If evolution is true, where did flying creatures come from?

Correct. Also correct. Evolution isn't true because a scientific consensus formed around it. Rather, a scientific consensus formed around it because the overwhelming supporting evidence convinces almost all scientists that it is likely true. Nonsense.But "Is evolution true?" is not this thread's topic. Bookworm asked if there exist reasonable scenarios for the evolution of flight, the implication being that no such scenarios exist and therefore evolution can't be true. But such scenarios do exist, and of course these scenarios assume evolution is true because Bookworms question boils down to, "If evolution is true, then how could flight have ever evolved?"But the fact that scenarios for the evolution of flight exist is not why evolution is an accepted theory within science. The material evidence for evolution comes from other sources. Flight evolution scenarios are merely consistent with evolution, not evidence for it.--Percy

When I used the adjective "likely" it was a reference to tentativity, not probability. You said that evolution wasn't true by consensus, and I replied that this was correct, but only because you've got the relationship backwards. We don't think evolution likely true because there's a consensus. We believe a consensus formed because evolution is likely true.About your comments about the eye, when creatures start flying by flapping their eyes then you'll be on topic. --Percy

An aside: "The greatest" was not a rope-a-dope. Rope-a-dope was a strategy employed by "the greatest."--Percy