Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
4 bytes added ,  17:05, April 11, 2007
no edit summary
Line 12: Line 12:     
<blockquote style="background: #F9F9F9; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA; padding: .3em;">
 
<blockquote style="background: #F9F9F9; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA; padding: .3em;">
−
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>
 
</blockquote>
116

edits

Navigation menu