You have zero reading comprehension. This is from the same article immediately before the paragraph you cited
" But not all scientists agree with the birds-from-dinosaurs link. Alan Feduccia, professor of biology at the University of North Carolina, is a noteable doubter.
He contends that Archaeopteryx wasn’t the ancestor of all birds, but just another of nature’s many experiments. He argues that a huge evolution of birds had been going on before Archaeopteryx, and that they evolved from four-legged forest reptiles.
In 1996 Feduccia investigated an intriguing bird that lived about 135 million years ago, just after Archaeopteryx. The bird, Liaoningornis, did not look like a dinosaur bird at all. It had a breastbone similar to modern birds, with massive flight muscles that enabled longer flights.
It was found alongside fossils of ancient birds not unlike Archaeopteryx. Feduccia believes that birds were very widespread by that date, occupying a variety of habitats. He believes most of them died out with the dinosaurs, about 65 million years ago"
The only thing different about Feduccia’s belief is birds split off the archosaur lineage before theropods, not later from theropods. Birds still existed 150 MYA, and 100 MYA, and 66 MYA right up to the time of the dinosaur extinction. Extant birds evolved from the bird lineages which survived the 66 MYA mass extinction event. Just as I’ve explained to you three times now.
Words mean something Greg. You need to read them in context to get the whole picture, not cherry pick snippets which fit your creationist beliefs.