I'd like to ask a question about the evolution of birds from dinosaurs.?

Question

First of all, birds and lizards have different respiratory systems. A transitional species wouldn't be able to breathe.

A transitional species would have front appendages that were part leg, part wing. It couldn't walk on them, or fly with them.

A transitional species would be partly covered with scales, partly covered with feathers. Seems like it would be a funny looking animal.

So can someone explain to me how this transition took place?

Could it be that God made each kind of animal after it's kind?

Answer 1

"A transitional species would have front appendages that were part leg, part wing. It couldn't walk on them, or fly with them."

Sure it could walk on them, at least.

"A transitional species would be partly covered with scales, partly covered with feathers. Seems like it would be a funny looking animal."

Birds are partly covered with scales, partly covered with feathers. Ever looked at a bird's LEGS?

I'll let you figure it out.

Answer 2

"First of all, birds and lizards have different respiratory systems. A transitional species wouldn't be able to breathe."
Dinosaurs were very different from lizards. They were warm-blooded, for instance. It stands to reason they could have different respiratory systems.

"A transitional species would have front appendages that were part leg, part wing. It couldn't walk on them, or fly with them."
The animals birds evolved from were bipedal. A transitional species could have feathers on its arms and also claws to grasp objects or rip flesh.

"A transitional species would be partly covered with scales, partly covered with feathers. Seems like it would be a funny looking animal."
Ever seen a bird's legs?

"So can someone explain to me how this transition took place?"
A mutation occured which was beneficial, and the altered genome was carried down the generations. Eventually, speciation occured.

"Could it be that God made each kind of animal after it's kind?"
NO. For a start, 'kind' is meaningless. Secondly, Creationism is clearly bollocks, and is easily disproven.

Answer 3

150 years ago, we didn't know about bacteria. No clue. It wasn't understood until Louis Pasteur determined that germs caused disease.

You are asking the same questions that scientists ask. You have, however, asked this in the Religion & Spirituality section, where we are mostly humanities majors, not biologists or physicists. Would you come to R&S to find out what opus number was Mozart's 40th Symphony? I think not. You're asking us to play to our weakness. Quite frankly, you're being unfair.

So let me suggest two things:

1. If you are serious about wanting to know the current evidence-based understanding on the origins of the universe and on evolutionary theory, there are excellent descriptions found at http://www.talkorigins.org .

2. Consider that you are proposing (not so subtly) that anything that is not explained is a place for God to be discovered. This is commonly referred to in ontology as "the god of the gaps" theory. It typically assigns God to any blank space that science has not yet reached useful conclusions. Remember what I said about disease? Before bacteria were discovered, it was assumed God was punishing the ill, or that they were demon possessed, or some other supernatural phenomenon caused sickness. This is the same god of the gaps.

Science never assumes, and should never assume, anything is supernatural. The purpose of science is to discover through measured observation, testing, and repetition what natural causes lead to our natural world. If you impose a statement "God caused it," then this stops the search for knowledge, because God is ultimately unknowable. This is the reason that the "god of the gaps" theory is discounted among learned ontological academicians, and is ignored by science.

^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^

Answer 4

I love it when people try to talk science with such a limited understanding of Theory and Practice..

seen any Crocoducks lately?

in addition to your first answer. I would add.

we are talking Millions if not Billions of years here.

Evolution does not work in 3 days..today a lizard. tomorrow a lizard/bird mutant, day after a bird.

people talk about the strange looking animals that evolution would create.

what about the ones that we have.

Jellyfish?
snails?
etc...

Answer 5

Study the science. There are anatomical similarities. Dinosaurs have been found with feathers. Study the science.

Since dinos lived for so many millions of years do you suppose god made them in his own image first?

Answer 6

The Discovery Chanel ran a great show on that a few days ago. If you are really interested, it is probably still in their rotation.

First-- Lizards aren't dinosaurs, so get that out of your head. Birds came out of the raptor line, lizards didn't.
Second -- the transition the scales are kind of rolled into tubes. It almost looks like fur, but it has a similar structure.
Third--you will still find disagreement among Paleontologists about it. They need to find a few more fossils to figure out a few things.

Anyhow here is the basic outline:
* Lisboasaurus estesi and other "troodontid dinosaur-birds" -- a bird-like reptile with very bird-like teeth (that is, teeth very like those of early toothed birds [modern birds have no teeth]). May not have been a direct ancestor; may have been a "cousin" of the birds instead.
* Protoavis -- this is a highly controversial fossil that may or may not be an extremely early bird. Not enough of the fossil was recovered to determine if it is definitely related to the birds, or not. I mention it in case people have heard about it recently.
* Archeopteryx -- reptilian vertebrae, pelvis, tail, skull, teeth, digits, claws, sternum. Avian furcula (wishbone, for attachment of flight muscles), forelimbs, and lift-producing flight feathers. Archeopteryx could probably fly from tree to tree, but couldn't take off from the ground, since it lacked a keeled breastbone (for attachment of large flight muscles) and had a weak shoulder (relative to modern birds).
* "Chinese bird" [I don't know what name was given to this fossil] -- A fossil dating from 10-15 million years after Archeopteryx. Bird-like claws on the toes, flight-specialized shoulders, fair-sized sternal keel (modern birds usually have large sternal keel); also has reptilian stomach ribs, reptilian unfused hand bones, & reptilian pelvis. This bird has a fused tail ("pygostyle"), but I don't know how long it was, or if it was all fused or just part of it was fused.
* "Las Hoyas bird" [I don't know what name was given to this fossil] -- This fossil dates from 20-30 m.y. after Archeopteryx. It still has reptilian pelvis & legs, with bird-like shoulder. Tail is medium-length with a fused tip (Archeopteryx had long, unfused tail; modern birds have short, fused tail). Fossil down feather was found with the Las Hoyas bird.
* Toothed Cretaceous birds, e.g. Hesperornis and Ichthyornis. Skeleton further modified for flight (fusion of pelvis bones, fusion of hand bones, short & fused tail). Still had true socketed teeth, which are missing in modern birds.
* [note: a classic study of chicken embryos showed that chicken bills can be induced to develop teeth, indicating that chickens (and perhaps other modern birds) still retain the genes for making teeth.]

Answer 7

Posting a science question in the religion and spirituality section often means the asker does not really want an answer. His goal is to ask a question that he believes proves some scientific knowledge to be wrong, or that science does not yet answer, and make the implicit claim that the only other explanation is a god, and specifically, the same god he happens to believe in.

It's the "god of the gaps" - intellectually bankrupt, since it favors ignorance instead of knowledge, and because of the contained logical fallacy.

If you really want to know how it works, ask in the right section - or even, *horror*, look it up or ask somebody who specializes in the field.

All species are transitional except ones that are extinct.

As for your 'half a wing' claim:

1. Half a wing can have any of several uses:
* In insects, half a wing is useful for skimming rapidly across the surface of water (Marden and Kramer 1995; Kramer and Marden 1997; Thomas et al. 2000).
* In larger animals, half a wing is useful for gliding. Airfoils for gliding appear in several different forms in many different animals, including
o skin between legs on flying squirrels (Petauristinae), scaly-tailed squirrels (Anomaluridae), flying phalangers, and flying lemurs
o flattened body of the flying snake (Chrysopelea)
o large webbed feet on gliding tree frogs (Rhacophorus and Polypedates)
o fins on flying fish (Exocoetidae) and flying squid (Onychoteuthis)
o expanded lateral membranes supported by elongated flexible ribs on gliding lizards (e.g., Draco)
o expanded lateral membranes supported by elongated jointed ribs on the Kuehneosauridae from the late Triassic
o lateral membrane supported by bones separate from the rest of the skeleton on Coelurosauravus jaekeli, an Upper Permian flying reptile (Frey et al. 1997)
o even an ant (Cephalotes atratus), when it falls, uses its hind legs to direct its aerial descent back to its home tree's trunk (Yanoviak et al. 2005).
* In immature chickens, wing-flapping enhances hindlimb traction, allowing the chickens to ascend steeper inclines. This function could be an intermediate to the original flight of birds. (Dial 2003)
* In some flightless birds (e.g., penguins), wings are used for swimming.
* In some flightless birds, wings are probably used for startling potential predators.
* Black herons use their wings to shade the water in which they fish.
* Some owls use their wings to hold their prey against the ground.
* Nighthawks, woodcocks, riflebirds, and several species of manakins make noises with their wings as part of sexual displays.
* Partial wings may have other useful functions that nobody has thought of yet.

Links:
Marden, J. H., n.d. Evolution of insect flight: a stepwise model based on weight-supported locomotion on the surface of water. http://www.bio.psu.edu/People/Faculty/Marden/project2.html
References:

1. Dial, K. P. 2003. Wing-assisted incline running and the evolution of flight. Science 299: 402-404. See also: Pennisi, E., 2003. Uphill dash may have led to flight. Science 299: 329.
2. Frey, Eberhard, H-D. Sues, and W. Munk. 1997. Gliding mechanism in the Late Permian reptile Coelurosauravus. Science 275: 1450-1452.
3. Kramer, M. G. and J. H. Marden. 1997. Almost airborne. Nature 385: 403-404.
4. Marden, J. H. and M. G. Kramer. 1995. Locomotor performance of insects with rudimentary wings. Nature 377: 332-334.
5. Thomas, M. A., K. A. Walsh, M. R. Wolf, B. A. McPheron and J. H. Marden. 2000. Molecular phylogenetic analysis of evolutionary trends in stonefly wing structure and locomotor behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 97: 13178-13183.
6. Yanoviak, Stephen P., Robert Dudley, and Michael Kaspari. 2005. Directed aerial descent in canopy ants. Nature 433: 624-626.

Further Reading:
Brodsky, A. K., 1994. The Evolution of Insect Flight. Oxford University Press.

Answer 8

How about the bone structure? The animal bones are by far denser than birds. What about going from a three chambered heart to a four chambered heart?
Their belief is that given plenty of time and chance, anything is possible.One more question. If their brain matter is made up with chemicals that came together by time and chance, how can they trust their thoughts?

Answer 9

Sorry no gods. There are many strange looking animals: the narwhal, porcupine, armadillo, giraffe, turtle, ostrich, the walking catfish (lungs and gills).....check out the archaeopteryx:

http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9009261/Archaeopteryx

Answer 10

They have found dinosaurs that had feathers in China.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feathered_dinosaurs

How's that for transitional species?