Table of Contents
Letter to the Editor
Letters Policy:
Basically the only thing we have to officially say is this, "Your letter may be directed to another member of the staff, rather than I, the Editor in Chief, answering it". This is done to insure that you get the most highly qualified answer that we can possibly give.
Also, sometimes I am on vacation every week or so.
And I, the Editor in Chief, reserve the right to edit all letters posted. Sometimes the "colorful" language has to be omitted or changed which would be distinguished by italicized (parenthesis) because it it causes nice elderly church ladies thump their Bibles too hard.
And with their fragile and delicate fingers, this causes considerable pain. And since we love and respect them dearly, we choose to save them from such pain so that they can continue to bake us cookies.
Your's truly,
The Editor in Chief.
Dear Sir,
I would like to draw your attention to the below article written by Turkish scholar Harun Yahya.
Regards,
Rasim
(Editor's note: Rasim then pasted the whole article for us to read. The original can be found at "http://www.harunyahya.com/mediawatch_dino_bird.php". Also of note - Frank bribed the conspiracy theory talk show host to tie me up to my chair and lock me in the utility closet so that he, Frank, could respond to the letter. To anyone who gets this message, please send help. It's apparant that we need some professional counseling around here.)
Our response...
Hey Rasim,
This is Frank. I'm the token evolutionist around here (and a "true" atheist at that).
I want to take issue with some key points from the article you sent to the Editor who is, shall I say, all tied up right now - he he.
From the article...
Because this Chinese fossil, called Microraptor gui-which the evolutionists are trying to portray as the "ancestor of primitive birds" is only 130 million years old-in other words, fully 20 million years younger than the oldest known bird. Obviously, it is sheer nonsense to present a bird "as the ancestor of primitive birds" when there were birds flying in the sky 20 million years before this creature even existed.
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.
Evolutionists always try to cover up this glaring contradiction.
Okay, here's the scoop. There's no "law" that states that evolution always has to happen in an upward and onward direction.
So... what the evidence obviously proves is that non-flyers (reptilian dinosaurs) evolved into birds (Archaeopteryxs).
Then there was a span of time in which birds reverse evolved [devolved] so that they couldn't fly anymore (theropods).
But eventually they evolved again (Microraptor gui) so that they could take to the air again just as their earlier ancestors (Archaeopteryxs) did.
Apparantly evolution suffered a hiccup during this time. It is really very simple.
But the striking thing about this wide spectrum is that creatures with different characteristics and anatomical structures appeared abrubtly and fully formed, rather than on the heels of more primitive ancestral forms.
Hey, we just haven't found all the intermediates yet. So what?!
Rasim, stop trying to twist the facts to prove your assumptions. Don't tie up your intelligence and hide it in the closet of ignorance. You can't fight the truth of evolution. Once you stop trying to, you'll be free and happy. I know I am.
Sincerely,
Frank B. Finite's Brain
(A chance evolutionary byproduct since the accidental dawning
of time, space, and matter.)