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

The Flight of Migratory Birds by Werner Gitt

Pectoral Sandpiper (Calidris melanotos) by J Fenton

Pectoral Sandpiper (Calidris melanotos) by J Fenton

The Flight of Migratory Birds by Werner Gitt is a fairly technical, but very interesting article about the migration of birds. While thinking about yesterday’s Birds of the Bible – Migration September 2009, I came across this article. He mentions the Pacific Golden Plover in detail and some other long fliers, like:

“The following equally incredible flight performances are recorded for:

  • the Japanese snipe (Capella hardtwickii): 5,000 km flight from Japan to Tasmania
  • the needle-tailed swift of Eastern Siberia (Chaetura caudacuta): flight from Siberia to Tasmania
  • the American sandpipers (e.g. Calidris melanotos = pectoral sandpiper): 16,000 km flight from Alaska to Tierra del Fuego.”

Another excerpt from the article:

Pacific Golden Plover (Pluvialis fulva) by Nikhil Devasar

Pacific Golden Plover (Pluvialis fulva) by Nikhil Devasar

“The birds’ capabilities extend beyond the bounds of our imagination. They can determine their homeward course over long distances, even when all possible aids to orientation have been removed during the disorientation journey. They possess the extraordinary faculty of being able, wherever they are, to determine their position relative to their home territory from their immediate surroundings. And this method of determining location, itself not understood even today, is only the beginning; then comes the real problem, namely flight navigation: mere sense of direction is not enough for this.

During flight over wide, windswept stretches of ocean, a tendency to drift off course cannot be avoided. Such drift must be continually compensated for, as in a feedback system in control technology, in order to avoid losing energy by flying a longer route. The Creator equipped the birds with a precise ‘autopilot,’ which apparently is constantly measuring its geographical position and comparing the data with its individually “programmed” destination. In this way an economical, energy-saving and direct flight is guaranteed. Just where this vital system is to be found and how this operating information is coded is known by no one today except the Creator, who made it.”
To see the whole article – CLICK HERE


New Species?

While working on the Orders of the Birds and finding so many species of birds worldwide, I went looking for more information about them. I came across this interesting article at the website. The bolding is mine. I trust you will find it worth the reading.

Cormorant Tree by Dan

Cormorant Tree by Dan

Do ‘New Species’ Demonstrate Darwinism?
by Various Authors
Frank Sherwin, M.A., and Brian Thomas, M.S.*

“That species undergo change in this grand system called earth is apparent, but those changes do not occur the way Charles Darwin envisioned. Living things do shift behaviors and physiologies in response to environmental (and other) pressures, but can these minor changes completely rework a creature’s essential form (a concept referred to as “macroevolution”)? Decades of research emphatically say no.

Often, small changes within a kind are referred to as “microevolution,” which has been defined as “evolution resulting from a succession of relatively small genetic variations that often cause the formation of new subspecies.”1 Creation scientists agree that small variations occur, both because they can be observed, and because it is reasonable that a wise Creator would equip His creatures with survival-enhancing capabilities. But these variations do not lead to large-scale changes between kinds. Indeed, “there is no agreement [among evolutionists] as to whether macroevolution results from the accumulation of small changes due to microevolution, or whether macroevolution is uncoupled from microevolution.”2

The confusing array of definitions for the word “species” can obscure deficiencies in Darwinian evolution. As leading scientists have admitted, “The very term ‘species’ is deeply ambiguous.”3 Harvard’s Steven Palumbi said in 1994 that “the formation of species has long represented one of the most central, yet also one of the most elusive, subjects in evolutionary biology.”4

If different species are described as essentially those forms which cannot interbreed, then new species do arise, a process called “speciation.” They do so, however, because of a loss of information–the opposite direction to what Darwinian evolution requires. “…..

To see the complete article – CLICK HERE

And Can It Be?

I couldn’t resist posting this devotional from the Institute For Creation Research for Aug 3, 2009.
“And Can It Be!” is my most favorite hymn and I have told Dan, that it is to be sung when I go “home to glory.” This does not have all the stanzas, but here is the full hymn.

Savannah Sparrow singing by Ray

Savannah Sparrow singing by Ray

And can it be that I should gain,
An interest in the Savior’s blood?
Died He for me, who caused His pain?
For me, who Him, to death pursued?

Amazing love! How can it be,
That thou, my God, should’st die for me?

He left His Father’s throne above,
So free, so infinite His Grace!
Emptied Himself of all but love,
And bled for Adam’s helpless race.

No condemnation now I dread,
I am my Lord’s and He is mine;
Alive in Him, my living Head,
And clothed in righteous divine.

What a powerful message that song has. How could God, so love us, (me, Lee) so much that He would come and die for me? A sinner, saved only by the grace of God, by the death of the Lord Jesus Christ on the cross. Amazing Love! How Can It Be?

Can It Be?

by John D. Morris, Ph.D.

“Christ also suffered for us. . . . Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.” (1 Peter 2:21-24)

Those who love good church music have come to love Charles Wesley’s commitment to and knowledge of his Savior and the Scriptures, for he wove into his music and poetry deep insights which challenge and thrill us even today. One of his hymns, “And Can It Be That I Should Gain?,” has unfortunately been abridged in modern hymnals. The original five verses are expressed:

And can it be that I should gain,
An interest in the Savior’s blood?
Died He for me, who caused His pain?
For me, who Him, to death pursued?
Amazing love! How can it be,
That thou, my God, should’st die for me?

Even the Old Testament saints wondered why God loves man so. “What is man, that thou shouldest magnify him? and that thou shouldest set thine heart upon him?” (Job 7:17). The New Testament contains many similar expressions of wonder. “Behold, what manner of love |literally ‘what a different kind of love’| the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God” (1 John 3:1). “God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. . . . And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement” (Romans 5:8-11).

The point is we were desperate sinners deserving His wrath. “But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love |i.e., ‘amazing love’| wherewith he loved us, Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved)” (Ephesians 2:4-5). JDM

This article was originally published August, 2009. Can It Be?”, Institute for Creation Research, (accessed August 02, 2009).

Update 8/8/09
Days of Praise went on to do each verse on the proceeding days. Here are the links to the rest of the song:
The Immortal Dies – verse 2
His Mercy Found Me – verse 3
My Chains Fell Off – verse 4
Alive in Him – verse 5

Birds of the Bible – Foundation #5

The birds are now out of the Ark and on their way to becoming all the species we see today. (See Birds of the Bible – Foundation #4 for the links to the others) It would be great to know exactly which bird kinds and critter kinds came off the Ark. We know for certain that 2 kinds of birds were on board. The raven and the dove are both mentioned. (Gen 1:21, “every winged bird according to its kind”) According to Birds of the World, 8th edition, there are 233 families of birds. Also Bird Families of the World from Cornell. There are studies going on by creationists who are trying to find out what the original kinds were. It is called Baraminology and comes from “bara” which means “created” and “min” which means “kind”. That is “baramin” and the study of it is Baraminology. I have listed some interesting articles at the end about this topic.

Robin Eating by Jim Fenton

Robin Eating by Jim Fenton

We have no problem with the birds interbreeding within their kind or as some call it “natural selection.” But the problem comes in with statements like this from a UCBerkeleyNews – Press Release, “Dinosaurs developed feathers some 65 to 100 million years ago and became birds, with the ostriches and emus among the first to evolve, and the ducks and chickens next. That much we know, says University of California, Berkeley, ornithologist Rauri Bowie. But when it comes to the rest of bird evolution, he adds, “nobody had any idea”- until now.”  I contend they still don’t know, because they have rejected the Creator who says He created them.

We all have the same evidence of fossils and living birds, but the difference comes with what worldview you start with. What they are finding is very interesting because of studies with the DNA of birds. The study was by The Field Museum of Chicago, which gathered “DNA from 169 species of birds representing nearly all of the world’s non-songbird families.” Because of these studies, it:

  • “shifts the relationships among today’s birds in surprising ways.”
  • “For example, parrots and songbirds turn out to be each other’s closest relatives, while falcons are only distant cousins of the other birds of prey, the hawks and eagles.”
  • “New world vultures like the turkey vulture are no longer classified with the storks, but rather, return to their more traditional placement with the hawks and eagles.”
  • And hummingbirds and swifts, long known to be closely related, are in the same group as the elusive nightjars and the whip-poor-will.”
  • “The new relationships often make a lot of sense….For example, hummingbirds, swifts and nightjars all go into torpor at night or during cold weather. It thus makes sense that they are related, rather than having evolved this trait independently.”
  • “Similarly, many songbirds… learn songs from their parents, just like many parrots, which are now revealed to be songbirds’ closest relatives.”
  • “although falcons look superficially like hawks, the new data show them to be distantly related. In line with this new phylogeny, falcons are known to have traits, such as acute ultraviolet vision, that distinguish them from hawks and other birds of prey.”

    Portraiture by Maji

    Portraiture by Maji

  • “These are just simple examples of how people are going to have to rethink the behavioral characters that have evolved,” he said. “The study has raised as many questions as it has helped to resolve.”
  • “Birds fall into three general groups: land, water and shorebirds”
  • “With this study, we learned two major things,”… “First, appearances can be deceiving. Birds that look or act similar are not necessarily related. Second, much of bird classification and conventional wisdom on the evolutionary relationships of birds is wrong.”

The Bold in the quotes are mine.

That is just an example of the remarkable things they are finding out. Sounds like a fantastic God created them and we are just finding out some of His Majesty.

You are worthy, O Lord, To receive glory and honor and power; For You created all things, And by Your will they exist and were created.  (Revelation 4:11 NKJV)

I had this article ready to go when today’s mail came. There is a great article about “Speciation and the Animals on the Ark,” by Daniel Criswell, Ph.D. in this month’s Acts and Facts from ICR. It is a little technical, but it helps explain more of what this article is about.

Article about Baraminology from Answers in Genesis by Todd Charles Wood. Bara-What?

Variation within Created Kinds” by Dr. Gary Parker

Is Natural Selection the Same Thing as Evolution?” by Georgia Purdom

From Wikipedia “Baraminology

From CreationWiki “Baraminology

The Vanishing Case for Evolution by Henry Morris, Ph.D.

The Vanishing Case for Evolution
by Henry Morris, Ph.D.

Evolutionary belief is a remarkable and largely unexplained phenomenon. It is a belief held by most intellectuals all over the world, despite the fact that there is no real scientific evidence for it at all. Evolutionists allege that evolution is a proved scientific fact, based on a multitude of scientific proofs, but they are unable to document even one of these supposed proofs! This curious situation is illustrated below in quotations from several leading evolutionary scientists.

No Evolution at Present.
To see the rest of the article CLICK HERE

You might also find this article interesting:
Just How Well Proven Is Evolution?, by John D. Morris, Ph.D.

Fossil Fibers Befuddle Dinosaur Evolution from I.C.R.

Fossil Fibers Befuddle Dinosaur Evolution
by Brian Thomas, M.S.*

Evolutionary museums and textbooks have often portrayed modern birds as the descendants of dinosaurs, a story that has been presented without empirical support. Now, a new “feathered” dinosaur discovery has thrown a wrench into the already dysfunctional machinery of the dino-to-bird tale. This dinosaur fossil with fang-like teeth, Tianyulong confuciusi, has been found with fibers that resemble structures believed by some evolutionists to be the precursors of feathers—the only problem is, it’s the wrong category of dinosaur to have them!

To read the rest of this article, go to I.C.R.

Since this blog is about birds and the other one creation, this article is good reading for both areas.