Zealot,
I've pretty much read these theories, however recall reading that there is a distinct difference between insulating and flight feathers, so the two couldn't really be compared.
Why couldn't a wing evolve without flight feathers, just insulating feathers? Further evolution could then co-opt the feathers for flight. A wing doesn't
need flight feathers. Another possibility is that stiff feathers that were more "co-optable" evolved to attract a mate, large colouful surfaces? Possibly a combination of both.
As MrHambre points out, this thread is about evidence that would falsify evolution. Not having data that shows a sep by step scale to flight feather evolution is hardly a contender, when all the evidence actually does point to feathers having evolved from scales (feather development is controlled by the same loci as scales in reptiles, I remember reading somewhere), & that birds did evolve from reptiles.
The wing would prove pretty much useless unless it aided as a means of flight or temportal flight.
There is a grouse like game bird (I forget which species, it was mentioned in the London Natural History Museum, London's display of bird evolution) who's chicks use their wings as a means of speed increase, & as an aid to overcoming small obstacles (before they can fly, obviously).
Mark
------------------
"I can't prove creationism, but they can't prove evolution. It is [also] a religion,
so it should not be taught....Christians took over the school board and voted in creationism. That can be done in any school district anywhere, and
it ought to be done." Says Kent "consistent" Hovind in "Unmasking the False Religion of Evolution Chapter 6."
[This message has been edited by mark24, 08-15-2003]
™ Version 4.2