[BMCDA]

I don't meant the artist's rendition but the actual fossil to the right. In this picture it's a bit small but VadeRetro had larger version where you actually could see the feathers.

[DittoJed2]

It is debatable as to whether those are feathers, and there is nothing in creationism that disallows for feathers on a dinosaur. It doesn't make him a bird or a transitional species.

[VadeRetro]

It's not mine! It has its own page on the American Museum of Natural History site.

As far as the feathers not being feathers (per that AiG claim), that's pretty debatable.

A clue to what's going on: this is probably the second Sinornithosaurus ever found. Much or all of the literature AiG and some others quote refers to the first fossil, a less clear and pretty (but fully adult) specimen shown below. There's more room for claiming the feathers might be something else on the first one.

Above, the first one.

Above, the probable second one (if it isn't a related new species).

Feather detail, first find.

Feather detail, second find.