Evolution: Lizards to Birds
|INTRODUCTION: LIZARDS AND FEATHERS?
This may not be the best place to begin a discussion about evolution, but it is interesting. Consider with me for a moment the subject of lizards evolving into birds; a common theory among evolutionists. Let’s start by speaking of the feather and their DNA complexity.
I think you will agree that the information coding for feathers is very complex. And it is known fact that lizards do not have this information. The question is: How could they produce it?
Cells only take the information from the DNA and build it. They cannot DESIGN or come up with information themselves, they are builders and not designers.
Now look at the average bird, for instance the Blue Jay. They have several different kinds of feathers, included in these are the ‘flight feathers’. These "flight feathers" are put exactly where they are needed for the best flight. How could cells gain information about flight? How do they know aero-dynamics? They don’t. They just know what is already programmed in their DNA.
DNA contains information, information is knowledge. And knowledge just can’t “happen”.
It has been reported that a clever genetic engineer has spliced out the information coding for feather construction from a chicken embryo, and has spliced it into a reptile embryo to cause it to grow feathers. But if this is so, it only confirms the point I am trying to make. Which is: such complex information cannot spontaneously arise—it has to be created or transferred from a pre-existing source.
And furthermore, that an intelligent mind is required to conduct the experiment. It takes an intelligent mind to come up with the information, and to put it in the DNA for the cells to build upon.
Do you think the CELL has the ability to understand FLIGHT, and thus the ability to acquire the needed information so that the lizard can be turned into a flying machine? No way. Someone designed these things. They didn't just happen.
SCALES TO FEATHERS?
If you read my last post. I said that the Lizard does not have the INFORMATION for feathers. There is NO CODE in the lizard for it to grow feathers. They don't have it now, they never did have it and they never will, that is unless man [an intelligent being] sticks it in there from a bird. Some atheists/evolutionists have suggested that lizard scales have mutated into feathers. But such mutations are not possible. Why?
Every structure or organ must be represented by information at the genetic level, written in a chemical alphabet on the long molecule DNA. Clearly, the information required to code for the construction of a feather is of a substantially different order from that required for a lizard's scale. For scales to have evolved into feathers means that a significant amount of genetic information had to arise in the bird's DNA which was not present in that of its alleged reptile ancestor.
Do you think it is by some RANDOM mutation that birds came into existence? With their feathers, avian lungs, special muscles and tendons and bones? It is a mathematical absurdity.
Just take their lungs! Drastic changes are needed to turn a reptile lung into a bird lung. In the lungs of humans and mammals, the air is drawn into tiny sacs (alveoli) where blood extracts the oxygen and releases carbon dioxide. The stale air is then breathed out the same way it came in. Reptiles have the same bellows system, but their lungs are septate [which means it is like one big alveolus divided by centrally directed ingrowths called septa coming from the walls]. The gas exchange occurs mostly on the septa. Birds also have septate lungs, but their breathing is much more complex. But birds, in addition to their lungs, have a complicated system of air sacs in their bodies, even involving the hollow bones. This system keeps air flowing in one direction through special tubes (parabronchi, singular parabronchus) in the lung, and blood moves through the lung's blood vessels in the opposite direction for efficient oxygen uptake, this is an AWESOME engineering design.
How would the bellows-style lungs of reptiles evolve gradually into avian lungs? The hypothetical intermediate stages could not conceivably function properly, meaning the poor animal would be unable to breathe. So natural selection would work to preserve the existing arrangement, by eliminating any misfit intermediates. Conclusion? Lizards cannot become birds.
THINK: Do you know how silly it sounds for someone to think that a CHICKEN is a dinosaur or a crocodile? Yet that is what evolutionists tell us.
Some evolutionists will tell us that birds and dinosaurs have some common traits. But all vertebrae creatures have some similarities. Have you ever thought that maybe the reason that animals share some similarities is because they came from a COMMON DESIGNER, rather than a common ancestor?
UNDERSTANDING THE BASICS OF DNA
Now let me try to make you UNDERSTAND what I mean by INFORMATION.
DNA, or deoxyribonucleic acid, is the hereditary material in humans and almost all other organisms. Most DNA is located in the cell nucleus.
The information in DNA is stored as a code made up of four chemical bases: adenine (A), guanine (G), cytosine (C), and thymine (T). Human DNA consists of about 3 billion bases. The order, or sequence, of these bases determines the information available for building and maintaining an organism, similar to the way in which letters of the alphabet appear in a certain order to form words and sentences.
Now let's drop down to KINDERGARDEN level, so we can understand this:
Let's say a lizard has a DNA pool that looks like this: ajdofujoi4ejraoijijhbiaerofjsijbniusahfroiaeujoeip]akf]peif0afkjfp[afdl';lnblnmfdoigiuhduirehjakhhgjkvnakjvhaiufhieur9e8jknglkavlksajgvkijerdhfiuehflkmzlkfjkjahfkjhdfjnakfjekjhjkie.
The evolutionist will say there is plenty of potential for a random mutation to put all the info together to form a bird.
But for the lizard to simply GROW FEATHERS. There would have to be a random mutation that would place the exact letters together in the right order. Kinda like the Cell would have to spell out “FEATHER” from the jumbled mess.
You might think, "That's not too hard"; but its not that simple. The INFORMATION that it takes to make feathers would probably stretch to the moon and back! And it all has to be in the exact order. A very very long and complex word you might say!
And that is just for the feathers. Then you would still have to have the avian lung, you would have to lose the weak and stiff fore-limbs of the dinosaur and gain massive muscle strength in the arms and shoulders. Plus tendons and pulleys all needed for flight. You would also have to gain a moveable upper beak, something reptiles do not have. And oh yes, you would have to go from cold blooded to warm blooded. Man the list is endless!
To turn a lizard into a bird you would have to add a list of information to the lizard’s DNA that would stretch from the SUN and BACK!
Now can Random chance do that? There is no way! It would be like chopping a 747 JET into 200 million pieces, shaking it up in a large basket, and it all falling exactly in place, so that the jet is ready to fly..
Do you think that is possible?
Well, let me be more realistic here. it would be more like taking a school bus chopping it up into a billion pieces and throwing it up in the air and it turning into a fighter jet!. Ready to roar through the blue sky..
The information in the DNA proves there is a Designer! An intelligent being behind creation. Here is an example: If you were walking down the beach, you would notice ripples and little hills in the sand. You'd know probably mother nature through the action of waves made the ripples. Nature can cause PATTERNS... but what if you walked a little further and you saw in the sand the words: FEATHERS THAT FLAP AND LUNGS THAT BREATHE.
Would you think that those words were a pattern naturally caused, or would you think there was a person who wrote that out? It would have to be a person because it contains information. Information can only come from INTELLIGENCE.
THE ARCHAEOPTERYX THE MISSING LINK BETWEEN LIZARD AND BIRD?
Many evolutionists have been informed by their teachers that a ‘feathered dinosaur’ fossil has been discovered, thus proving that birds have evolved from lizards. This Fossil is called the Archaeopteryx. But is this really a feathered lizard or are the evolutionists lying to us?
The following is an excerpt from an interview with Doctor Mention, an expert on the subject Carl Wieland..
Evolutionists sometimes claim that the fossil creature Archaeopteryx is the link between reptiles and birds.
In Germany, in 1984 there was a major meeting of scientists who specialize in bird evolution, the International Archaeopteryx Conference. They disagreed on just about anything that was covered there on this creature, but there was very broad agreement on the belief that Archaeopteryx was a true bird. Only a tiny minority thought that it was actually one of the small, lightly built coelurosaurian dinosaurs [small lightly framed dinosaurs].
Did that mean that really they didn’t think it was a transitional pre-bird?
Well, its kind of interesting that they found it necessary to draft the following statement. Conferees did agree unanimously to the declaration that organic evolution is a fundamental process of biology and we recognize the importance of the Archaeopteryx contribution to that problem. So you can see they were acutely aware that their deliberations might lead some to wonder whether, in fact, Archaeopteryx had anything to say about evolution, so they all did sign this. If, of course, it’s a true bird, it is not the half-way, half-reptile, half-bird like we've often heard.
Dr Menton, the first issue of our magazine had an article about Archaeopteryx, which I wrote. At that time everyone was drawing its skull as quite reptilian. I understand that’s changed a bit?
Yes. The crushed nature of the skull in one of the specimens may have caused the problem. The general consensus now is that the brain is essentially that of a flying bird, with a large cerebellum and visual cortex. Also, in most vertebrates, including reptiles, the mandible (lower jaw) moves, but in birds (including Archaeopteryx) so does the maxilla (upper jaw).
Evolutionists point out that it does have some characteristics which are found in other classes, such as reptiles.
This is true, but then its true of almost any vertebrate skeleton. There are also design similarities between reptiles, mammals and living birds too. Birds have a distinctive, specialized skeleton because, as one distinguished evolutionist who is also an ornithologist once said, Birds are formed to fly. So was Archaeopteryx.
Much is made of the fact that Archaeopteryx had teeth.
Archaeopteryx was not the only fossil bird to have had grasping teeth. Some fossil birds had teeth, some didn’t. But how can teeth prove a relationship to reptiles, when many reptiles don’t have teeth? Crocodiles are really the only group of reptiles that consistently have very well developed teeth. And of course even some mammals have teeth and some don’t.
Some evolutionists have claimed that Archaeopteryx was just a dinosaur plus feathers, in effect. Others have suggested that its just a hoax ”a dinosaur fossil plus chicken feather imprints”.
Yes, they have, “Sir Fred Hoyle, for example. I find that unconvincing for a variety of reasons. The feathers are not just simply applied to the surface of the bird. Where they are attached to bone by ligaments, we see tiny bumps. So in Archaeopteryx, the primary and secondary wing feathers are attached to the hand and ulna, respectively. And the feathers on the tail are actually minutely attached to each of the 20 vertebrae. There are also a lot of small feathers on the legs and body of this bird, and there is compelling evidence that the head was covered with feathers too. However, when you see pictures of Archaeopteryx or its imaginary ancestors, its quite common for artists to show a scaly head.
What about the wishbone?
Archaeopteryx has a robust wishbone [furcula]. Some recent fascinating studies using moving X-rays of birds as they fly show how the shoulder girdle has to be flexible to cope with the incredible forces of the power-stroke in flight. You can actually see the wishbone flex with each wing-beat.
Do the feet of Archaeopteryx support the view that it was a dinosaur that ran along the ground?
No. Archaeopteryx, along with all perching birds, has what is called a grasping hallux, or hind toe, pointing backwards. Rearward-facing toes may be found in some of the dinosaurs but not a true grasping hallux with curved claws for perching.
Archaeopteryx is a bird, don’t let evolutionists lie to you! Hey, just ask any three year old and he will tell you it is a BIRD!
ATHEISTS WALK BY FAITH AND NOT BY SIGHT!
Atheists and Evolutionists often accuse Christians of having blind faith in an ancient book. And believing fairy tales. But in all reality the atheist is the one who believes in fairy tales.
Evolution is the ‘fairy tale’ that all life evolved from a single cell organism. That some how over time, by random chance these organism have added information, and have evolved into more complex creatures. Even though: The fossil record denies evolution. The complexity of the cell proves it can't happen. DNA proves it can't happen. And absolutely no evolution [Creatures evolving to another kind or the adding of information at the DNA level] has ever been observed. It is just a fairy tale.
Do you remember the fairy tale about a princess kissing a frog and it turning into a prince? The atheist would agree that this is a "Fairy tale", not because they know a frog can’t turn into a human, but because the frog turned into a human in only two seconds! But give that frog or newt a few million years, and they will believe it! You see for the atheist, "Time" is what makes fairy tales into reality.
WHY IS EVOLUTION STILL BEING TAUGHT?
The only reason evolution is still clung to is because the humanists and the atheists are trying to understand the universe apart from GOD. They must have explanations for life and the different kinds of animals from a naturalist point of view and this takes FAITH. You may not realize this but atheists have a lot of faith. They have made up their mind that “There is no God”, an absolute statement, even though they have very limited knowledge of the universe. They can’t prove there is no God. They don’t even have one percent of the information to come to this conclusion, yet they conclude this by FAITH, and from this foundation they build their world view. They then build upon this faith by doctrines like evolution that cannot be substantiated by evidence, but they accept it by faith.
Do you realize how much faith it takes for a person believe that a particle can turn into a HUMAN if you give it enough time? Or that a worm can become a Bald Eagle if you give it enough time? Yet, this is what they believe! Not because they have seen it happen, but they believe it happens.
A SAD RELIGION.
A Creationist can look at a Falcon and know that these creatures were designed and formed for a reason, to be a flying machine. They can look at the whale and know they were designed to be awesome swimmers in the ocean deep. They know that each creature has a reason for being, a grand purpose and design. They can look in the mirror and know that they are upon this earth for a reason. That they were designed for a purpose and that they are not a mistake.
But the poor blind atheist believes that everything came into existence by ACCIDENT. They believe that life first began by an ACCIDENT. They believe all living creatures are an ACCIDENT. They believe that mankind is just an ACCIDENT. They believe that they themselves are an ACCIDENT! And thus all of their thoughts and all their dreams are MERE ACCIDENTS, proceeding from an Accident! What a dark and depressing religion it is!