Evolution Intelligent Design

Theory of bird flight evolution a flight from reality?

Spread the love

At Creation-Evolution Headlines, we hear that the story that bird flight evolved from “flap running” has been resurrected in the pop science media. Must be summer. (“Flap Over Flight Evolution” (June 26, 2011):

This just-so story is so lame, it should be a huge embarrassment to the Darwin Party. These guys don’t understand evolutionary theory at all. You can’t draw analogies between chick development to adult bird in a year, and say a similar transition occurs in evolutionary time over millions of years. Chick development is encoded in DNA and in numerous epigenetic regulatory codes, and is observable in the present. Are they believers in some mystical meta-Gaia belief, that the history of the life on Earth develops from embryo to adult? This hypothesis is a cross between Lamarckism and recapitulation theory, both of which have been tossed into the dustbin of history. Two wrongs don’t make a right.

Here’s a pigeon flap running:

Some think flap running is a consequence of already having feathered wings. Would a penguin improve its speed on land by waving its flippers about?

In a familiar play for the popular Darwin market, the theory adds discarded ideas as a cook adds ingredients to a spoiled soup.

and CEH asks readers to send suggestions for helping straighten out the mess:

We laughed this hypothesis off the stage when it first appeared (01/16/2003), and even evolutionist Pennisi had her doubts. Now, eight years have gone by and Dial and Jackson are still promoting it. To make any progress toward sense in evolutionary circles, critics will have to at least get them to be consistent with their own belief system. Give us your suggestions for giving Jackson and Dial a much-needed red face. Reading them our 12/22/2003 commentary might be a start. If they are men of integrity, their faces will turn red with shame. If not, their faces will turn red with rage. (Note: federal funding, tenure, and media fame can have the unintended consequence of reducing integrity.)

Some think flap running is a consequence of already having feathered wings. Would a penguin improve its speed on land by waving its flippers about?

9 Replies to “Theory of bird flight evolution a flight from reality?

  1. 1
    bornagain77 says:

    Notes:

    No Evidence for Evolution Of Birds
    https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1UF3DhlUnDM0Qrwh8ZmyLJA2r9hGFvHjoXki6WTzYg5M

    Quotes of Note:

    “Feathers give no indication that they ever needed improvement. In fact, the “earliest known fossil feather is so modern-looking as to be indistinguishable from the feathers of birds flying today.”
    Yale University’s Manual of Ornithology—Avian Structure and Function

    “The first and most complete fossil of archaeopteryx, found in 1855, was misidentified as a flying pterodacylus for 115 years. The newest finding, though, demonstrates that our understanding of even well-studied fossils like archaeopteryx — scrutinized, measured, modeled for 150 years — can still be upended.”
    Bye Bye Birdie: Famed Fossil Loses Avian Perch – Oct. 2009

    “The whole notion of feathered dinosaurs is a myth that has been created by ideologues bent on perpetuating the birds-are-dinosaurs theory in the face of all contrary evidence”
    Storrs Olson, the curator of birds at the Smithsonian Institution’s National Museum of Natural History

    The Archaeoraptor Fraud of National Geographic Magazine (In 1999)
    Excerpt: “The idea of feathered dinosaurs and the theropod origin of birds is being actively promulgated by a cadre of zealous scientists acting in concert with certain editors at Nature and National Geographic who themselves have become outspoken and highly biased proselytizers of the faith. Truth and careful scientific weighing of evidence have been among the first casualties in their program, which is now fast becoming one of the grander scientific hoaxes of our age—the paleontological equivalent of cold fusion.”
    Storrs Olson
    http://www.bible.ca/tracks/arc.....n-bird.htm

  2. 2
    Ilion says:

    These guys don’t understand evolutionary theory at all.

    In DarLogic, one need not even attempt to understand ‘modern evolutionary theory’; all one need do is faithfully offer the pinch of incense.

  3. 3
    Mung says:

    Think of modern evolutionary theory as a box of parts which, when assembled, ought to cohere into a functional, purposeful, unified whole.

    As needed the evolutionist takes out a part and says, see here, I have this part, and it can be used to do such and so!

    And in another situation the evolutionist takes out a different part and says, see here, I have this part, and it can be used to do some other such and so!

    All the while never managing to fit the parts together into a unified whole whilst convincing themselves that they have in that box of parts all the parts they need in order to do just that.

    And even this analogy can be improved upon, because it is actually the case that some of the parts in the evolutionist box are contradictory. You have two parts which are supposed to fit into the same slot, but look nothing alike.

  4. 4
    Mung says:

    I heard that the birds are suing Twitter for trademark violation.

  5. 5
    Mung says:

    Seems they are putting up quite a squawk.

  6. 6
    Mung says:

    There appears to be a definite pecking order on the bird’s legal team.

  7. 7
    Mung says:

    Your honor, the witness keeps flying off the handle.

  8. 8
    Mung says:

    Bunch of bird brains. Cannot even hope to win this case.

  9. 9
    Mung says:

    On a wing and a prayer.

Leave a Reply