I notice that you completely ignored VadeRetro's link. Which isn't surprising. Creationists ignore information that they don't like because they prefer picking easy battles and pretending that's all that ever challenges them.
It seems that...it is you, VadeRetro and many other evolutionists, that live in a pretend world, while being blinded and seduced by your desire to support current [avian] evolutionary "theory" despite the evidence (or lack thereof). This seduction leads to wrong-headed assumed conclusions that smack of Lyshenko-type science.
I read the link.
Obviuosly, you (and VadeRetro) haven't paid attention to some of the newest information out on the subject of dinosaur "feathers".
A team of scientists (Dr. Feduccia, Dr. Lingham-Soliar, Dr. Hinchliffe and others) recently conducted research and study (reported Oct. 10), which can be found in the latest Journal of Morphology.
"They found that fossilized patterns that resembled feathers somewhat also occur in fossils known not to be closely related to birds and hence are far more likely to be skin-related tissues [so much for protofeathers!].
In his October 10, 2005 press release on the subject, Feduucia said, "The strongest case for feathered dinosaurs arose in 1996 with a samll black and white photo of the early Cretaceous period small dinosaur Sinosauropteryx, which sported a coat of filamentous structurtes some called "dino-fuzz". The photo subsequently appeared in various prominent publications as the long-sought 'definitive' evidence of dinosaur 'feathers' and that birds were descended from dinosaurs...Yet no one ever bothered to provide the evidence--either structural or biological--that these structures had anything to do with feathers."
"In our new work, we show that these and other filamentous structures were not protofeathers, but rather remains of collagenous fiber meshworks that reinforced the skin."
"Current dinosaurian dogma requires that all the intricate adaptations of birds' wings and feathers for flight evolved in a flightless dinosaur and then somehow became useful for flight only much later...That is close to being non-Darwinian."
"Also, the current feathered dinosaurs theory makes little sense time-wise either because it holds that all stages of feather evolution and bird ancestry ocurred some 125 million years ago in the early Cretaceous fossils unearthed in China. That's some 25 million years after Archaeoptyrex, which was already a bird in the modern sense."
"With the advent of 'feathered dinosaurs', we are truly witnessing the beginnings of the meltdown of paleontology...Just as the discovery of a four-chambered heart in a dinosaur in 2000 in an article in Science turned out to be an artifact, feathered dinosaurs too have become part of the fantasia of this field."
Your commonly made hasty (and incorrect)-generalizations about me and some/all creationists ("Creationists ignore information that they don't like because they prefer picking easy battles..."), given this thread, may more appropriately describe you than me.
And I wonder if the above-mentioned study will be archived on the list-o-links.