Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
240 bytes removed ,  14:04, July 10, 2007
→‎Creationists' Perspective: Remove part that is irrelevant to section
Line 16: Line 16:  
The same logic applies to the [[dinosaur]]-bird debate. It is perfectly in order for creationists to cite [[Alan Feduccia|Feduccia]]’s devastating criticism against the idea that birds evolved ‘ground up’ from running dinosaurs (the cursorial theory). But the [[dino-to-bird]] advocates counter with equally powerful arguments against Feduccia’s ‘trees-down’ (arboreal) theory. The evidence indicates that the critics are ''both'' right — birds did not evolve either from running dinos or from tree-living mini-[[crocodile]]s. In fact, birds did not evolve from non-birds at all!  
 
The same logic applies to the [[dinosaur]]-bird debate. It is perfectly in order for creationists to cite [[Alan Feduccia|Feduccia]]’s devastating criticism against the idea that birds evolved ‘ground up’ from running dinosaurs (the cursorial theory). But the [[dino-to-bird]] advocates counter with equally powerful arguments against Feduccia’s ‘trees-down’ (arboreal) theory. The evidence indicates that the critics are ''both'' right — birds did not evolve either from running dinos or from tree-living mini-[[crocodile]]s. In fact, birds did not evolve from non-birds at all!  
 
<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/news/scientific_american.asp</ref>
 
<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/news/scientific_american.asp</ref>
−
</blockquote>
  −
  −
The Apostle Matthew notes that:
  −
  −
<blockquote style="background: #F9F9F9; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA; padding: .3em;">
  −
"The foxes have holes and the birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay His head."
   
</blockquote>
 
</blockquote>
  
nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254

edits

Navigation menu