CREATIONIST: " It has been asserted that Archaeopteryx shares twenty one specialized characteristics with coelurosaurian dinosaurs, indicationg that birds had evolved from these or very similar dinosaurs. In spite of these similarities, there are two facts that would exclude Compsognathus as an ancestor of birds. Compsognathus and Archaeopteryx were contemporaries, both of which occur as fossils in the Sonhofen limestone, said to be upper Jurassic, or about 150 million years of age. How can a parent be as young as its offspring? Furthermore, Compsognathus and coelurosaurian dinosaurs were saurischian, or "lizard hipped dinosaurs." A proper reptilian or dinosaurian ancestor of birds should have had "bird-hips." Coeleurosaurian dinosaurs cannot be the ancestors of birds."
- Duane Gish, 1995
FACT: Gish deliberately falsifies the process of evolution by omission. His question "How can a parent be as young as its offspring?" is a patently absurd question bordering on lunacy. Gish is not a lunatic, however he is clever in misleading the uneducated by such a question. A single individual cannot be as young as its offspring, of course. Making people believe that this is implied by evolutionists, is the deceitful intent of Gish's question. Actually, an evolutionist would say that whole populations of a new descendent type can live side by side with their ancestral type. How can that be possible? Simply because the habitat and niche of the older ancestral type still exists, thus its descendent forms can coexist with its parental types by living in a different part of the very same geographical region or by eating a different diet. Yes, parental types and their descendents can and do live side by side at the very same time. Then Gish, hardly an authority on the origin of birds, states flatly that only dinosaurs with "bird-hips" can possibly be ancestral to birds. This is just another deceitful statement, aimed at the uneducated and designed to mislead and misinform the general public. Paleontologists called the ornithischian dinosaurs "bird-hipped" because their hips and pelvis resembles that of living birds. There is no reason whatsoever that the hips of birds could not have evolved separately from that line of evolution leading to bird-hipped dinosaurs. In fact the overwhelming evidence demonstrates that birds are much more closely related to "lizard-hipped" dinosaurs than to "bird-hipped" dinosaurs! The above creationist quotation is just another example of twisted logic by a chronic liar Duane Gish. (See detailed discussion on the origin and evolution of birds.
Return to Page Numbers