A penguin is not an ostrich is not a parrot is not an eagle.
In the bird class, you have a wide variation in ability to fly, and other characteristics. In the fossil record, you have a number of intermediate (extinct) forms, such as Archaeornithes and Enantiornithes.
The earliest birds had claws on their wings, which would allow them to climb trees. Once in the trees, an ability to glide from branch to branch (like modern flying squirrels) would have given an evolutionary advantage.
From gliding branch-to-branch to flying short distances tree-to-tree would give another advantage, as would the ability to dive on prey from the tree branch and fly back to the branch.
They are still birds. None are a new species. Just because there are different breeds within a species is not proof of evolution. A horse can mate with a donkey, their offspring is sterile, A lion can mate with a tiger, their offspring is sterile. The actual mutations we see now cause birth defects, cancer, sterility, etc.
Both your examples are nothing more then a logical fallacy of arguing to a definition and circular reasoning. A duck Billed Platypus has electrical sensors in its beak. A Peacock has a feathered hat. When they breed they breed the same. Just because something existed fully formed in the fossil record that had a biological phenomena different from what we see today does not equate to its a transition species nor does it prove evolution. It only proves another life form appeared fully formed in earth's history with NO transition species surrounding its existence found in the physical world.
I have more but just a couple more problems for the General Theory.
As I posted before, the rate of mutation of Human DNA is now understood to be very slow - one letter of DNA in a billion years.
"Geneticists have previously estimated mutation rates by comparing the human genome with the sequences of other primates. On the basis of species-divergence dates gleaned — ironically — from fossil evidence, they concluded that in human DNA, each letter mutates once every billion years. “It’s a suspiciously round number,” says Linda Vigilant, a molecular anthropologist at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany. The suspicion turned out to be justified. ... Nature 489, 343–344 (20 September 2012) doi:10.1038/489343a
http://www.nature.com/news/studies-slow-the-human-dna-clock-1.11431
Life on earth is estimated to have begun only about 2 billion years ago.... so add the 3 carry the 2 and.... OOPS!
2nd, DNA is self correcting - it has a "checksum" that fixes changed DNA
"In the 1940′s, the eminent scientist Barbara McClintock damaged parts of the DNA in corn maize. To her amazement, the plants could reconstruct the damaged section. They did so by copying other parts of the DNA strand, then pasting them into the damaged area. This discovery was so radical at the time, hardly anyone believed her reports. (40 years later she won the Nobel Prize for this work.) And we still wonder: How does a tiny cell possibly know how to do…. that??? A French HIV researcher and computer scientist has now found part of the answer. Hint: The instructions in DNA are not only linguistic, they’re beautifully mathematical. There is an Evolutionary Matrix that governs the structure of DNA. In English, the letter E appears 12.7% of the time. The letter Z appears 0.7% of the time. The other letters fall somewhere in between. So it’s possible to detect data errors in English just by counting letters. In DNA, some letters also appear a lot more often (like E in English) and some much less often. But… unlike English, how often each letters appears in DNA is controlled by an exact mathematical formula that is hidden within the genetic code table. When cells replicate, they count the total number of letters in the DNA strand of the daughter cell. If the letter counts don’t match certain exact ratios, the cell knows that an error has been made. So it abandons the operation and kills the new cell. Failure of this checksum mechanism causes birth defects and cancer." http://www.cosmicfingerprints.com/mathematics-of-dna/
And what do we see happens with real mutations today? Sterility, cancer, birth defects, etc.
If looked at it without the filter of General Theory the data points to the fact that not only has there not been enough time for the general theory to have caused the complexity we see see now, but that the method presumed for change is not only self-correcting for the most part but when it does not self-correct we end up with sterility, cancer, birth defects, etc.