Study Shows Bird Species Change Fast – Re-post

Yellow-bellied Seedeater (Sporophila nigricollis) by Michael Woodruff

Yellow-bellied Seedeater (Sporophila nigricollis) by Michael Woodruff

Study Shows Bird Species Change Fast
by Brian Thomas, M.S. *

“Biologists recently found that feather colors and songs vary among some species within the South American genus Sporophila, also known as seedeater birds. But strangely, they did not find any genetic differences in the form of species-specific DNA markers. Do these variations fit any evolutionary pattern?

The researchers published their species comparisons in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B. In their report, they wrote, “Taken together, we suggest that this is a compelling example of an extremely rapid, recent and ongoing continental radiation, with species diverging in male plumage [feather] coloration patterns and song.”

Ruddy-breasted Seedeater (Sporophila minuta) ©

Ruddy-breasted Seedeater (Sporophila minuta) ©

“Lead author of the seedeater study and graduate biology student Leonardo Campagna said in a Queen’s University press release, “One of Darwin’s accomplishments was to show that species could change, that they were not the unaltered, immutable products of creation.”5

But nowhere does the Bible say that species cannot change! Instead, it seems that they would have to change—within the limits of their own interbreeding kind—in order to fulfill God’s command in Genesis 1 for His living creatures to fill the earth and its many changing environments.

And God blessed them, saying, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth.” (Genesis 1:22 NKJV)

Darwin insisted that animals slowly change between kinds. In contrast, seedeater birds have shown that they rapidly changed within their kind. Despite Campagna’s touting of Darwin’s “accomplishments,” these birds display programmed variation, not evolution.”

…. See the complete article in Institute of Creation Research” – Study Shows Bird Species Change Fast


Birds of the World – Thraupidae – Tanagers and Allies

Wordless Birds


That’s a Fact – Evolution In Action & On The Origin of Dogs

Here is an interesting video from the Institute of Creation Research. Thought I’d share it.



Then God saw everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good. So the evening and the morning were the sixth day. (Genesis 1:31 NKJV)

Also an interesting article about the Origin of Dogs. Love those dogs as well as birds. Here’s an excerpt.

“On the Origin of Dogs
by Brian Thomas, M.S. *

Overall, there are more dogs than children in American and British households.1 Dogs have become a huge part of humans’ lives. How and when did they get here?

Chromosomes show that “the domestic dog, Canislupus familiaris, is a grey wolf.” Additional DNA studies provide “strong evidence” that all dog breeds descended from a wolf population that was domesticated in southern East Asia. Dogs, wolves, coyotes, and foxes can interbreed, so they represent the created dog kind. Over 230 dog breeds have been defined in the 4,300 or so years of post-Flood history.

In his 300 B.C. book Historiae Animalium, Aristotle listed the dog separately from the wolf and fox. But University of Otago archaeologist Helen Leach wrote that “systematic breeding only emerged within the past 300 years.”

Over 200 breeds were produced in only 300 years? That doesn’t fit with evolution’s theory of gradual change, in which new features are supposedly favored by natural selection over vast time periods. A recent experiment proved that dogs most likely changed in just a few generations through pre-designed genetic programming and intentional breeding……

To see the rest of the article – Origin of Dogs

From Acts & Facts – January 2012

Sharing The Gospel


Created to Fly

Steppe Eagle (Aquila nipalensis) by Peter Ericsson

Steppe Eagle (Aquila nipalensis) by Peter Ericsson

But ask now the beasts, and they shall teach thee; and the fowls of the air, and they shall tell thee:…Who knoweth not in all these that the hand of the Lord hath wrought this? (Job 12:7, 9)

Here are some excerpts from the Fit for Flight article by Brian Thomas, at the Institute for Creation Research. It is in the August Acts and Facts. To see the whole article, Click Here.

“Birds, for example, were clearly designed for flight and were not formed by any purposeless natural process. The ancient book of Job stated as much: Job 12:7, 9 – above)

  • Some of the required parts for flying birds are visible from the outside, such as wings and an aerodynamic body shape. Other characteristics are less obvious, but equally important.
  • Anything that flies must have a specific power-to-weight ratio.
  • A bird’s center of mass is toward the front, in between its wings.
  • A small but crucial feature on many birds is the alula feather.
  • There are many more specific, required features, like retractable landing gear and horizontal stabilizers, not to mention damage repair mechanisms.”
“And this does not even take into account the beauty of bird flight, bird songs, or their various colorful feathers, which constitute art that demands an Artist who can blend high flights of imagination with the most intricate engineering quality.Surely the great Creator deserves credit for His fantastic handiwork!”

Please check out the article, “Fit for Flight” and also check out the other Acts and Facts articles.


Interesting Things – Similar Features Show Design

Gilbert Sturart's Portrait of George Washington©WikiC

Gilbert Sturart's Portrait of George Washington©WikiC

Chimpanzee at Lowry Park Zoo by Lee

Chimpanzee at Lowry Park Zoo

Similar Features Show Design, Not Universal Common Descent by Randy J. Guliuzza, P.E., M.D. is a very interesting article from the October issue of the Acts and Facts from Institute for Creation Research.

“I’m related to George Washington,” an acquaintance announced after searching his genealogical record. He also believes he is closely related to chimpanzees. Though he doesn’t really look like either, all three do share a lot of similar features.

So, are similar looks or features enough to establish whether these three are related closely, remotely, or not at all in regard to their ancestry? No. Similar looks and features can be very deceiving. A true relationship is actually a fact-based connection. A line of connected birth certificates is factual evidence that can be verified. Just comparing similar features—or even DNA—to determine related ancestry is always an inference with a probability of being right ranging from high to zero.

For the rest of the article – Click Here. It is a very good article.


Dinosaur Protein Sequences & Dino-to-Bird Model – Tomkins

Dinosaur Protein Sequences and the Dino-to-Bird Model by Jeffrey Tomkins, Ph.D. is in this months Acts and Fact.

Here is an excerpt from it:

“Evolutionists have maintained that the fossil record supports a long-ages history for earth, but material extracted from dinosaur bones is providing an interesting challenge to that theory. The recent discoveries of soft dinosaur tissues, defined cell matrices, elastic blood vessels, and clearly observable cell microstructures such as cell nuclei have been a source of both shock and excitement to the paleontology community.



The shock comes from the fact that degradative processes somehow did not completely destroy all evidence of tissue from the supposedly millions-of-years-old fossils. The excitement comes from the fact that, given the pristine state of these tissues, scientists should be able to extract macromolecules. These would then be used in studies of molecular evolution to bolster the evolutionary ideas that are competing for supremacy in the scientific community, such as the currently touted “dinosaur to bird” transition model.

In fact, soft tissues from the bones of a Tyrannosaurus rex and a Brachylophosaurus canadensis (duck-billed hadrosaur) did yield protein fragments that were subjected to amino acid sequence analysis and then used in theoretical computational analyses.1, 2 But did the data demonstrate a dinosaur to bird transition, or was it possibly manipulated in the spirit of academic politics?”
Click here to read the rest of a very interesting article.

More from the Institute of Creation Research