Re: ORIGIN OF BIRDS -1

My rebuttal.

Category:

Howto & Style

Tags:

• evolution
• creation
• mutation
• natural
• selection
• fundamentalist
• fundie
• fundy

[gencrauf]

i can understand your effort, but please look with wise, not only eyes.. first of all mutations only damage organisms, like disasters, DNA has a complex structure and any mutation would have a effect like a bomb. So neo-darwinists ideas break down. And they should show us just one fossile to prove the idea. They couldn't. Because there is no intermediate fossile. Upss, sorry you drop your candy :)

[Kabane52]

Here is a fossil.

Australopithecus Afarensis

Not all mutations are detrimental

talkorigins(dot)org/faqs/mutat­ions.html

[nodyxes]

hey kid. I am a molecular biologist. I see that you don't know anything about science. Try to read some books.

[Kabane52]

I have. Who are you, Michael Denton?

[wollin20]

Don't give up!

[Camronas]

Yes I saw her video as well, the whole thing was flawed. She made no points, couldnt back up anything. She should be ashamed that a kid your age could break her whole video. I think its great that you slapped her down and said "No this is fact"

[SirMildredPierce]

"Where are these fossil records? The fossils you mention are "not" transitional."

If we found a "transitional" fossil, wouldn't we then just end up with two gaps instead of one, thus requiring even more "transitionals" to fill in the gaps? There will always be gaps in the fossil record but those gaps are being filled all the time. For years the creationsist demanded a transitional form between land mammals and whales, that transitional was found in the Indus Valley in the 90's.

[SirMildredPierce]

That was a terrible video and I'm glad to see someone tearing it apart. The part that got me the most was when they started comparing birds to non-theropod dinosaurs. They could make the same comparison between non-theropods and theropods and come to the same conclusion. Well considering they are idiotic creationists I suppose they wouldn't have a problem with such a conclusion!

[falcoperegrinus82]

Most evolutionary biologists hold that birds evolved from theropod saurischians and not ornithoschians. The Alan Feduccia quote at 5:54 is taken completely out of context and is a total mischaracterization in a lame attempt to make him sound like a creationist, which he is not. His argument is that birds and theropods share a common ancestor and that birds are not direct descendants of theropods which is what he is arguing in that quote. He is not a creationist.

[falcoperegrinus82]

archaeopteryx and I think velociraptor had pneumatic skeletons.

[IAmForTruth]

Where are these fossil records? The fossils you mention are "not" transitional. Are you saying evolution is intelligent? Why didn't the animal die in transition? Quit drinking the Koolaid son...God made everything including your forefather. You are answering with quotes without proof...because there are no proofs for an outdated "hypothesis".

[eydos]

Nice video, happy to see young people like you thinking and knowing so much. Keep up the good work little fellow.

[DJcrackbitch]

So if I think hard about growing wings out of my back, I'm going to evolve into some fucked up person with wings taped on his back?

[pienipaha]

I think the chance is pretty much 50 / 50. Depends on the mutations "type", I guess.

Though it is rare, negative mutations can also be inerited in some, very rare cases.