| THE EVOLUTIONISTS
ARE STILL STRUGGLING WITH THE SAME DILEMMA: THE ORIGIN OF FLIGHT
The dino-bird
myth once again entered the agenda in an article titled "Wing Assisted
Incline Running and the Origin of Flight" in the January 17, 2003,
edition of the journal Science. A biologist by the name
of Kenneth P. Dial, from the University of Montana, offered a new
interpretation of the theory that dinosaurs evolved into birds.
His claim was widely reported in the world press, although he offered
not one concrete, scientific piece of evidence to support the thesis
that birds evolved from dinosaurs. Dial's claim came nowhere near
accounting for the complex design in birds, and did not go beyond
providing a new story for the dino-bird myth.
This article will reveal the scientific
deceptions in Kenneth Dial's evolutionist claims by describing the
fossil discoveries and the complex design upon which flight is based.
Dial's Research
The evolutionists claim that birds evolved
from dinosaurs has no scientific basis to it. Evolutionists
ignore this fact, however, and try to keep their claims alive
by means of speculative reports. |
Dial's claim rests on certain observations
of the Alectoris chukar species of partridge. One feature of these
birds is that they prefer to run up a steep incline or tree trunk
rather than fly. As they run, they also flap their wings to gain
speed. This short-distance running was given the name Wing-Assisted
Incline Running (WAIR).
During WAIR, as the partridges run
up the slope, they both use their feet and flap their wings, thus
reducing the effect of gravity. Their feet are designed in such
a way as to cling to the ground, and their wings function like the
ailerons on a racing car. As a result of Dial's research, he observed
that chicks possessed almost the same WAIR ability as adult birds.
He described how within four days of hatching birds were able to
climb up 45 degree inclines in this manner, and that their still-growing
wings had an aerodynamic effect during this sprint.
A number of experiments were conducted
on these developing wings, and Dial saw that the aerodynamic effect
on wings with shortened feathers decreased. Birds with trimmed feathers
were unable to climb as well as birds whose feathers had not been
trimmed.
Dial, an evolutionist, maintains that
the origin of birds goes back to dinosaurs of the theropod subgroup.
He favors the idea that dinosaurs are the ancestors of birds and
tries to place his observations of the partridge uphill sprint somewhere
into the illusory dino-bird evolution. According to the scenario
he came up with, dinosaurs trying to escape from predators flapped
their forearms when running on inclines in order to gain speed,
and these forearms thus gradually turned into wings. This scenario
is totally devoid of any scientific foundation, although he sought
to use it as evidence for the imaginary transition from dinosaur
to bird.
It is clear that Dial's claim rests
on nothing more than imagination. Showing that he was able to reduce
the aerodynamic properties of birds' feathers by shortening them
brings with it absolutely no scientific explanation of the way that
dinosaurs allegedly came to be able to fly. This is nothing but
trickery of the kind put forward by many other evolutionists seeking
to instill the imaginary dino-bird model in people's minds.
The fact that such a claim was made
by a scientist and published in a scientific journal might deceive
some people into thinking that such stories possess some kind of
scientific basis. The fact is, however, that scientific research
actually disproves the dino-bird theory, for which no evidence has
ever been forthcoming. Scientific findings in the fields of paleontology,
developmental biology, physiology, and anatomy in particular clearly
reveal that Dial's claim is nothing more than a fantasy. In addition,
a number of advances in the technological arena show that flight
and flying creatures have been specially designed. This fact eliminates
the evolutionists' groundless and invalid claims that living things
evolved as the result of a series of coincidences.
Paleontology
Darwinists hold that some small dinosaurs,
such as Velociraptors or Dromaeosaurs, evolved by acquiring
wings and then starting to fly. Thus, Archaeopteryx is assumed
to be a transitional form that branched off from its dinosaur
ancestors and started to fly for the first time. However,
the latest studies of Archaeopteryx fossils indicate that
it is absolutely not a transitional form, but an extinct species
of bird, having some insignificant differences from modern
birds. |
The defenders of the dino-bird theory
regard the theropods, a small, carnivorous species of dinosaur,
as the ancestor of the birds. Evolutionists particularly stress
a certain fossil species of this type found in the Liaoning region
of China in this connection. However, they ignore one important
truth: At a time when there were still no theropod dinosaurs, which
they suggest were the ancestors of birds, birds capable of normal
flight were already in existence on the earth. Archaeopteryx,
an ancient species of bird that lived 150 million years ago, is
millions of years older than the theropod species of dinosaurs.
Despite being an evolutionist, the well-known ornithologist Dr.
Alan Feduccia is known for his recognition of the scientific dilemma
facing the dino-bird theory. Feduccia has stated that Archaeopteryx
represents an "insurmountable problem" from the point of view of
evolution:
There are insurmountable
problems with that theory… Beyond what we have just reported, there
is the time problem in that superficially bird-like dinosaurs occurred
some 25 million to 80 million years after the earliest known bird,
which is 150 million years old.1
The fact that a creature should have
emerged 25 million years before its ancestor is an inexplicable
situation from the Darwinists' point of view. The existence of the
Archaeopteryx fossil alone is sufficient to invalidate
the dino-bird theory. Discoveries in the field of developmental
biology, which studies the development of living things, also point
to the invalidity of the dino-bird theory.
Despite being an evolutionist himself,
Alan Feduccia opposes the thesis that birds evolved from dinosaurs.
By studying the development of the pentadactyl forelimbs of
ostrich embryos in the egg he once again revealed the impossibility
of the evolutionists' claims. |
Developmental Biology
The latest research by Dr. Alan Feduccia
and Julie Nowicki of the University of North Carolina at Chapel
Hill studied the development of ostrich eggs. Feduccia compared
the hand digits in ostrich embryos with those of dinosaurs of the
theropod species, and revealed that birds and theropods had a different
thumb order. The following discussion of this research appeared
on the website of the American Association for the Advancement of
Science (AAAS):
"Whatever the
ancestor of birds was, it must have had five fingers, not the three-fingered
hand of theropod dinosaurs," Feduccia said. Scientists agree that
dinosaurs developed 'hands' with digits one, two and three… "Our
studies of ostrich embryos, however, showed conclusively that in
birds, only digits two, three and four, which correspond to the
human index, middle and ring fingers, develop, and we have pictures
to prove it," said Feduccia, professor and former chair of biology
at UNC. "This creates a new problem for those who insist that dinosaurs
were ancestors of modern birds. How can a bird hand, for example,
with digits two, three and four evolve from a dinosaur hand that
has only digits one, two and three? That would be almost impossible."
…2
Another well-known bird expert who
opposes the dino-bird theory is Larry Martin of Kansas University,
who states that the theory has no consistent, defensible element
at all:
To tell you the
truth, if I had to support the dinosaur origin of birds with those
characters, I'd be embarrassed every time I had to get up and talk
about it.3
Physiology
BREATHING
Up to a fifth of a bird's body volume is taken up by air sacs
which are connected to the lungs. The air sacs even extend
into the wing bones.
Thanks to special air sacs all along the passages betwen them,
air always flows in one direction through the avian lung.
In this way, birds are able to take in air nonstop. This satisfies
their high energy requirements.
The avian respiratory system is a marvel of design, specially
created to meet the bird's need for high levels of oxygen
during flight. |
Dinosaurs are members of the reptile
family. When birds and reptiles are examined it can
be seen that their physiologies are
very different. First and foremost, birds are warm-blooded and reptiles
cold-blooded. The cold-blooded reptile metabolism works slowly.
Birds, on the other hand, consume a great deal of energy in a tiring
activity such as flying. Their metabolisms are much faster than
those of reptiles. Birds have to carry oxygen to their cells very
quickly, which is why they are equipped with a special respiratory
system. Air travels in only one direction in their lungs, thus not
delaying the organism's supply of oxygen. In reptiles, on the other
hand, the air taken into the body leaves it by the same channels.
Unidirectional flow is found only in the bird lung, and is a unique
design. It is impossible for such a complex structure to have come
about in stages. That is because this unidirectional flow system
and the lung itself need to exist in perfect form at all times in
order for the creature to survive. Michael Denton, a biologist known
for his criticisms of Darwinism, has this to say on the subject:
Just how such
a different respiratory system could have evolved gradually from
the standard vertebrate design without some sort of direction is,
again, very difficult to envisage, especially bearing in mind that
the maintenance of respiratory function is absolutely vital to the
life of the organism.4
Anatomy
When bird feathers are studied closely,
a very delicate design emerges. To claim that the complex
design in feathers could have come about by the evolution
of reptile scales is quite simply a dogmatic belief with no
scientific foundation. |
Birds possess a special anatomy that
allows them to fly. The bones play an important role from the point
of view of flight. They need to be both strong and light. Bird bones
are hollow, but strong enough to hold the skeleton together. Yet,
in reptiles the bones are heavy, and not hollow.
Dr. Feduccia has said the following
about the anatomical differences between birds and dinosaurs:
Well, I've studied
bird skulls for 25 years and I don't see any similarities whatsoever.
I just don't see it... The theropod origins of birds, in my opinion,
will be the greatest embarrassment of paleontology of the 20th century.5
As
well as their bones, birds' wings also possess a special design
not found in any other living thing. As well as their light bones,
their feathers also play an important role in the aerodynamic properties
of the wing. Dr. Andy McIntosh, a professor in Combustion Theory
at Leeds University, UK and an aerodynamicist, described the superior
design in feathers during an interview:
Bird flight in
particular is remarkable; consider feathers. If you look at a feather
under a microscope, you see the main stem, with barbs coming out
to the left and right, and from these you have left-and right-handed
barbules. Now the interesting bit is that the left-handed ones have
hooks, and the right-handed ones have ridges... The feather is made
such that if you bend it, everything bends with it, and yet it's
a very light structure. So the hooks catch the ridges and they slide
over the ridges-it's a mechanical engineer's dream to have such
useful, lightweight engineering. But if you have a sliding joint,
you need lubrication. To do this the bird twists its neck around
180o and dips its beak into a tiny oil gland right down at the back
of its spine. It then preens itself, wiping this oil all over its
feathers, so that they join together nicely, and these sliding joints
are oiled. That's a marvellous bit of engineering.6
Dr. McIntosh finds the idea unscientific
that feathers with such a superior design have evolved and not been
created by an intelligent design:
I have seen a photo
in a book, of an aircraft landing at Hong Kong and underneath it
is a falcon landing at the same time. Now as you look at birds and
planes together, are you going to say that one is designed and the
other isn't? I would find that scientifically preposterous.7
The Irreducible Complexity in
Birds' Wings Refutes Gradual Evolution
All these scientific facts invalidate
the dino-bird evolution scenario. When the complex design in the
bird wing is considered, it once again emerges that it is impossible
to account for flight in terms of random evolution. The most important
fact demonstrating this is the irreducible complexity in this perfect
design. Accepting the hypothesis of the evolution of flight means
accepting that wings were inadequate at certain stages. Yet an inadequate
"wing" is inadequate for flight at all. In order for flight to take
place, the creature's wings need to be flawless and fully formed.
TheTurkish evolutionist biologist Engin Korur makes the following
admission on this point:
The common feature
of eyes and wings is that they can only perform their functions
if they are developed as an entire entity. To put it another way,
a creature cannot see with a deficient eye, nor fly with half a
wing. How these organs came about remains a still unexplained secret.8
 |
NON-STOP
FLIGHT
The swift's long, curved wings enable it to fly continuously
at an average speed of about 40 kph (25 mph)
SWIFT FLIGHT
The swift alternates fast wingbeats with short glides.
SPEED IN BURSTS
The kingfisher's fast but short flight is achieved on stubby
triangular wings. This wing shape helps the bird to take off
from the water after a dive.
KINGFISHER FLIGHT
Whirring wingbeats carry the kingfisher between perches. It
can brake in mid-air to dive for fish. |
 |
PEREGRINE
FLIGHT
The peregrine falcon divers with its wings partially folded.
This method of catching prey is known as "stooping".
SPEED RECORD HOLDER
The peregrine falcon is the world's fastest bird. Although
its speed is often exaggerated, it can probably dive at a
breath-taking 280 kph (175 mph) in pursuit of other birds.
As it dives, it slashes its victim with its talons, knocking
it to the ground with the force of the impact. |
Kenneth Dial's thesis that WAIR accounts
for the evolution of the wing is invalid in the face of these facts.
According to his imaginary scenario, dinosaurs' arms would prove
inadequate in several stages of this so-called evolution, and flight
could not happen. To believe that a bird developed in stages means
accepting that all the complex structures and systems described
above-the design of the unidirectional flow of air in the lungs,
hollow bones, the hooks and barbs on the feathers, the light but
flexible structure, the bird's warm-blooded metabolism, and many
other details indicative of a perfect design-also came about in
stages. It is of course impossible for any creature in which these
organs and systems were in any way lacking to have survived at all.
The Perfect Flight Systems
and Technology in Living Things
UNIQUE
FLYING TECHNIQUES OF THE BIRDS
The size and shape of each bird are
created in a way to enable them to hunt and fly in the easiest
way possible. Unique wing shapes of birds are perfect examples
of God's immaculate creation. |
It is impossible to account for the
design in birds and the flight motion dependent on that design in
terms of evolution. Flight possesses the most complex aerodynamic
properties, both in birds and in insects. The control of flight
in birds and insects requires a nervous system capable of flawlessly
controlling the creature's muscles. In this system, known as neuromuscular
control, the nerve cells are in constant communication with the
muscle cells. After contracting with the instructions received from
the nerve cells, the muscles send back a signal reporting their
contracted state. When a bird rises, glides, or descends, this system
is ready to provide the necessary aerodynamics.
SPECIALIZED
BONE STRUCTURE OF THE BIRDS
Unlike dinosaur and reptile bones, bird
bones are hollow. This gives the body stability and lightness.
|
The perfect flight systems in birds
and insects is a source of inspiration for engineers, who try to
create the most productive designs with the best materials for the
lowest cost, and who have begun to imitate this superior design
in nature. For instance:
Like bird bones, the
interiors of airplane wings are hollow. There are long, thin supports
between the internal faces of the bone in order to maintain resistance.
In flight engineering, similar struts inside the wing serve the
purpose of a skeleton in the face of sudden and severe air currents.
Known as the "Warren's truss," it has been copied from birds.9
The flaps on the plane wing used to
control the plane's attitude have been set out to imitate the movement
of the bird's wings as it comes in to land.
Birds' skeletal structure is employed
in designing airplanes, bridges and modern structures. |
The shape of the nose in birds and
planes is such as to reduce air resistance.
The ability of modern-day
planes to make sudden maneuvers in the air is much less than that
of birds. The understanding of the aerodynamic systems of birds
in flight is of the first importance in the production of more maneuverable
planes. That is in fact the reason for the funding received for
Kenneth Dial's study described above. William Zamer of the American
National Science Committee, which funded the research, says, "The
results may also one day help humans design better vehicles for
both land and air travel."10 This reveals just
how superior the aerodynamic control ability in partridges is.
The flight system of the dragonfly,
which is a wonder of design, inspired many scientists to make
use of its workings in aeronautics. |
Despite being much smaller than birds,
insects have also fascinated those engineers who have studied the
way they fly. For example, a fly can flap its wings an average of
500 times a second, and can instantaneously change direction. The
superior design in the dragonfly, which can remain suspended in
the air or suddenly change direction at high speed, was imitated
in the design of the American Sikorsky helicopter.
Engineers trying
to imitate insect flight encounter a major difficulty here. Fly
wings rotate in the air in a figure-eight pattern. The surface of
the wing points upwards in the first half of the rotation and down
in the second half. In order to imitate this, jointed rotating wings
would need to be mounted on a plane. Even harder than that is the
computer system to allow such wings to move rapidly and in a controlled
manner. The construction of such a system is beyond our wildest
dreams with the current level of our technology. The greatest dream
of engineers imitating insect flight is to be able to create robot
insects whose flight can be controlled in narrow corridors and rooms.
Experts working in high technology institutes in America state that
in terms of imitating insect flight they regard themselves as being
at the level of the Wright brothers in 1903.11
Conclusion: Flight is a Complex
Motion God has Created
The fact that scientific discoveries
have invalidated the evolutionist scenarios of flight, the existence
of irreducibly complex systems in flying organisms, and finally
the fact that the design in these creatures is in many ways far
above the level of technology reached by man, all unquestionably
prove that flight came about not by chance but by conscious creation.
The fact that evolutionary scenarios are still stubbornly kept on
the agenda is nothing else than a despairing effort by those who
refuse to accept the truth of creation and who are blindly devoted
to Darwinism.
Not one evolutionary scenario put forward
by Darwinists has any scientific foundation or constitutes a true
scientific explanation, and in fact scientific findings place evolution
in an impasse. All scientific discoveries clearly show that flight
was specially created. This superior creation is the work of God.
|