Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

At Science Daily: Fossil overturns more than a century of knowledge about the origin of modern birds

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Fossilised fragments of a skeleton, hidden within a rock the size of a grapefruit, have helped upend one of the longest-standing assumptions about the origins of modern birds.

Researchers from the University of Cambridge and the Natuurhistorisch Museum Maastricht found that one of the key skull features that characterises 99% of modern birds — a mobile beak — evolved before the mass extinction event that killed all large dinosaurs, 66 million years ago.

This finding also suggests that the skulls of ostriches, emus and their relatives evolved ‘backwards’, reverting to a more primitive condition after modern birds arose.

Using CT scanning techniques, the Cambridge team identified bones from the palate, or the roof of the mouth, of a new species of large ancient bird, which they named Janavis finalidens. It lived at the very end of the Age of Dinosaurs and was one of the last toothed birds to ever live. The arrangement of its palate bones shows that this ‘dino-bird’ had a mobile, dexterous beak, almost indistinguishable from that of most modern birds.

For more than a century, it had been assumed that the mechanism enabling a mobile beak evolved after the extinction of the dinosaurs. However, the new discovery, reported in the journal Nature, suggests that our understanding of how the modern bird skull came to be needs to be re-evaluated.

Each of the roughly 11,000 species of birds on Earth today is classified into one of two over-arching groups, based on the arrangement of their palate bones. Ostriches, emus and their relatives are classified into the palaeognath, or ‘ancient jaw’ group, meaning that, like humans, their palate bones are fused together into a solid mass.

All other groups of birds are classified into the neognath, or ‘modern jaw’ group, meaning that their palate bones are connected by a mobile joint. This makes their beaks much more dexterous, helpful for nest-building, grooming, food-gathering, and defence.

“This assumption has been taken as a given ever since,” said Dr Daniel Field from Cambridge’s Department of Earth Sciences, the paper’s senior author. “The main reason this assumption has lasted is that we haven’t had any well-preserved fossil bird palates from the period when modern birds originated.”

Two of the key characteristics we use to differentiate modern birds from their dinosaur ancestors are a toothless beak and a mobile upper jaw. While Janavis finalidens still had teeth, making it a pre-modern bird, its jaw structure is that of the modern, mobile kind.

“Evolution doesn’t happen in a straight line,” said Field. “This fossil shows that the mobile beak — a condition we had always thought post-dated the origin of modern birds, actually evolved before modern birds existed. We’ve been completely backwards in our assumptions of how the modern bird skull evolved for well over a century.”

The researchers say that while this discovery does not mean that the entire bird family tree needs to be redrawn, it does rewrite our understanding of a key evolutionary feature of modern birds.

Full article at Science Daily.

Assumptions seem to have played a large role in the evolutionary story of birds. When assumptions turn out to not match reality, then either the theory is wrong, or extrapolations made from the theory are unjustified.

Comments
"Only views in line with the current concensus are welcomed." The Trolls that come here are fully aware they are running cover for certain narratives and are stupid enough to pretend we don't notice. Andrewasauber
December 5, 2022
December
12
Dec
5
05
2022
07:53 AM
7
07
53
AM
PDT
Querius, this is something ... look November 1st, Scientific American: Fossils Upend Conventional Wisdom about Evolution of Human Bipedalism
For most of human evolution, multiple species with different ways of walking upright coexisted ... the March of Progress, as this image and its variants are known, has decorated countless books, T-shirts, bumper stickers and coffee mugs. But paleoanthropological discoveries made over the past two decades are forcing scientists to redraw this traditional, linear imagery. We now know that various hominin species living in different environments throughout Africa, sometimes contemporaneously, evolved different ways to walk on two legs
English is not my first language, but did i get this right ? Are Darwinists really suggesting, that at the same moment, various human ancestors, decided to walk on two legs independently from each other ? (I hope i have misunderstood something) https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fossils-upend-conventional-wisdom-about-evolution-of-human-bipedalism/martin_r
December 5, 2022
December
12
Dec
5
05
2022
07:02 AM
7
07
02
AM
PDT
Yes, science IS ALWAYS CHANGING - at least the historical sciences are. True. It's a good thing that it adjusts to new information, but the problem is, there is no guarantee that this new information is correct either. It really means that much of what we THINK we know may not really be true at all. We don't know what we don't know and yet we make decisions/interpretations based on the limited data that we have which means that much of what we think we know and have figured out might not really be true. So science is NOT the arbiter of truth. How dependable is our current "knowledge"? The reality is that no one really knows. When you can't run experiments to check your hypothesis, you are dependent on your interpretation of what you think you currently know. Most interpretation is done through the evolutionary paradigm which itself is an interpretation of the data and still problematic. It just shows that unfortunately, when it comes to origins science, our so-called "knowledge" is not necessarily true. It calls into question a lot of what passes for science these days, including the global warming mumbo jumbo, where like in biology, dissenting voices are not permitted. Only views in line with the current concensus are welcomed.tjguy
December 4, 2022
December
12
Dec
4
04
2022
11:44 PM
11
11
44
PM
PDT
Thank you, Martin_r. The next thing we'll find out is that Fanjingshania is alive and well in the Andaman Sea, and scientists will announce its discovery as shocking but yet another triumph of Darwinism. They will attribute its rarity to the fact that than Andaman islanders have been eating them like popcorn for centuries. The article will conclude with a quote about the fact that this is a "living fossil" that managed to evade evolutionary change for millions of years but provides important insights into evolution, once again proving Darwinian's theory. And then the whole thing will be forgotten. From the same fascinating and much-appreciated website, I've just learned that missing features also evolve! Imagine that!
“Through this study, we have really been able to show that tooth loss in vertebrates is largely a story about frogs, with over 20 independent losses,” said lead study author Daniel Paluh, a Ph.D. candidate in the University of Florida’s department of biology. “Only eight other groups of living vertebrates, including seahorses, turtles, birds and a few mammals, have also evolved toothlessness.”
As a result of this article, I'm happy to announce here tonight that scientists have determined that I've evolved flightlessness along with the lack of webbed arms, and a complete lack of jet engines under my armpits! This lack of jet engines has purportedly evolved at least 20 times! -Q (jet engines would be so cool!)Querius
December 4, 2022
December
12
Dec
4
04
2022
06:26 PM
6
06
26
PM
PDT
Querius, this one is very interesting ... another case for the waiting time problem ? November 1st Shocking 439-Million-Year-Old “Shark” Forces Scientists To Rethink the Timeline of Evolution
The new discovery puts into question existing models of vertebrate evolution by significantly condensing the timeframe for the emergence of jawed fish from their closest jawless ancestors. This will have a profound impact on how we assess evolutionary rates in early vertebrates and the relationship between morphological and molecular change in these groups,
https://scitechdaily.com/shocking-439-million-year-old-shark-forces-scientists-to-rethink-the-timeline-of-evolution/martin_r
December 4, 2022
December
12
Dec
4
04
2022
03:06 PM
3
03
06
PM
PDT
Martin_r @29, Wow! Yet another unpredicted discovery that rewrites the theory of evolution, which is now considered a fact. Unfortunately the facts seem to be changing all the time. LOL The "mountains of evidence" seem to have a moving into a sea of doubt. The paper goes on to say:
As a modern-type lizard, the new fossil impacts all estimates of the origin of lizards and snakes, together called the Squamata, and affects assumptions about their rates of evolution, and even the key trigger for the origin of the group.
A "modern-type lizard" from the Late Triassic? Oh wait, I know. The environment for these lizards MUSTA remained unchanged for 220 million years! Yabbut, there MUSTA been spectacular evolution occurring in the genotype and internal organs that are just not expressed in the phenotype. Right? At this point Lamarck must be rolling in his grave--with laughter. Looks like his theory is actually turning out to be stronger than Darwinism. But we're all compelled to follow the science fantasy. Hey, maybe next week researchers will find that chimpanzees MUSTA evolved from humans. And why not? Darwinism would suggest that they're far better adapted to their African environment than humans in the same African environment, right? -QQuerius
December 4, 2022
December
12
Dec
4
04
2022
01:17 PM
1
01
17
PM
PDT
Seversky ... sure...it is a revision after a revision after a revision ... every single day a new revision ... Like i said, these people are not to be trusted ... they are always wrong ... PS: Seversky, no reply on my updated spontaneous-generation post ? https://uncommondescent.com/extraterrestrial-life/at-scitech-daily-sofia-finds-no-phosphine-a-potential-sign-of-life-on-venus/#commentsmartin_r
December 4, 2022
December
12
Dec
4
04
2022
11:27 AM
11
11
27
AM
PDT
Yes, the theory is revised in the light of new evidence. That is a feature not a bug.Seversky
December 4, 2022
December
12
Dec
4
04
2022
10:50 AM
10
10
50
AM
PDT
Querius, i can go on and on and on .... ScienceDaily, December 2 (obviously, another keen eye)
Fossil discovery in storeroom cupboard shifts origin of modern lizard back 35 million years A specimen retrieved from a cupboard of the Natural History Museum in London has shown that modern lizards originated in the Late Triassic and not the Middle Jurassic as previously thought.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/12/221202142548.htmmartin_r
December 4, 2022
December
12
Dec
4
04
2022
08:52 AM
8
08
52
AM
PDT
Martin_r @26,
“Discovery of 119-Million-Year-Old “Selfish” Genes Casts Doubt on Established Evolution Beliefs”
What, already? It's not even been one week since the article in the OP came out:
Fossil Overturns More Than A Century Of Knowledge About The Origin Of Modern Birds
Fortunately for Darwin, his faithful have Unshakable Faith in his theory of evolution. :P -QQuerius
December 3, 2022
December
12
Dec
3
03
2022
11:44 PM
11
11
44
PM
PDT
Martin_r @24, 25, Thanks, I didn't know about https://retractionwatch.com/. How interesting. Browsing the website, I wondering why papers are retracted for plagiarism when it obviously musta been the inevitable result of convergent cognition due to the evolutionary zeitgeist phenomenon. ;-) What an interesting discovery regarding RNA! First, I noticed these sentences (emphasis added):
Cells contain machinery that duplicates DNA into a new set that goes into a newly formed cell. That same class of machines, called polymerases, also build RNA messages, which are like notes copied from the central DNA repository of recipes, so they can be read more efficiently into proteins.
So how did the team leader describe the significance of this discovery?
“This work opens the door to many other studies that will help us understand the significance of having a mechanism for converting RNA messages into DNA in our own cells . . .”
a. An ID-oriented researcher would ask, "I wonder what function this is designed to provide? b. A Darwinist researcher would conclude, "This is probably a useless junk function, an ancient vestige of evolution, once again proving life's evolution from an RNA world." (c. And a graduate in ______ studies would ask, "Would you like fries with that order?" ) It seems that Dr. Pomerantz took approach "a." resulting in a couple of testable hypotheses. -QQuerius
December 3, 2022
December
12
Dec
3
03
2022
11:36 PM
11
11
36
PM
PDT
and something for Dawkins too ... November 23 2022 "Discovery of 119-Million-Year-Old “Selfish” Genes Casts Doubt on Established Evolution Beliefs" https://scitechdaily.com/discovery-of-119-million-year-old-selfish-genes-casts-doubt-on-established-evolution-beliefs/martin_r
December 3, 2022
December
12
Dec
3
03
2022
11:11 PM
11
11
11
PM
PDT
Querius, as to yesterday's talk, i found another "surprise" ... this one looks pretty serious ... "New Discovery Shows Human Cells Can Write RNA Sequences Into DNA – Challenges Central Principle in Biology"
In a discovery that challenges long-held dogma in biology, researchers show that mammalian cells can convert RNA sequences back into DNA, a feat more common in viruses than eukaryotic cells.
https://scitechdaily.com/new-discovery-shows-human-cells-can-write-rna-sequences-into-dna-challenges-central-principle-in-biology/ Happy reading.martin_r
December 3, 2022
December
12
Dec
3
03
2022
10:43 PM
10
10
43
PM
PDT
Querius,
– Announcing a fraudulent evolutionary breakthrough (thank you, Bornagain77) (https://youtu.be/OZhtj06kmXY?t=1149)
Yes, i have read about this missing-bird-link fakery years ago. Very fascinating is the fact, that this fake fossil was glued together by a farmer! A Chinese farmer can fool smart Darwinian scientists... This is a grotesque ... PS: Querius, go to RetractionWatch.com - there you will find the whole world of science fraud ...martin_r
December 3, 2022
December
12
Dec
3
03
2022
10:30 PM
10
10
30
PM
PDT
Alan Fox @22, Very true! However, here are some notorious cases of scientific fraud: - Using a felt pen to claim success at tissue transplants (https://www.ogmagazine.org.au/14/2-14/research-fraud-painting-mice/) - Falsifying data in vaccine research (https://www.nature.com/articles/nature.2015.17660) - Announcing a fraudulent evolutionary breakthrough (thank you, Bornagain77) (https://youtu.be/OZhtj06kmXY?t=1149) Why wasn't the third case prosecuted? -QQuerius
December 3, 2022
December
12
Dec
3
03
2022
05:36 PM
5
05
36
PM
PDT
The solution, in my opinion, is to boot ideologues out of scientific research...
Careful what you wish for. ;)Alan Fox
December 3, 2022
December
12
Dec
3
03
2022
02:56 PM
2
02
56
PM
PDT
Querius/18 I’m sure if you work just a little bit harder, you can find “Darwinian racism” somewhere in the OP. You can then celebrate your trifecta with a round of fizzy water. Sounds like a real hoot………chuckdarwin
December 3, 2022
December
12
Dec
3
03
2022
02:08 PM
2
02
08
PM
PDT
Martin_r @19,
525-million-year-old fossil defies textbook explanation for brain evolution
Ouch!
Active DNA demethylation of developmental cis-regulatory regions predates vertebrate origins
Ouch!
PS: Darwinists are definitely not to be trusted.
Two more recent examples where Darwinism FAILED to predict these new discoveries. This is exactly why even the term "Darwinist" or "Evolutionist" exposes a quasi-religious commitment to a theory that grows WEAKER with every significant discovery! This why Darwinism is no longer science. In science, researchers need to investigate nature from a NEUTRAL position, avoiding bias and advocacy. Researchers need to follow the data, not the ideology or the consensus. The solution, in my opinion, is to boot ideologues out of scientific research and academia. As was presented as an analogy in one of the recent video links, a jury shouldn't find someone guilty of a crime merely because they're so far the best suspect in a very weak case. If the case is too weak, the defendant shouldn't even be charged. More detective work is needed. -QQuerius
December 3, 2022
December
12
Dec
3
03
2022
01:53 PM
1
01
53
PM
PDT
CD
The researchers say that while this discovery does not mean that the entire bird family tree needs to be redrawn, it does rewrite our understanding of a key evolutionary feature of modern birds. (emphasis added)
I got that. However, let me repeat what I said earlier ... I doubt that in the history of science, there was another field of science surprised with new findings every single day … Like the other day at ScienceDaily.com: 525-million-year-old fossil defies textbook explanation for brain evolution https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/11/221125132137.htm or this one, published DEC 2: Active DNA demethylation of developmental cis-regulatory regions predates vertebrate origins
This work demonstrates that active 5mC removal from regulatory regions is a common feature of deuterostome embryogenesis suggestive of an unexpected deep conservation of a major gene-regulatory module. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abn2258
PS: Darwinists are definitely not to be trusted.martin_r
December 3, 2022
December
12
Dec
3
03
2022
11:42 AM
11
11
42
AM
PDT
Chuckdarwin @17,
. . . all the IDers huffing and puffing, gloating and bloviating about the demise of evolution.
It stings, doesn't it when scientific evidence goes against your beloved belief. Personally, I don't care either way with three exceptions, two of which apply in this case: 1. The historically explicit and currently implicit racism in Darwinism. 2. The egregious anti-science bias that censors all challenges to Darwinism. 3. The mountains of science fantasy being touted as "evidence" for Darwinism, which stops scientific progress. -Q P.S. I find drinking your tears is much more refreshing after carbonating them with my SodaStream (tm) Sparkling Water Maker (https://sodastream.com/).Querius
December 3, 2022
December
12
Dec
3
03
2022
11:19 AM
11
11
19
AM
PDT
Even today, CT technology is not completely accessible to researchers except at "elite" universities because of cost. It is a revolutionary tool in paleontology and without it, these fossils would not have been completely observable despite best efforts by paleontologists. As Seversky points out, this is the way science moves despite all the IDers huffing and puffing, gloating and bloviating about the demise of evolution. It's also important to put this find into proper context:
The researchers say that while this discovery does not mean that the entire bird family tree needs to be redrawn, it does rewrite our understanding of a key evolutionary feature of modern birds. (emphasis added)
chuckdarwin
December 3, 2022
December
12
Dec
3
03
2022
06:47 AM
6
06
47
AM
PDT
Of related note:
Nov. 2022 – it is now experimentally proven, (via advances in quantum information theory, and the experimental realization of the Maxwell demon thought experiment), immaterial information has a ‘thermodynamic content’, and that an immaterial mind has the capacity to infuse ‘thermodynamically meaningful’ immaterial information into a system in order move a system toward lower entropy and higher energy i.e. toward life. https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/from-evolution-news-prigogines-self-organization-vs-specified-biological-complexity/#comment-770929
bornagain77
December 3, 2022
December
12
Dec
3
03
2022
03:44 AM
3
03
44
AM
PDT
Martin_r and Querius, as to, "You start with a random clump of atoms, and if you shine light on it for long enough, it should not be so surprising that you get a plant." - Jeremy England - MIT physicist Brian Miller responds to Jeremy England's, ahem, "untethered" claims here,
(20:25),, "All natural processes go from high free energy to low free energy. But life requires nature to take a bunch of chemicals and go from low free energy to high free energy. That is a physical impossibility.,,, "There has been more sophisticated analysis by people like Jeremy England at MIT. And Jeremy England has talked about what are called fluctuation theorems. A really interesting story is that people have said Jeremy England came up with a new physics theory for life. That somehow physics can explain the origin of life.,,, Again, I never trust what you read in the press, I go back to the original literature. When you look at England's equations it basically disproves all origin of life theories. Because, when you actually look at his math, what it shows you is (that), a system driven far from equilibrium, they tend towards greater entropy. The internal entropy increases. And they tend to give off heat. Well again, the origin of life requires the opposite. So, based on his equations, what happens is the probability of life forming away from equilibrium is just as small as near equilibrium. What that means is that,,, trying to argue that life originated through natural processes is like trying to create a perpetual motion machine, or to market alchemy. It is a scientific impossibility.",,, - Brian Miller - Thermodynamics, the Origin of Life, and Intelligent Design - video - 24:17 mark https://youtu.be/YAXiHRPZz0s?t=1453
bornagain77
December 3, 2022
December
12
Dec
3
03
2022
02:23 AM
2
02
23
AM
PDT
Martin_r @12, Yikes, this is Von Helmont's experiment all over again, only with different ingredients and added equations for taste! However, I can make up science fantasy as well . . . or satirize it:
The Entropic Origin of Information When the entropy of a system increases, it must dissipate the entalpic density (add equation here) by the expansion of spacetime. This drives the expansion of the universe. However, spacetime expansion is not limited by the speed of light, but it does have a finite limit due to the gravitational presence of dark matter. As a result, entropic pressure forces the compression of mass-energy into information which has no space-time volume. Thus, due to random perturbations in the entropic "soup" it becomes inevitable that information will at some time and some place spike, producing the complexity we observe as a result.
There. You see? -QQuerius
December 2, 2022
December
12
Dec
2
02
2022
07:08 PM
7
07
08
PM
PDT
It is quite sad that this happens but creating fake fossils in China is motivated by money. Once someone with the skill to do it convincingly realizes how much can be made then any moral qualms go out the window. https://timevaultgallery.com/fake-chinese-fossils-fossil-forgery-from-china/relatd
December 2, 2022
December
12
Dec
2
02
2022
05:30 PM
5
05
30
PM
PDT
Querius, here you go https://uncommondescent.com/extraterrestrial-life/at-scitech-daily-sofia-finds-no-phosphine-a-potential-sign-of-life-on-venus/#commentsmartin_r
December 2, 2022
December
12
Dec
2
02
2022
04:35 PM
4
04
35
PM
PDT
Bornagain77 @9, Thank you for the links. I had no idea and was stunned to learn about the fossil hybrids fabricated in China from several other fossils to create chimeras that were supposedly missing links. And that museums knowingly ignored the evidence that they were fakes, so that they could tout some faked evidence once again "proving" evolution. That museums knowingly go along with such frauds is gross scientific malpractice. Science in pursuit of the truth is hard enough without such criminal fakery. This is deeply disappointing! -Q P.S. Yes, I'm very aware of crackpots and charlatans are engaged in such fakery outside the domain of science pandering to religious people for the sake of fame and money. Maybe I shouldn't be surprised that this extends to papers, positions, and grants.Querius
December 2, 2022
December
12
Dec
2
02
2022
04:22 PM
4
04
22
PM
PDT
Martin_r @8,
PS: Have you seen my post on spontaneous generation ? That MIT physicist England ?
No, I think I missed it. Could you provide a link? Thanks, -QQuerius
December 2, 2022
December
12
Dec
2
02
2022
03:03 PM
3
03
03
PM
PDT
a few related notes:
More Vindication for Jonathan Wells - October 8, 2012 Excerpt: Feduccia calls Berkeley dino-bird advocate Kevin Padian "the Elmer Gantry of the theropod crusade," criticizing Padian both for his public advocacy of the dino-bird hypothesis (that's the Elmer Gantry aspect) and for his scientific work. In that respect, Feduccia fully supports Jonathan Wells's critique of the dino-bird theory. He concludes with this: "Small wonder the Creationists are thriving and thoroughly enjoying much of the junk science introduced into the current dino-bird debate. [p. 10]" per ENV Are Birds Living Dinosaurs? - Wolf-Ekkehard Lönnig - 16 February 2021 A review of Alan Feduccia’s most recent book (2020): Romancing the Birds and Dinosaurs1 Excerpt: Feduccia: “Most disturbingly, Smith et al. are quick to pull out the “creationist card,” comparing our arguments to methods of creationists. Yet, it is the current dinosaur-bird nexus of paleontology that has resulted in the creationists calling the field “The Disneyfication of Dinosaurs.” And, one well-known creationist following a meeting on birds origins in 1999, stated, “This is not science . . . this is comic relief [83, 8].”23 So, since the birds-from-dinosaurs dogmatists “are quick to pull out the “creationist card”” to conceal their almost total absence of scientific facts and arguments, let’s say beforehand and to avoid any misunderstandings: Alan Feduccia is neither a creationist nor an intelligent design theorist but a stout evolutionary biologist interpreting the fossil material as well as the entire world of living organisms exclusively/entirely/completely in ideas and terms of his materialistic world view,,, http://www.weloennig.de/Feduccia2020.pdf Ten Reasons Why Birds Are Not Living Dinosaurs Wolf-Ekkehard Lönnig - April 14, 2021 https://evolutionnews.org/2021/04/ten-reasons-why-birds-are-not-living-dinosaurs/ Fossilized bird lung tissue controversial; Big if true - December 26, 2018 The new Archaeorhynchus fossil surprisingly contains many of the same structures, the team announced. That suggests that these important respiratory adaptations were present very early in the modern bird lineage. https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/fossilized-bird-lung-tissue-controversial-big-if-true/ From a Frog to a Prince: Biological Evidence of Creation – video – (avian lung) 2:16 minute mark https://youtu.be/TMoWfPn2pCI?t=136 Blown away by design: Michael Denton and birds’ lungs Excerpt: A classic example, he says, is the lung of the bird, which is ‘unique in being a circulatory lung rather than a bellows lung [see box]. I think it doesn’t require a great deal of profound knowledge of biology to see that for an organ which is so central to the physiology of any higher organism, its drastic modification in that way by a series of small events is almost inconceivable. This is something we can’t throw under the carpet again because, basically, as Darwin said, if any organ can be shown to be incapable of being achieved gradually in little steps, his theory would be totally overthrown.,,, The amazing bird lung As a bird breathes, air moves into its rear air sacs (1). These then expel the air into the lung (2) and the air flows through the lung into the front air sacs (3). The air is expelled by the front air sacs as the bird breathes out. The lung does not expand and contract as does a reptile’s or mammal’s. The blood which picks up oxygen from the lung flows in the opposite direction to the air so that blood with the lowest oxygen (blue in the diagram always means lower oxygen, red means high oxygen) is exposed to air with the lowest oxygen. The blood with the highest oxygen is exposed to air with an even higher oxygen concentration. This ensures that, in every region of the circulation, the concentration of oxygen in the air is more than that of the blood with which it is in contact. This maximizes the efficiency of oxygen transfer from the air to the blood. This is known as counter-current exchange. Such very efficient lungs help birds to handle the energy demands of flight, especially at high altitudes.1 https://creation.com/blown-away-by-design-michael-denton-and-birds-lungs Bird Evolution vs. The Actual (fossil) Evidence - video (11:42 minute mark) https://youtu.be/OZhtj06kmXY?t=704 “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 "What we have shown is that there's absolutely no evidence whatsoever that protofeathers existed in dinosaurs, period."10,,, - Storrs Olson, - curator of birds at the Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of Natural History “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 - curator of birds at the Smithsonian Institution’s National Museum of Natural History "The hype about feathered dinosaurs in the exhibit currently on display at the National Geographic Society is even worse, and makes the spurious claim that there is strong evidence that a wide variety of carnivorous dinosaurs had feathers. A model of the undisputed dinosaur Deinonychus and illustrations of baby tyrannosaurs are shown clad in feathers, all of which is simply imaginary and has no place outside of science fiction." - Storrs Olson Scientists caught faking Dinosaur - bird fossil Archeopteryx (Stors Olson) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Iz7GResDtQ
Verse:
Genesis 1:20 And God said,,, “and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the heavens
Of related, supplemental, note to Darwinists (vis 'artistic reconstructions') presenting the supposed fossil evidence for human evolution in a highly misleading manner in their museum exhibits,
Ancestor bias - Museum depictions of ‘human ancestors’ challenged—by evolutionists by Philip Robinson - Nov. 2022 https://creation.com/museum-apemen-challenged-by-evolutionists
bornagain77
December 2, 2022
December
12
Dec
2
02
2022
02:38 PM
2
02
38
PM
PDT
Querius
Darwinism will take it’s rightful place alongside phrenology, eugenics, and alchemy!
I am pretty sure that one day it will. It seemed believable in 19th century, but today ? PS: Have you seen my post on spontaneous generation ? That MIT physicist England ?martin_r
December 2, 2022
December
12
Dec
2
02
2022
11:39 AM
11
11
39
AM
PDT
1 2 3 4

Leave a Reply