Theropods and Birds showing a change in kinds

I'm not sure if I understand what you are saying here.If we look at a long-dead emu fossil and a long-dead theropod fossil of about the same size, in other words at skeletons, then as CS has pointed out, they look remarkably similar. If some of the bones were missing, there's a good chance one could be misidentified as the other.If, on the other hand, we look at a picture of an emu and a "thunder lizard" brand artist's rendition of what people on That 70's Show thought a theropod might have looked like, sure, they look totally different. One looks like an evil version of Big Bird and the other looks like Godzilla. But I feel pretty certain that those artist renditions were all wrong and still mostly aren't right.My position is that if you met a small theropod in a murky bit of jungle right now, you might well think that it was an emu or ostrich or something similar, perhaps extending its wings for balance as it ran at you, and your first clue that it wasn't would be when it slashed you with its foreclaws or ripped a serrated chunk out of you with its wicked teeth. But I do think that they had feathers, and you apparently don't. Time will tell.Theropoda - Wikipedia

Here's a nice chart. It's wrong, of course. Instead of doing an overview comparison of many genes, or using even more current methods that give even better comparisons, it's based entirely on a single molecule, mitochondrial cytochrome-c. The webpage linked is a discussion on how this works and how to get better results. http://users.rcn.com/...ltranet/BiologyPages/T/Taxonomy.htmlThe creationist websites have jumped on this intentional bad example, however, to start making claims in the usual vile way. http://www.darwinismrefuted.com/myht_of_homology_04.htmlThis is the sort of thing that keeps ID from ever getting anywhere near the science class ever again. Skippy surprises scientists - creation.comDoes anyone here believe that Jennifer Graves actually used the wording attributed to her in those quotation marks?Another interesting point is that we are obviously seeing the results of a game of telephone. Note what animal does not occur anywhere in the chart being misrepresented.