When did dinosaurs turn into birds?

[In situ]

Theistic Evolution says that DNA is the "Language of God".

If that is the case, then god is a bad speller.

 

[In situ]

You were not paying attention, were you. Most of the features that the casual student of biology/palaeontology might associate with birds were already present in the dinosaurs. Therefore, argues insitu, very few changes were necessary to make the transition.

Almost correct, the point I want to stress is that birds have not changed from one kind into some other kind.

Evolution does not work that way, creatures cannot change, or stop being, what they already are. Birds are just an unique variation of all possible ways to be a dinosaurs. That unique variation we call "birds", but that does not mean birds are a "different kind". They are only a different kind in the respect a dog is different kind of a mammal. Dogs, cows, elephants are all unique ways of being a mammal just as a bird is a unique way of being a dinosaur.

 

[joshua 1 9]

If that is the case, then god is a bad speller.

Actually God does not take responsibility for the mess that man and the devil has made out of His creation. He does have a plan of redemption and restoration so in the fullness of time everything will be fixed and repaired.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Where these bird like dinosaurs (all have teeth, non fused finger digits and tails) on the Ark as well?

There are people that see a connection between Noah's flood 4,331 years ago and the break up of Pangaea 175 million years ago. One is a shadow and a type of the other. I tend to be a dispensationalist so I see a day in Genesis as being 1,000 years. Genesis has many layers of meaning depending on how you look at the story. It is amazing where there is so much meaning that shallow people understand so little of what there is to learn from that story.

 

[In situ]

Actually God does not take responsibility for the mess that man and the devil has made out of His creation.

You referred to a claim that DNA is the language of god. Are you now saying DNA is the language of the devil instead?

He does have a plan of redemption and restoration so in the fullness of time everything will be fixed and repaired.

What are the evidence that god have such plan? What is the evidence that god has a sex and that god is a male?

But mots important, what has this to do with the fact that birds are dinosaurs, i.e. the OP I made?

 

[In situ]

There are people that see a connection between Noah's flood 4,331 years ago and the break up of Pangaea 175 million years ago. One is a shadow and a type of the other. I tend to be a dispensationalist so I see a day in Genesis as being 1,000 years.

What is a 'dispensationalist'?

Genesis has many layers of meaning depending on how you look at the story. It is amazing where there is so much meaning that shallow people understand so little of what there is to learn from that story.

The problem with too much meaning is that it does not actually mean very much since it just mean what you want it to mean. I.e. it becomes a question of picking a meaning when there are "much meaning". In fact this is what cryptography is about - to maximize the possible meaning of a message in order to obscure the real message. The message with maximal meaning is in fact a signal made out of random noise... Noise can carries any message you want. A message with a clear restricted meaning, i.e a non-random message, cannot... this is why "shallow people" is not able to break strong crypted codes, like you apparently claim to be able to do.

Considering this, would you agree on that we, the shallow people which lacks your special code breaking abilities, would need some sort of help to find the correct meaning in gods cryptated message? After all we do not have your special ability to be code breakers like you and cannot "just see" the message in clear text, so maybe you can explain how we can decrypt the message from god which just look like nonsense to the rest of us, you know, we the shallow people.

In any case, AV claimed "dinosaurs and birds" was on the Ark. The purpose of my post was to present evidence that birds are dinosaurs, so there should be no need by AV to mention birds separately.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Dinosaurs never turned into birds, birds existed at the same time they did.

 

[In situ]

Dinosaurs never turned into birds, birds existed at the same time they did.

A "dinosaur" is not a creature, it is a classification. If you are classified as something you are that something - per definition of the classification. Birds are dinosaurs with fused finger digits, no tail and teeth. It is circular reasoning to say "birds existed with dinosaurs", it is like saying cows exists at the same time as mammals does. Yes, it is true since cows are mammals then it must be so.

In other words: It is not logical possible for birds to exists and at the same time no dinosaurs to exists. If you claim anything else then you better show a definition of a dinosaur that does not include avians.

.

 

[In situ]

They didn't.

You are actually correct. You cannot evolve away from something you already are. For example bats never evolved "away" from being a mammal, nor did dogs, tiger or whales. They are still mammals. And this is how the theory of evolution explains the the diversity (and the similarities) we see in nature; inheritance preserve the unique traits you have inherent from your ancestral line and creates unique variations (diversity) that way. The unique inherent variations, i.e. the biodiversity, we see in nature proves relatedness across the species border all the way to domain level.

 

[Hieronymus]

View attachment 175718

Nobody was there, Einstein...

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Nobody was there, Einstein...

Well you weren't there when the events of the Bible were supposed to happen, so that means the Bible is false.

Do you see the problem with using "you weren't there" as an argument?

 

[In situ]

Dinosaurs turned into birds? Wow. Never heard that before. I did hear that birds are the most 'similar' animals to dinosaurs, but that they both developed independently.

One don't "turn" into a classification. For instance we do not say that bird have turned into eagles. What would that even mean to say that? When I say birds are dinosaurs then it should be understood in the same way it is understood that eagles are birds. A bird is a variation (or specialization) of the larger and more general classification dinosaur.

...I don't believe it.

What exactly is it you don't believe? Do you not believe the classification is correct, that birds are a subclass of dinosaurs, or do you not believe "dinosaurs turned into bird"? In the latter case you belief would be correct, in the first not...

 

[In situ]

According to they theory of evolution code writes itself.

Does it? If so how?

 

[In situ]

Yet the theory can't account for how...

What "mystery" is that needs to be explained or has not been explained?

 

[Landon Caeli]

One don't "turn" into a classification. For instance we do not say that bird have turned into eagles. What would that even mean to say that? When I say birds are dinosaurs then it should be understood in the same way it is understood that eagles are birds. A bird is a variation (or specialization) of the larger and more general classification dinosaur.



What exactly is it you don't believe? Do you not believe the classification is correct, that birds are a subclass of dinosaurs, or do you not believe "dinosaurs turned into bird"? In the latter case you belief would be correct, in the first not...

Amphibians can look like reptiles, and share common characteristics. But they are seperate genres.

 

[In situ]

I think dinosaurs were well extinct by the time of the Ark!!!

Bird are the last remaing group of dinosaurs, so you probably meant to say "all groups of dinosaurs, beside birds".

 

[Ophiolite]

Dinosaurs never turned into birds, birds existed at the same time they did.

"How do you know? Were you there?"

 

[In situ]

Amphibians can look like reptiles, and share common characteristics.

What is "common characteristics" and what does this has to do with the OP?

(And for correctness, no, an amphibian cannot "look like" a reptile. If something "looks like" a reptile then it is a reptile. Classifications are not simply "looks", names or labels - it is a careful and detailed observations of what a living being really is! A classifications of a living being is not an ideas or concept about that living being but an observational fact).

 

[Landon Caeli]

What is "common characteristics" and what does that doers this has to do with the OP?

Salamanders and lizards have common characteristics, just like some birds and some dinosaurs do.

 

[Goatee]

Bird are the last remaing group of dinosaurs, so you probably meant to say "all groups of dinosaurs, beside birds".

No i didnt