It’s a Bird, It’s a Dinosaur, No It’s a Guppy!
Or so a report from Fox News, released June 16, 2006 of an article in the journal Science, indicates. The report is of the fossil remains of “40 nearly modern amphibious birds”. The claim is that the bird named Gansus is a missing link in bird evolution, and that it fills in the “gap” between the extinct bird Archaeopteryx and birds alive today. Of course, like all such claims by evolutionists, the story is built on supposition and speculation masquerading as science. The first supposition is the age of the fossils. They were given an age of 110 million years old, even though there is no way to scientifically determine the age of any object. It is then pure speculation pretending that these fossils of birds were somehow more or less evolved than other birds.
The commonly repeated story of bird evolution is that carnivorous dinosaurs somehow got small, grew feathers and began to fly. The new fossil discovery, rather than filling in a gap, actually turns the story on its head. From their own press release is the statement that “The fact that Gansus was aquatic indicates that modern birds may have evolved from animals that originated in aquatic environments, the researchers said”. But for several decades, evolutionists have assured us that the fossil evidence was incontrovertible that birds evolved from 2-legged land dinosaurs and now they say that the fossil Gansus is supposed to be the missing link? As with so many stories by evolutionists, when more information is discovered, their certainty is shown to be nothing more than arrogance and wishful thinking. The fact that they are trumpeting this fossil find as a “missing link” in spite of their own statements shows that they really haven’t thought their story thru. What will happen is that they will take this information and reinterpret it to fit what they have already decided they want to believe. The motto of many evolutionists is - don’t let the facts get in the way of a good story.
A quote from Francis Bacon in 1620 is right on about how, to some degree, we all want to remake reality into our own image. “The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion . . . draws all things else to support and agree with it. And though there be a greater number and weight of instances to be found on the other side, yet these it either neglects or despises . . . in order that by this great and pernicious predetermination the authority of its former conclusions may remain inviolate.” But don’t Creationists fall into the same trap as evolutionists? They can, but there is one big difference between Creationists and evolutionists when it comes to prejudging the evidence; we have a God-given objective standard, the Bible, that we can use in evaluating any claims. The Bible certainly doesn’t make Christians perfect in all of their judgments, but it does tend to limit the damage from wishful thinking. History has shown that evolutionists have no such standard to act as a check on them and the damage done by those promoting the cause of evolutionism is almost limitless.