The bird does not have to fly. I put my hands in my pockets when the urge comes over me.
The better question is, are flightless birds devolved?
I don't forsee any evolutionists taking up that torch. But considering their tendency toward error their interpretations aren't something I give much weight to.
What exactly do you mean by "devolved"? Are you implying that flightless birds are less fit for their environment? Do they fail to reproduce? Do they live shorter lives than birds that can fly?
"But considering their [scientists] tendency toward error their interpretations aren't something I give much weight to."
Ever notice how liberals accuse people of doing what they actually do or thinking what they actually think? Creationists do the same thing, both blinded by ideology.
Yet they accuse objective analysis of data by scientist to be "interpretation".
Yet, when you get down to specifics of interpretation of the Bible, the creationists ideas are empty. The 24 hr day is refuted by Gen 2:4. The Bible itself refutes the creationist position.
The fact that no human skeletons have ever been found with
dinosaurs refutes a young earth. The fact that no evidence of a global flood exists, refutes their interpretation of Noah. But they blithely go on babbling about how their ideas are the only ones that make one a Christian and get nastier and nastier during the debate.
I have to admit their repetitiveness and resistance to accepting fact have advanced their cause, but I fail to see what positive end comes from it.