Are Birds a type of Dinosaur?

@Robert_Byers

If you understood how unique the dino & bird matches are … you would not be so flip about how the determination is made.

Both these are fine. What is problematic is explaining how a blind and unguided process build a flight feather which is made of keratin proteins and essentially 3D printed by the transcription translation process.

@Colewd,

You seem to think there is some obligation to attack/defend the Godless version of Evolution.

There is no obligation.

However, if you insist on doing either, I look forward to the day you have your own section to do it in!

1 Like

What I wanted to bring up was the manufacturing of a flight feather and the origin of that process was probably above the pay grade of dinosaurs reproducing. :slight_smile:

1 Like

@Colewd:

PeacefulScience.Org is one of the few pro-Evolution sites that doesn’t have to validate Godless evolution. Nor does it have worry about such matters.

@gbrooks9 This is so silly, just like evolutionary science isn’t the study of God-guided evolution, it isn’t the study of Godless evolution either. Evolutionary science is neutral on whether evolution is God-guided or Godless. Is this so hard to accept?

@Patrick,

I really don’t know what you are complaining about.

I’m using THEOLOGICAL TERMINOLOGY to address a theological distinction.

All your clarifications are completely beside the point!

I am complaining about made up religious terms such as Theistic evolution, Evolutionary Creationism, God-guided Evolution, Godless Evolution, Atheistic evolution, Darwinian Evolution, Intelligently Designed organisms, de novo humans, de novo creation, …

@Patrick

Invariably these new terms are theologically-contexted… so they are none of your Atheist-business.

Let me know when someone tries to sell a theological phrase as a scientific one!

Sure I will let you know the next time somebody writes about Atheistic Evolution.

1 Like

Whats unique? its just comparative anatomy! Thats all that is done to draw biological relationships. they presume likeness equalls common descent and then match bits and pieces.
They , finally, discovered the t rex had a wish bone and feathers and BANG EUREKA birds are from dinos!! Not th other way around. Dinos, these types, are just flightless ground birds in a spectrum of diversity. in fact just recnetly reading wiki on T rex and froends i noted another evolutionist dino researcher bringing up about some theropod dinos started flying AND THEN went flightless!!
They are closer to the truth.

What about the DNA comparison of all living birds?

Whats your point? If DNA could be got from theropod dinos it would show some DNA likeness to birds. In fact they would argue this.

You are ridiculous.

Interesting paper:

Linnaeus was a creationist, and he still grouped species together based on their shared features. You need to actually study the history of taxonomy.

That’s like saying bears are a flightless ground bat simply because bats are grouped within mammals. You aren’t making much sense.

1 Like

No its not the same thing. Or even close.
i’m saying that it was a grand error back in the 1800’s to conclude that , these theropod dinos, were reptiles and related to other creatures they also called dinosaurs.
in fact they just never imagined these theropod dinos could be in a great spectrum of diversity in birds. In these cases flightless ground birds. only now with smarter people and better tools do they discover these theropod dinos are perfect cousins to birds. THEN they screw it up again and say AHA birds evolved from these dinosaurs because these dinos are perfect cousins to modern birds.
The equation is wrong. the classification trips them up.
these theropod dinos ARE just birds.God didn’t create any dinos. these theropod dinos are just another example of glorious diversity within kinds.
indeed like bears and wolves and, probably, seals are the same KIND. Just a diversity.
Even the high t rex, 40 feet long and tons of weight, had a wishbone and feathers.
maybe could sing and talk like some birds.!!

@Robert_Byers,

Yep… that’s right … there was an error in the Victorian age … and nobody has noticed… except for a cunning few who are quite sure nobody else will notice… but you saw right through it all…

You are arguing against the basic idea of grouping species together based on shared features. This started in the 1700’s with Linnaeus, who, by the way, was a creationist.

That’s like saying that mammals are in the great diversity of bats. You have it backwards. Birds are a group within dinosaurs just as bats are a group within mammals. This isn’t hard to understand, so why do you keep getting it wrong?

Yes. Just a few trusted upper class researchers in these obscure things got it wrong.
Then about 40 years ago better tools and a few more smarter people realized how birdy like theropod dinos were. Then proved it. Still got it wrong. It takes a creationist to put it together.
Bang a gong T rex as a terrible reptile is gone. Instead its more like daffy duck.
Just a big daffy.