And here's the first creationist to take a bite out of Four-Wings!
The latest Dino-Bird hype and the facts
Actually this "age problem" exists in all the "dino-bird" fossils which are supposedly ancestors of birds. Evolutionists who believe that birds descended from dinosaurs claim that the ancestors of birds were theropod dinosaurs which walked on two feet. However theropod dinosaurs appear after Archaeopteryx in the fossil record. 5 Evolutionists always try to cover up this glaring contradiction. The same cover-up efforts can already be seen in the news reports about the Microraptor gui fossil. All the evolutionist newspapers and magazines touting this fossil as a 130-million-year-old "primitive bird" never bother to mention that Archaeopteryx was able to glide flawlessly in the sky some 20 million years before that.
This has been noted by Professor Alan Feduccia, too. In a recent corresponce, he writes:
"I am not yet convinced that the creature has four wings; we could be looking at misplaced wing feathers, and it is difficult to interpret. Too, the characters that link this animal to dromaeosaurs are very tenuous. Certainly the tail is quite different from known dromaeosaurs, and the claw is not a sickle claw, but only slightly enlarged. Also, the pubis is more birdlike. Perhaps we are not looking at flying dromaeosaurs, but a remnant of the early avian radiation... some 20-30 million years beyond Archaeopteryx."
(They actually have a correspondence with Alan Feduccia. And they thank him for his help)
Of course, I happen to agree with Prof Feduccia's side. This will only hurt evos which believe that velociraptors evolve into birds, not those who think tree reptiles evolve into birds (including Feduccia, Mayr, Chatterjee, Svend Palm, and me). Maybe I'll take issue with the Harun Yahya company again...
™ Version 4.2