Full disclosure -- I don't accept evolution. I consider it far-fetched. However, that is not the point of the comment I'm about to make.
This is a pointless article which reeks of desperation for publication. If we totally agree with mainstream evolutionary theory, we can ask ourselves: "What was the first creature to fly?"
Was it a bat? No, mammals evolved rather late, didn't they?
Was it a bird? No, birds evolved from dinosaurs, didn't they?
Was it a pterodactyl? Well, they are 150 million years old, but ...
Was it an insect? Well, we have long known of the giant dragonflies of 300 million years ago, so ...
Great headline: "Insects were First creatures To Fly"
That's real ground-breaking stuff.
ClearCase_guy:
"Great headline: "Insects were First creatures To Fly".
That's real ground-breaking stuff. " Actually, the real story here is the huge DNA analysis project which examined many different insect species around the world, decoding the differences amongst them, and "time-stamping" each important change in order to back-date the first appearance of insect wings.
The result was discovery that the first insect wings predated the first winged-insect fossils by about 100 million years.
But those sentences are a bit long for a headline, so they shortened it.
