Not the same problem. That's inheritance down the tree, not up. That "mamms on a T. rex" thing you clammed up on: the point was that things don't move down the tree or from branch to branch. The wrong line of reptiles, one that split off from dinos before dinos were dinos, was the one that grew the mammaries and started moving toward hair, live birth, etc.
That's why evolution says there are things that should not be found. Three ear bones in a salamander. Human bones down among the trilobites. Lots of things, but it's getting pretty late for them to turn up.
But who's to say what's up the tree and what's down?
That "mamms on a T. rex" thing you clammed up on: the point was that things don't move down the tree or from branch to branch.
That's the theory and that's one of the problems I have with it. It seems arbitrary. Consider the article. It notes how some say Old World and New World bats evolved independently. Or consider Gore3Ks point that we don't really know for certain if the some of the dinosaurs low on the tree didn't have teats. If survivability were the goal why would we have even gone beyond bacteria or algae?
That's why evolution says there are things that should not be found. Three ear bones in a salamander. Human bones down among the trilobites. Lots of things, but it's getting pretty late for them to turn up.
Palentology has been around for about 200 or so years. Consider some of the archaeological discoveries that have recently been made. It was long thought that Troy was a myth.