Remember your Creator in the days of your youth! |
Hi
, Last week, we noted briefly a few of the difficulties evolutionists face when attempting to explain where birds came from. They claim that they evolved from reptilian creatures. This takes a lot of imagination to overcome the numerous obstacles, but a recent discovery has many of them excited. One of the articles written about this begins this way: "The fossil of a 127-million-year-old baby bird has been unearthed, paving the way for understanding how birds evolved during the age of dinosaurs". |
For starters, look at the fossil of the bird, pictured here (courtesy: Fabien Knoll). Nothing unusual. Even the articles claim it was a baby bird that weighed less than 3
oz. and was about 2 inches long.
Now, look at the painting below. It's an artist's rendition of what the creature "might" have looked like. (courtesy: Raul Martin).
Do you notice anything odd, not only about the two images, but also about the above sentence? First, the fossil is acknowledged to be a bird
- plain and simple. However, it's claimed to be 127 million years old. According to evolutionists, this would place it during the supposed "age of dinosaurs". Hence, the very imaginative rendition by the artist that depicts it in its supposed "half-reptile/half-bird" state. Yet, there is nothing in the fossil, at all, to indicate this. Furthermore, the sentence uses the phrase "paving the way". Think about that a moment. Once a path or road is paved, it gets you to the destination much quicker. What is the
destination being proposed here? Ostensibly, to explain how a reptile turned into a bird.
Does this fossil do that? No. It's a bird. Not a repto-bird. A bird! It doesn't show the "how" of any supposed change from one kind of creature to another. There is no road at all, let alone a paved one! And, the date of 127 million years is pure presumption. Like most fossils, it's most likely simply a creature killed and buried
during the great flood event. |
|
|
|
