Why most scientists think birds are dinosaurs – and you should too

3 Likes

That blog post discusses BAD (birds are dinosaurs) and BAND (birds are not dinosaurs), but it doesn’t get into the position adopted by the current major opponents of BAD, which has been described as MANIAC (maniraptorans are not in actuality coelurosaurs). What it does show is that those who think birds aren’t dinosaurs are unable to adopt any consistent position. In fact, they’ve frequently been compared to YECs.

5 Likes

here are two interesting findings that are relevant to the bird evolution:

maybe birds evolved from bats after all:)

here is another interesting fossil:

So you accept their findings?

Lol. Feduccia

Yep. It’s a bit like trying to disprove the Big Bang theory by citing Fred Hoyle.

3 Likes

Saying that birds are descended from maniroptoran theropods is not the same as saying that birds are dinosaurs.

Saying that humans are descended from gnathostomes (jawed fishes) is not the same as saying that humans are fish.

It is if you’re into cladistic classification, as modern systematists pretty much all are.

Incidentally, humans are gnathostomes.

4 Likes

are they also fishes?

Depends on what definition of “fish” you want to use. If gnathostomes are all fish, then yes. If a fish has to have fins rather than legs, then no. I certainly find it interesting to think of us as highly modified, terrestrial fish. Much of your anatomy and development becomes understandable.

2 Likes

Humans are not. Yes its about classification. so that must have rules. Who makes the rules?
Anyways modern research shows increasingly how alike our birds are to theropod dinos. Thus they conclude birds from these dinos with disagreement about points.
Modern research is finally showing how alike theropods are to birds. so creationism, I think will in time, embrace that these dinos are just birds.
its about classification.

“Fish” is a paraphyletic group. Cladists use monophyletic groups.

1 Like