of evolution holds that birds evolved from carnivorous theropods.
However, a comparison between birds and reptiles reveals that
the two have very distinct features, making it unlikely that
one evolved from the other.
There are various structural differences between
birds and reptiles, one of which concerns bone structure.
Due to their bulky natures, dinosaurs-the ancestors of birds
according to evolutionists-had thick, solid bones. Birds,
in contrast, whether living or extinct, have hollow bones
that are very light, as they must be in order for flight to
Another difference between reptiles and birds
is their metabolic structure. Reptiles have the slowest metabolic
structure in the animal kingdom. (The claim that dinosaurs
had a warm-blooded fast metabolism remains a speculation.)
Birds, on the other hand, are at the opposite end of the metabolic
spectrum. For instance, the body temperature of a sparrow
can rise to as much as 48įC due to its fast metabolism. On
the other hand, reptiles lack the ability to regulate their
body temperature. Instead, they expose their bodies to sunlight
in order to warm up. Put simply, reptiles consume the least
energy of all animals and birds the most.
One of the best-known ornithologists in the world,
Alan Feduccia from the University of North Carolina, opposes
the theory that birds are related to dinosaurs, despite the
fact that he is an evolutionist himself. Feduccia has this
to say regarding the thesis of reptile-bird evolution:
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.108
Larry Martin, a specialist on ancient birds from
the University of Kansas, also opposes the theory that birds
are descended from dinosaurs. Discussing the contradiction
that evolution falls into on the subject, he states:
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.109
Yet, despite all the scientific findings, the
groundless scenario of "dinosaur-bird evolution" is still
insistently advocated. Popular publications are particularly
fond of the scenario. Meanwhile, concepts which provide no
backing for the scenario are presented as evidence for "dinosaur-bird
In some evolutionist publications,
for instance, emphasis is laid on the differences among dinosaur
hip bones to support the thesis that birds are descended from
dinosaurs. These so-called differences exist between dinosaurs
classified as Saurischian (reptile-like, hip-girdled
species) and Ornithischian (bird-like, hip-girdled
species). This concept of dinosaurs having hip girdles similar
to those of birds is now and then taken as evidence for the
alleged dinosaur-bird link. However, the difference in hip
girdles is no evidence at all for the claim that birds evolved
from dinosaurs. That is because Ornithischian dinosaurs
do not resemble birds with respect to other anatomical features.
For instance, Ankylosaurus is a dinosaur classified
as Ornithischian, with short legs, a giant body,
and skin covered with scales resembling armor. On the other
hand, Struthiomimus, which resembles birds in some
of its anatomical features (long legs, short forelegs, and
thin structure), is actually a Saurischian.110
In short, the structure
of the hip girdle is no evidence for an evolutionary relationship
between birds and dinosaurs. The claim that dinosaurs resemble
birds because their hip girdles are similar ignores other
significant anatomical differences between the two species
which make any evolutionary link between them untenable from
the evolutionist viewpoint.
Shipman, "Birds Do It... Did Dinosaurs?," New Scientist,
1 February 1997, p. 28.
109 Pat Shipman, "Birds Do It... Did Dinosaurs?,"
New Scientist, 1 February 1997, p. 28.
110 Duane T. Gish, Dinosaurs by Design,
Master Books, AR, 1996, pp. 65-66.