Was anyone else dissapointed to find out dinosaurs probably had feathers?

Question

And if so, why?

Answer 1

No, because I don't think they did.

First of all, bird evolution is one of the most controversial areas in evolutionary paleontology and evolutionists often disagree and criticize each other.

We hear a lot of reports of feathered dinosaurs being found, but what you rarely hear, is that the main candidates are believed by many experts to simply be frayed collagen fibers, or hair like structures that could have supported a frill or crest like those on iguanas, or are on animals that are not dinosaurs, but flightless birds. The drawings are certainly not what we find; they are just the artists’ imagination. Dr. Alan Feduccia, a world authority on birds and an evolutionist, along with his coworkers have presented a substantial body of evidence to support their view that there are, in fact, no known dinosaurs with feathers (they believe birds evolved from different reptiles, but not dinosaurs).

And then you have ones like Archaeoraptor that was proven to be a hoax. Who knows how many times that will happen. All these announcements of feathered dinosaurs cause a lot of media fanfare, but when they are refuted, there is scarcely a whimper in the media.

You may be thinking, “But what about Archaeopteryx? That has been used for years and years.” Archaeopteryx was a true perching bird with fully formed wings and flight feathers, as well as a large wishbone for the attachment of muscles used for the downstroke of the wings.

So what is all the fuss about; why is Archaeopteryx such an icon of bird to dino evolution? Well, it had teeth in the bill, claws on the wings, no keel on the breast bone, an unfused backbone, and a long, bony tail, which are all characteristics most people associate with reptiles.

But as Dr. Gary Parker said, “...the reptile-like features are not really as reptile-like as you might suppose. The familiar ostrich, for example, has claws on its wings that are even more ‘reptile-like’ than those of Archaeopteryx. Several birds, such as the hoatzin, don’t have much of a keel. The penguin has unfused backbones and a bony tail. No living birds have socketed teeth, but some fossil birds do. Besides, some reptiles have teeth and some don’t, so the presence or absence of teeth is not particularly important in distinguishing the two groups.”

Dr. Alan Feduccia (like I said, an evolutionist, and by the way, one who doesn’t like creationists quoting him) said, “Paleontologists have tried to turn Archaeopteryx into an earth-bound, feathered dinosaur. But it’s not. It is a bird, a perching bird. And no amount of ‘paleobabble’ is going to change that.”

On top of that, scientists have found fossils of what they would call “true birds” in layers of rock that they date as being older than Archaeopteryx. That presents a problem for them. I believe Archaeopteryx was something of a mosaic like a bat or platypus. Similar structures can just as easily point to a common designer.

What they need to find, is a fossil showing scales turning into feathers, or a leg turning into a wing, or the reptile lung turning into the avian lung. How you can take a “two-way” reptile lung and evolve it into a fully functional “one-way” bird lung without causing extinction of the species is quite a conundrum.

And there are other problems. Feduccia and his team studied bird embryos under a microscope and published their study in the journal Science. They reported, “New research shows that birds lack the embryonic thumb that dinosaurs had, suggesting that it is ‘almost impossible’ for the species to be closely related.”

And then there is the new T-rex and chicken link based on that T-rex soft tissue they found. But as usual, we don’t ever get to hear the whole story. Dr. David DeWitt commented on this and said, “Of all the organisms in the sequence database, the one that matched T. rex the closest was the chicken. Now, before assuming that this would be strong evidence that birds are related to dinosaurs, it must be put into perspective. The sequence similarity between the T. rex and the chicken was 58%, while it was only 51% similar to both frogs and newts. This compares with a reported 81% similarity between humans and frogs, and 97% between humans and cows. Moreover, while some of the peptide fragments showed sequence matches to chickens, others matched frog, or newt, or even fish and mice. The authors did point out that not all organisms are in the database. Although the chicken was the closest match from the database, it is possible that animals not included could be a closer match. Regardless, such similarity does not prove that the organisms shared an evolutionary ancestor.”

There is no credible evidence that dinosaurs evolved into birds. Dinosaurs have always been dinosaurs and birds have always been birds.

Answer 2

That became into the declare. in spite of the shown fact that, it is not any longer elementary to be sure once you're working with a fossil and the latest thinking is that the "feathers" are basically wide, long scales. All reptiles have the means to advance their physique temperature. no longer all of them can do it metabolically, nevertheless. there is a few data that a number of the dinosaurs ought to do it that way.

Answer 3

where did you get your info? it has been known for a long time that some dinos had feathers, one of the ways they figured out that birds are relatives of dinosaurs!.

Answer 4

um, no they didn't. Some did, yes, and morphed eventually into birds, but most didn't. Feathers really aren't that usefull unless you need them for flying or insulation (and considering the climate at the time, they probably did not need insulation)

Answer 5

Not all only some ,there were thousands of types of dinosaurs,

Answer 6

No , but I did notice my week old chicks stance was real similar to the T-Rex !

<