Posted on 01/01/2019 10:42:10 AM PST by lasereye
Many secular scientists consider so-called “feathered dinosaurs” to be evidence of dinosaurs evolving into birds. Clearly defined anatomy-based categories exist for both “bird” and “dinosaur,” but evolution requires a bird-to-dinosaur transition.1 In living creatures, only birds—not mammals or reptiles—have feathers. Furthermore, with a few controversial exceptions,2 all extinct feathered animals are acknowledged as birds. Even bird-feather proteins called keratins are unique.3
The use of feathers to fly “affects virtually every aspect of feather design and construction.”4 A flight feather has a long, slender central shaft called a rachis. From this extend the barbs, and from these extend the even smaller barbules. The barbules on one side of the barb are smooth, but, like Velcro, they link to tiny hook-shaped barbules on the opposite side.
Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) image showing feather barbs with hooklets. Image credit: Copyright © 2010 C. Dove and S. Koch. Used in accordance with federal copyright (fair use doctrine) law.
Assuming hypothetical feathers on dinosaurs functioned as modern feathers do, they must consist of all the required working parts. Even the angle, thickness, shape, and construction of the parts must all exist and be assembled within narrow tolerances.5 So far, Darwinists have only impressions of “protofeathers” that they assume were structures on the way to becoming modern feathers. But until they became functional feathers, it appears they would have decreased a creature’s fitness, making them less likely to persist in future generations.6
Consequently, a biblical creation worldview rejects the supposition that protofeathers were structures on the way to evolving into flight feathers. So, what were they? Possibly skin collagen fibers, not feathers. Some resemble fossil preparation marks, which are caused by tools used to uncover and excavate fossils. For these reasons, many researchers are “skeptical of inferring feathers when there are no feathers preserved” with bona fide dinosaurs in the fossil record.7
The difficulties in determining whether or not a fossil is a feathered dinosaur are many. Most fossils consist only of fragmented skeletal parts. Others show only ambiguous impressions in stone. Unfamiliar creatures that demonstrate evidence of feather-like structures may have been unusual birds like today’s ostrich—not dinosaurs.
For these and other reasons, even some evolutionists have rejected the “feathered dinosaur” conclusion.8 Rather, they interpret the fibers not as protofeathers but as partly decayed integument, which is skin or hide.9 Theagarten Lingham-Soliar suggests that because the Sinosauropteryx fossil was found associated with lake biota, it was probably semiaquatic. Filaments that grew from its skin resembled the smooth, downy feathers used in pillows. They may have helped waterproof it like modern duck feathers.10
No evidence for feather evolution exists. Feathers in the fossil record are consistently fully formed.11 Extensive study of one of the oldest known feathers—a 69-millimeter-long, well-preserved, claimed Archaeopteryx feather—reveals that all its major details match those of modern bird feathers.12 Thus, one might expect to find fully developed feathers on dinosaurs, but “protofeather” fibers don’t fill the bill.
Without the wishful evolutionary thinking, the current evidence suggests that protofeathers were not structures evolving into feathers but likely decayed skin with fossilized collagen fibers remaining. Further research may change the conclusion that feathered dinosaurs did not exist, but until then we must go with the existing evidence, which disputes the feathered dinosaur theory. This conclusion takes the wind out of the sails of an evolutionary link between dinosaurs and birds.
References
* Dr. Bergman holds multiple degrees and is a former adjunct associate professor at the University of Toledo Medical School in Ohio.
Keratins are the proteins from which hair, nails, claws, horns and hooves are built.
Leviticus XI:19...”Bird”
Leviticus XI:30...”Reptile”
Same word: Tinshemet; “Tuf, nun, shin, mem, tut.”
Interesting.
Both with and without feathers. Proof: Google pictures of Joan Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Hope is the thing with feathers
That perches in the soul,
And sings the tune without the words,
And never stops at all...
- Emily Dickinson
Allen’s book is a spoof on Dickinson’s theme.
“Scientists” told the world, with great “authority”, for over 100 years that Dinosaurs were reptiles. They weren’t; and obviously so from inspection of the fossilized bone marrow. And the simple fact that they didn’t hug the ground like all cold blooded species. A good thing to keep in mind when “Authorities” make pronouncements.
Originally they were created so I guess you could say they came from a father.
What ?
Oh .... feather.
Happy theologically correct New Year !
Dinosaurs were cold-blooded reptiles like crocodiles. The modern day “experts” want to try to put feathers on them and make them warm blooded to put them in the fictional evolutionary chain. Most modern day science is simply “fake news” and science fiction. It would be cool to be a biblical paleontologist and find that elusive T-Rex with a spear in its side. :-)
Not an expert on this topic.
I don’t have much trouble with the idea that some dinosaurs had feathering, or that dinosaurs may not be reptiles per se, or that birds derived from this class, Dinosauria.
But I DO have a problem with everyone declaring that birds ARE dinosaurs.
I might as well say mammals ARE reptiles.
Birds are living dinosaurs. They are descended from fast-running carnivorous theropod dinosaurs.
They didn’t all become extinct 65 million years ago.
Yes,but one must also consider how similar the dinosaur record is to reptiles, despite all the bird hoo hah. And also that current reptiles aren’t quite as primitive as has likewise been made out.
Anything with biology is questionable. For God’s sake, they can’t even decide if a modern living Panda is a bear or a raccoon. Why does anyone think they can trulyprognosticate on ancient extinct biology?
Why do birds HAVE to be dinosaurs? Isn’t it possible they are simply derivative of dinosaurs? I see a lot of difference, albeit I am no expert. Just an outsider observing the forest rather than the trees.
Yes
I was thinking in terms of the ancient philosophical definition of man as a featherless biped.
Supposedly Diogenes the Cynic plucked a chicken and held it up saying, "Here is Plato's man."
Sung to the tune The Yellow Rose of Texas....
Does a chicken Have Lips?
Does a Chicken have a Beak?
Does a Bear,,,,
Is the Pope,,,,
,,,as the nose on Your Face!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.