Bookmark and Share

Wednesday, March 9, 2016

Feathers disprove the cult of Evolution [as do 1 million other facts]

Scales don't magically grow into complex technology

by StFerdIII


Feathers are unique structures found only in birds. Feathers are considerably different from scales and skin, whether the skin is thin and hairy or thick and hairless. Feathers are not only “strikingly different from scales in their structure” but also in their development.Feathers are well-designed complex structures, which are effective insulators, yet extremely light so the bird can fly. For strength and efficiency, man’s finest planes contain no part that can compare with them. Wing feathers are “one of the most beautifully designed structures in the world
Compton’s Pictorial Encyclopedia, F.E. Compton Co., Chicago, Vol. 5, p. 57, 1957
Conjecture and pretty pictures are not science. Neither are missing link frauds like the Archaeopteryx from China [sited from a well known area of forgery and hoaxes in north-east China]. There are no transitional fossils, or even species within the natural world, which exhibit scales or skin, 'mutating' [which kills software]; into a complex technology, like a feather. Feathers are unique, efficient, resplendent.
Questions to ask an Evolutionist theologian:
  • Why would skin 'evolve' into something as singularly complex as a feather ?
  • How would the body change its complete structure, bone density, reproduction system, brain, breathing, hearing, seeing and morphology to receive such technology ?
  • Why would it do so ? Isn't a reptile happy just being a reptile or did it read the evolution text book and decide that yes indeed, it was time to evolve ?
  • Why no fossil or natural world evidence ?
  • Can you produce a feather in a lab from skin, or scales ? If not why would the chaos of the natural world induce such a massive dislocation in an animal's body covering ? Wouldn't it cause death ?
Evolution offers no clues about feathers. It rarely offers anything scientific about the sheer baffling intricacy of species and their systems.
The origin of feathers is still a real problem. The feather cannot correspond to a whole scale but only to the outer half of the scale. The inner half or vascular core is believed to have atrophied. Any theory of the origin of feathers is hypothetical and can only be characterized as judicious speculation.”
Klotz, J., Genes, Genesis and Evolution, Concordia Publishing House, St Louis, p. 460, 1970.
No clues of feather evolution have ever been found in the fossil record—thus no physical evidence exists of any change—which must exist if they evolved. For this reason, feather origin is considered an enigma.”
Turner, C.E.A. , ‘Archaeopteryx, A Bird: No Link’ Evolution Protest Movement, (Pamphlet) September 1973.
Fossil record: “The scales of dinosaurs and reptiles, feathers of birds, leaves of plants, and even the wings of insects trapped in amber are clearly detailed in the record of the rocks. Consistently found are scales that are fully scales, feathers that are fully feathers, and skin that is clearly skin. No transitional forms of a part feather/part scale have been uncovered.”
The feather is a marvel of natural engineering. It is at once extremely light and structurally strong, much more versatile than stretched skin on which a bat supports itself in flight, or the rigid structure of an aircraft’s wings — and far more readily repaired or replaced when damaged … Though nearly weightless it has strength. The stiff shaft of the quill provides rigidity when support is needed, yet it is supple towards its tip, when flexibility is required for split second aerial maneuvering. Feel the sleekness of the web, soft yet firm. Separate the barbs; zipper them together again by running them through the fingertips as a bird would preen with its bill. The intricacy of the design that allows this can be appreciated by putting the feather under a microscope.”
Peterson, R.T., The Birds, Time Inc., New York, p. 33, 1963.


Evolution lacks proof. That is why it is a metaphysical enterprise reliant on rhetoric, story telling and propaganda.