Origin of birds confirmed by exceptional new dinosaur fossils

University of Bristol Press Release ^ | 9/26/2009

[SeekAndFind]

we can just re-write the history so that feathers came first, and everything’s good.

Evolutionists call this --- the self-correcting property of science. IOW, when your previous model is wrong, change the model somehow to fit the theory. But the theory itself cannot be questioned.

[CharlesWayneCT]

The problem is that we are not talking about a model. We aren’t “changing the model to fit the theory”.

We guessed at a progression of creatures that we could at least argue were steps UP on the “evolutionary ladder”, using the theory of evolution to explain the mutations, darwin to explain selection, and “common sense” to explain why a bird would be preferable to a dinasaur.

So when we find a new fossil that puts everything out of order, and we move around the species, we aren’t changing a “model”, we are just changing our story.

It’s like you are building a jigsaw puzzle, and you take some piece and stick it in the middle of the board, and you take pains to explain how the piece is scientifically located; then you put in a piece next to it and find out the piece is in the wrong place.

The problem isn’t in the science, it’s in the false claim that science dictated the location of the piece.

the theory of evolution (science) isn’t a historical science — it can’t scientifically determine what animals lived when in the past, or even scientifically predict what will come next.

And yet evolutionists will take the perfectly valid science of evolution, and misuse it, just like climate alarmists take perfectly good meteorological science, and misuse it to try to predict a global warming future.

We conservatives easily understand the flaw in the 2nd, but too many assume we have to acecpt the first as being flawless.

Although once in a while, somebody like Charles Johnson of LGF comes along, to show us that once we jump on the evolutionary history bandwagon, we could just as easily jump on the global warming bandwagon, and then we could denounce those who don’t believe global warming as anti-scientific, just like evolutionists like to do for those who don’t believe their mythology.

I can deal with science that is repeatable, predictable, observational. the evolutionary historical model is just not that. What is the next “evolutionary step” for man? What will we look like in 100 years? 1000 years? Evolution has no answer. But whatever happens, it will be “proof” of evolution. Just like whatever happens with the weather, it’s “proof” of man-made climate change.

[antiRepublicrat]

Too many scientists get too giddy when they first hear some news. Some level of excitement over the possibility is fine, but it's dumb to print anything conclusive until a full investigation has been done. That's how publications like NG end up with egg on their faces. Sad, and I grew up on NG. I don't read it anymore.

[TheOldLady]

"Now it all fits neatly into place..."

Oh rly?

[colorado tanker]

“This fossil provides confirmation that the bird-dinosaur hypothesis is correct and supports the idea that birds descended from theropod dinosaurs, the group of predatory dinosaurs that include Allosaurus and Velociraptor”, said Xu.

I just have a nonscientific, right-brain objection to animals that would have tried to eat me being pretty to look at.

[SunkenCiv]

[TheOldLady]

LOL!

[bt_dooftlook]

I guess they’ll call this latest fossil find, “Peking Duck”