Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: AndrewC
Absolutely right. The chart can't be right. I think the author was trying to point out a variety of ways in which birdlike features arose in dinosaurs and didn't care too much which came first. As to the variation in feather impression quality, Archie apparently left better fossils. Whatever.

Your point?
890 posted on 03/18/2003 1:42:31 PM PST by gomaaa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 887 | View Replies ]


To: gomaaa
Your point?

There is a big problem with the theory that birds evolved from dinosaurs using the Archie, Sino and other fossils and the cladogram shown. Along with the cladogram, goes the following:

Cladograms depend on two main scientific ideas. The first is that time flows in one direction only. The cladogram represents this by moving strictly from left to right. Thus, common ancestors of related groups must arise prior to these descendants in time, just as in genealogy parents arise before their children. Just as parents cannot inherit characteristics from their children, an hypothesis of ancestry requires that the “ancestor”; occurred earlier in time than its first “descendants.”

The fossil dates, as you have noted, deny the cladogram.

899 posted on 03/18/2003 2:12:23 PM PST by AndrewC (Jello™ is suing Darwininians for patent infringement)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 890 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson