[DittoJed2]

Mutations are a LOSS of information. And, a dinosaur with feathers is a dinosaur.

[DittoJed2]

Or a distortion of genetic information. You don't have information added that would be necessary for something to jump from one kind of an animal to another (i.e., from Ape to human).

[Ichneumon]

Mutations are a LOSS of information.

No they are not. Sometimes they are a loss of information (e.g. excisions), sometimes they are a change in information (e.g. point mutations), sometimes they are a gain of information (e.g. duplications).

And, a dinosaur with feathers is a dinosaur.

Why is it not "a dinosaur with a bit of bird"?

[BMCDA]

If you have a string and apply some change to it you have new information. The original information may be lost but after the change occurs you have new information.
Are you sure you don't mix up two different information concepts (Shannon and Kolmogorov-Chaitin)? It's a mistake that's very common among creationists. As well as their equating information with meaning.
Here you can read more about this.

And, a dinosaur with feathers is a dinosaur.

A dinosaur with bird-like features ;)
The problem is you seem to think that these categories (dinosaur, bird) are somehow fixed with sharp boundaries. But this is not the case. You have a population that changes over time and somehow you have to subdivide this continuum. Now where do you draw the line? This can be as arbitrary as determining at which wavelength green ends and blue begins.