Sciencescience

Sat May 26, 2018, 06:45 PM

More science problems for "bird evolution".!

Bird Evolution Story Crash-Lands
BY BRIAN THOMAS, M.S. * | MONDAY, NOVEMBER 06, 2017

A new discovery forced a rewrite of bird evolution. Chinese fossil discoveries ballooned the number of birds found among dinosaur-containing rocks. Until now, the oldest Chinese fossil birds, found in Lower Cretaceous deposits, had unique anatomies that seemed better suited for climbing or occasional gliding than for powered flight like most modern birds.1 However, Upper Cretaceous deposits have long revealed modern-looking bird anatomies. The supposed time difference between Lower and Upper layers permitted around 40 million years for modern bird anatomy to evolve. But it only takes one good fact to shoot a bad story out of the sky.


This new find, the Lower Cretaceous Enantiornithine bird fossil named Pterygornis dapingfangensis, had fully fused arm bones that formed the same rigid type of wings that today’s birds use for powered flight. It also had fused pelvic bones like modern birds. Steve Brusatte of the University of Edinburgh reviewed the report and told the BBC, “These are fundamental features of the modern bird blueprint, and are integral to giving birds the strength and rigidity needed to fly.”2

They may have been rare, but this newfound fossil proves that fully formed flyers lived and died among those swamp plants and animals entombed in Lower Cretaceous sediments. Will evolution’s defenders continue to assert that these supposedly oldest birds—with their unique anatomies—evolved into the Upper Cretaceous (and modern bird) anatomy now that we know the modern bird anatomical setup was there all along?

This find fulfills a creation-based prediction. Back in 2009, Creation researcher Mike Oard summarized several fossil discoveries that expanded evolutionary time frames for key transitions, similar to the supposed transition to modern bird anatomy. After summarizing evolutionary rewrites of the first instances of internal fertilization inferred from fossils and human art inferred from archaeology, Oard wrote, “The trend should continue, which would more and more support creation and go against evolution. It is consistent with the original creation of each kind but with a certain inbuilt variety, just as stated in Genesis 1.”3

Oard found more fossils the following year. He summarized over a dozen examples in the Journal of Creation that expand the time ranges for supposed evolutionary innovations.4 Evolutionists claimed that Tiktaalik is an evolutionary transition between fish and amphibians, but the discovery of fully formed amphibian trackways in layers deposited before Tiktaalik debunk this iconic fossil. Another article listed seven more fossil discoveries that stretch evolutionary time beyond credibility.5 Now, this surprisingly early occurrence of modern flying bird anatomy joins the long list.


Mike Oard was right. The trend continues with this modern bird anatomy found so far out of its evolutionary place. Each rewrite reveals the weakness of speculative evolutionary stories and highlights how well Genesis creation and the Flood fit the fossil record. If God created every basic bird kind in the beginning, then we shouldn’t be surprised when they appear fully formed among various other fossils.

References

Thomas, B. 2017. Actual Feathers on Mystery Fossil Indicate ‘Bird.’ Acts & Facts. 46 (5): 15.
Briggs, H. New evidence on how birds took to the air. BBC News. Posted on bbc.com October 10, 2017, accessed October 10, 2017.
Oard, M. J. 2009. Evolutionary fossil-time ranges continue to expand. Journal of Creation. 23 (3): 14-15.
Oard, M. J. 2010. Further expansion of evolutionary fossil time ranges. Journal of Creation. 24 (3): 5-7.
Oard, M. J. 2014. Fossil time ranges continue to be increased. Journal of Creation. 28 (3): 3-4.

49 replies, 1556 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 49 replies Author Time Post
Reply More science problems for "bird evolution".! (Original post)
nolidad May 2018 OP
Bozo Haram May 2018 #1
Meowmenow May 2018 #2
nolidad May 2018 #9
Meowmenow May 2018 #15
Cold Warrior May 2018 #32
SatansSon666 May 2018 #6
nolidad May 2018 #10
Pennsylvania May 2018 #16
SatansSon666 May 2018 #20
SatansSon666 May 2018 #19
nolidad May 2018 #8
nolidad May 2018 #14
SatansSon666 May 2018 #21
nolidad May 2018 #26
SatansSon666 May 2018 #28
SatansSon666 May 2018 #29
OneLoudVoice May 2018 #3
nolidad May 2018 #11
OneLoudVoice May 2018 #39
SatansSon666 May 2018 #4
SatansSon666 May 2018 #5
nolidad May 2018 #13
SatansSon666 May 2018 #17
nolidad May 2018 #25
SatansSon666 May 2018 #27
nolidad May 2018 #33
SatansSon666 May 2018 #36
Micrometer May 2018 #7
nolidad May 2018 #12
SatansSon666 May 2018 #22
nolidad May 2018 #24
SatansSon666 May 2018 #30
nolidad May 2018 #34
SatansSon666 May 2018 #37
LavenderGirl May 2018 #18
nolidad May 2018 #23
SatansSon666 May 2018 #31
nolidad May 2018 #35
SatansSon666 May 2018 #38
nolidad May 2018 #41
SatansSon666 Jun 2018 #45
nolidad Jun 2018 #46
SatansSon666 Jun 2018 #49
nolidad Jun 2018 #47
SatansSon666 Jun 2018 #48
Bubba May 2018 #40
nolidad May 2018 #42
Bubba May 2018 #43
nolidad May 2018 #44

Response to nolidad (Original post)

Sat May 26, 2018, 07:49 PM

1. Your sources suck.

"Journal of Creation", FFS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bozo Haram (Reply #1)

Sat May 26, 2018, 11:16 PM

2. But they have 1500 Masters and PhDs, even a dept. head or two!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meowmenow (Reply #2)

Mon May 28, 2018, 10:30 AM

9. And yet all you can do is mock

but are ill equipped to show why they are wrong.

Slander and ad-hominems are the resort of a person who has lost an argument if you didn't know.

And it is 15,000 not 1500. You also forgot that many textbooks were written by YEC scientists that are still used in public universities today.

But Expertise in a field seems not to impress you at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #9)

Mon May 28, 2018, 11:17 AM

15. Mocking is all yec deserves.

 

Ooooo "many" textbooks!

There is a difference between "losing an argument" and losing your mind. Arguing with crazy is a waste of time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Meowmenow (Reply #15)

Mon May 28, 2018, 03:28 PM

32. I decided that a couple of months ago

When he told me that a population of eight could multiply to 2M in 200 years on an earth decimated by a worldwide flood. When I got the Creationist classic “you weren’t there!” response, I said that’s it. From now on, no reasoned argument, just mocking. Reasoned argument is simply a waste of time with some people. Besides, I’m told I’m pretty good at mocking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bozo Haram (Reply #1)

Sun May 27, 2018, 10:35 AM

6. Sometimes they even reference

Their own papers in their own journals after giving themselves PhD diplomas from their own institutions.
It's fucking hilarious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #6)

Mon May 28, 2018, 10:31 AM

10. YOu really are stupid aren't you!

So do you mock that evolutionists reference their own papers in their own journals?

And being a pseudo intellectual I would not expect you to look up their education bios. YOu can't even find material to support your false claims!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #10)

Mon May 28, 2018, 11:24 AM

16. Alerted. Leave.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pennsylvania (Reply #16)

Mon May 28, 2018, 11:34 AM

20. Thanks. Better for all to see.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #10)

Mon May 28, 2018, 11:34 AM

19. Yup. All those scientists

Giving themselves honorary diplomas from their own schools and going out and doing research.. the scientific community is flooded with them.

Lmao..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bozo Haram (Reply #1)

Mon May 28, 2018, 10:27 AM

8. Well that is your opinion and you are entitled to it.

But just saying so doesn't make it so!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bozo Haram (Reply #1)

Mon May 28, 2018, 10:43 AM

14. And you probably have never bothered to study the research papers linked in Journal of Creation.

So of course that makes you an expert to dispense with such profound one liners!

But his articles he references to are loaded with real science and info even from evolutionists backing his "claims".

This is an old line of attack. Cannot refute the science so just try to negate them as non scientists.

It hasn't workd for 40 years! More and more Americans are becoming creationists!

It is also interesting that nearly all Creation Scientists are defectors from evolutionary theory and they left because their research showed them that the entire big bang cosmology and darwinian evolution violates the known laws of science!!! That is a tough act to deny!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #14)

Mon May 28, 2018, 11:50 AM

21. I didn't say they ALL did.

There are legit ones.
They just have no credibility left because they admit they'll disregard evidence that goes against their beliefs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #21)

Mon May 28, 2018, 12:40 PM

26. No they disregard opinions about the evidence- not the evidence.

YEC scientists have said man has always been man. The supposed lineage of man from ape- has been so altered over time. Just as YEC predicted it would.

Look at H. Naledi- it is now downgraded to A. Afarenses. After all they made the whole skeleton form parts from 15 differing skeletons! Its like taking pieces from 15 puzzles and making anew puzzle that is supposed to make sense! Human and ape remains and make a new species!!!

Look at just one- radio dating!

It has been empirically demonstrated to be totally unreliable as a dating method- yet so many stubbornly cling to it!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #26)

Mon May 28, 2018, 12:46 PM

28. Wrong and wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #26)

Mon May 28, 2018, 12:59 PM

29. Who downgraded it to A. Afarensis?

ICR?
AiG?
Mr. Thomas?
lmao!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Original post)

Sun May 27, 2018, 04:28 AM

3. LMAO

Got a source?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneLoudVoice (Reply #3)

Mon May 28, 2018, 10:32 AM

11. Read the paper and look at the footnotes, you will find your source.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #11)

Mon May 28, 2018, 11:01 PM

39. I can also start my own website and then post anything I like on that website

That is not a source. Do you have a source?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Original post)

Sun May 27, 2018, 10:30 AM

4. Lmao.

Oh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Original post)

Sun May 27, 2018, 10:33 AM

5. It makes sense that Mr. Thomas

Is fascinated with bird evolution.
After all, he's a fucking loon.

Even though he has a masters in biotechnology, he likes to scour journals and pretend he knows what the fuck he's talking about for everything else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #5)

Mon May 28, 2018, 10:42 AM

13. and you a masters in chemistry so you say

so that makes you unqualified to remark on him! That is a door that swings both ways if you wish to play that game!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #13)

Mon May 28, 2018, 11:30 AM

17. I'm not writing articles about scientific discoveries.

That are way over my head.
I'm laughing at a stupid loon.
There's a difference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #17)

Mon May 28, 2018, 12:38 PM

25. And you d o not have the qualifications to determine who is a loon or not!

you are a pseudo chemist not a degreed psychoanalyst!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #25)

Mon May 28, 2018, 12:41 PM

27. I can determine who is a loon.

See a loon acting loony, that's a loon.
See. Simple.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #27)

Mon May 28, 2018, 06:26 PM

33. Well we know you set a low low low bar for determining who is loony!

So we Christians have lots of company !

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #33)

Mon May 28, 2018, 06:31 PM

36. Nope. Loons are creationist liars and charlatans.

Never called you a loon, you just believe them for some reason.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Original post)

Sun May 27, 2018, 10:37 AM

7. courts have ruled that it is a religious, not a scientific, view.

creation science fails to produce scientific hypotheses



Creation science or scientific creationism is a branch of creationism that
claims to provide scientific support for the Genesis creation narrative in
the Book of Genesis and disprove or reexplain the scientific facts, theories
and scientific paradigms about geology, cosmology, biological evolution,
archeology, history, and linguistics.

The overwhelming consensus of the scientific community is that creation science
fails to produce scientific hypotheses, and courts have ruled that it is a religious,
not a scientific, view. It fails to qualify as a science because it lacks empirical support,
supplies no tentative hypotheses, and resolves to describe natural history in terms of
scientifically untestable supernatural causes. Creation science is a pseudoscientific
attempt to map the Bible into scientific facts. It is viewed by professional biologists as
unscholarly, and even as a dishonest and misguided sham, with
extremely harmful educational consequences.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation_science

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Micrometer (Reply #7)

Mon May 28, 2018, 10:41 AM

12. Hate to tell you but courtsd are not the aribiters of what is science and what is not!

And if you looked at research papers from YEC science you would find enormous hypotheses and research to investigate those hypotheses.

Also if you looked at your wiki article it was composed by opponents of creation science and the judge ruled based on a huge bias! Science can only derive conclusions from natural law.

Hate totell you- evolution is as much belief as creation. It cannot be tested in its major hypotheses, it cannot be observed nor repeated- so it fails the scientific method and thus falls under religious belief! But it hasd no deity attached to it with the exceptions of theistic evolution .

One major tenet of the judges ruling was that creation science says everything came from nothing! That is actually the argument of the big bang cosmology! All matter started as nothing (space, time, matter did not exist) and due to some weird quantum flux that they cannot pint to, show, demonstrate or validate- this nothing exploded and created everything!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #12)

Mon May 28, 2018, 12:06 PM

22. Evolution is a belief..

More lies from ICR and the other relevant loons.
They love to project their faults onto others.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #22)

Mon May 28, 2018, 12:36 PM

24. No it is a belief.

There is no empirical evidence that non life became life- just a belief.

There is no empirical evidence that all the generas of plants and animals developed from one organic "soup". It is believed.

There is no evidence that one genre of animal evolved to another genre of animal through random, unplanned undirected mutations preserved by natural selection- that is a belief!

Evolutionis as much a religious belief as creation is as I have said all along!

But the empirical evidence and laws of science lend more support to creation models than evolutionary models.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #24)

Mon May 28, 2018, 01:01 PM

30. Evolution doesn't say non-life became life.

lmao.

You haven't said that all along. Some loon made it up and you went with it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #30)

Mon May 28, 2018, 06:27 PM

34. Well I already posted 5 articles from evolutionist positing how life began from non life

and like it or not- you are stuck with that as part of evolution whether you want to deal with it or not.

Everything has to be natural with no God and they all accept an ancient "campbells soup", so your whining means nothing!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #34)

Mon May 28, 2018, 06:32 PM

37. The theory of evolution does not have anything to say about the beginning of life.

You studied it for 10 whole years.
you should know that.
lmao.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Original post)

Mon May 28, 2018, 11:31 AM

18. "Journal of Creation" is pseudoscience

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LavenderGirl (Reply #18)

Mon May 28, 2018, 12:34 PM

23. So you say!

But last I looked you were not appointed arbiter of what is science and what is not!

I know evolutionists call it pseudo science, but that don't make it so. They attack because it contradicts their secular belief system with the big bang and darwinian evolution as its genesis account of origins.

They start with absolutely nothing exploding and it creates everything. And life began by chance meetings of chemicals in a prebiotic "soup" and somehow, someway, through some unknown method that chemical "soup" became alive- split into animal and vegetable kingdoms, and over time became conscious life and then intelligent man. Through random, accidental undesigned, unplanned mutations that are "positive" which goes against all the observed evidence of mutations.

And people call YEC science loony.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #23)

Mon May 28, 2018, 01:02 PM

31. YEC isn't science.

Only YEC people think it is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #31)

Mon May 28, 2018, 06:29 PM

35. You keep farting that out

But seem incapable of writing two intelligent sentences showing why it is not!

But keep bloviating- you are funny!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #35)

Mon May 28, 2018, 06:33 PM

38. It isn't science.

someone else already explained it to you here or in another thread.
They nailed it, no need for me to repeat it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #38)

Wed May 30, 2018, 06:24 PM

41. No they dictated it to me without any evidence!

Just because you and several others call YEC pseudo science or science that goes against the belief system of evolution junk science doesn't make it so.

It takes a back and forth with evidence and information- you know- what you seem to fail to do!

Will keep looking fro when you talk science instead of slander.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #41)

Fri Jun 1, 2018, 06:32 AM

45. You wouldn't know evidence

If it slapped you across the face.
The poster explained how science works and that creationism isn't science based off of the scientific method because it offers no hypotheses to be tested among other things.
That's your evidence. Lmao

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #45)

Fri Jun 1, 2018, 06:39 AM

46. There's the Satans Son I have come to expect.

Make accusations and do whatever necessary to keep from having to show you know nothing!

YOu are the emperor of ad-hominems and lies!

Well off on vacation for 10 days ciao!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #46)

Fri Jun 1, 2018, 06:48 AM

49. Enjoy your vacation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #45)

Fri Jun 1, 2018, 06:41 AM

47. You also intentionally fail to recognize

that creation science does propose enormous hypotheses and makes enormous predictions based on the belief they hold.

They do the same thing as evolutionists, start with their model, form hypotheses based on the model and research to see of the hypotheses hold water.

But you will never admit that nor will your masters allow you to admit that!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #47)

Fri Jun 1, 2018, 06:47 AM

48. Name some testable hypotheses creationists make then.

Any hypothesis made from the Bible will easily be debunked and dismissed. They already all have. Every testable claim from the Bible has been proven false. Every fucking one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #35)

Tue May 29, 2018, 02:41 AM

40. You're Getting A Lot Of Alerts In This Thread, Nolidad.

Apparently, one of your posts above was alerted, and I was just on a jury for this post. I voted, "Bad faith ... Intent to disrupt."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bubba (Reply #40)

Wed May 30, 2018, 06:27 PM

42. Yeah had a bad few days!

The heat is killing me and my arthritis has been roaring at me with a vengeance.

I deal with a failing heart valve, lupus and arthritis in both knees, both shoulders, one hip and up my spine.

So whe it gets real hot or real humid- I can get a little snarlyt and it shows in my writing.

I love sarcasm as a form of humor (like don Rickles) but when all three of those above are active- it is no longer humor but me in an impatiendt mood.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #42)

Thu May 31, 2018, 02:46 AM

43. You're A Mailman??

Wow. I'm impressed you're able to do your job with your body in that kind of shape.

Anyway, I doubt the alert was because you're "a little snarly." I would guess it's because you're a conservative And a Christian. Liberals look for any excuse to shut you up.

I got a hide for mentioning I had a story for sale on Amazon. The TOS state that an individual poster promoting his own product or service is fine. Nobody was offended, except in the sense that anyone who doesn't toe the party line offends liberals. They saw a chance to give a hide to a conservative who seldom gets a hide. I'm sure the same dynamic was at work in your case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bubba (Reply #43)

Thu May 31, 2018, 06:39 AM

44. I am seeing my cardiologist June 15

maybe planning open heart surgery for valve replacement. That will put me out of work 12 weeks. May retire then if leave sharing does not get me enough time to cover my absence. With all the ailments and dovtor appts. have not been able to save much sick leave.

Just got two cortisone shots and feeling pretty good in the joints. Either way my mail man days will most likely be over end of the year no matter what! 35 years will be enough!

I thank the Lord for t his job. It let me put 5 kids through school, buy a home, take my kids on some nice vacations and my wife and I on some cruises.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Sciencescience