Stephen Czerkas from the Dinosaur Museum in Blanding, Utah, purchased a fossil from China in 1999 from a dealer for $80,000 and National Geographic touted the fossil as proof that dinosaurs transitioned into birds. They announced this before verifying that the fossil was genuinely the half bird, half dinosaur they assumed it to be.
Then they were caught with egg on their faces when researchers exposed the fossil, christened Archaeoraptor, as a fraud that was a bird fossil fused artificially together with a dinosaur fossil. Nevertheless, not to be held back from his dinosaur-to-bird theories, Czerkas and his wife published a book in 2002 naming another fossil, Scansoriopteryx, as an example that dinosaurs became birds. Scansoriopteryx was classified as a theropod dinosaur with feathers discovered in Inner Mongolia and Czerkas was working with the Chinese Academy of Geological Sciences to study the fossil. Alan Feduccia from the University of North Carolina was also brought in to help.
After subjecting the fossil to “advanced 3D microscopy, high resolution photography and low angle lighting to reveal structures not clearly visible before,” Czerkas and Feduccia discovered that the forelimbs, hind limbs, pelvis, and other parts of Scansoriopteryx undoubtedly showed that what Czerkas thought was half bird, half dinosaur was really 100% bird. Czerkas has found himself backtracking for the second time in his career. The two scientists now “believe that dinosaurs are not the primitive ancestors of birds.”
Brian Thomas of the Institute for Creation Research notes the following about the situation:
‘This extinct bird’s distinct anatomy fits Scripture’s explanation that birds were birds and dinosaurs were dinosaurs from the moments of their creation on days five and six of the creation week. And the very fact that the bird specimen was fossilized, having been buried rapidly in mud, fits Scripture’s explanation that all air-breathing, land-living creatures perished unless they were among the cadre on board the ark.
‘The fact that serious scientists had been willing to label Scansoriopteryx a dinosaur despite its distinct bird body and feathers surely says more about scientists and their “science” than it does about the fossil.’
But you won’t hear this somewhat embarrassing situation in major news outlets since it makes macroevolution look like exactly what it is–fairy tales dressed up to appear scientific.
Sources:
Birdlike fossil challenges notion that birds evolved from ground-dwelling dinosaurs, ScienceDaily.com, July 9, 2014.
Brian Thomas, Second Look Causes Scientist to Reverse Dino-Bird Claim, Institute for Creation Research, http://www.icr.org, July 18, 2014.
Harry A. Gaylord
sunandshield.wordpress.com 
The “God Particle”, the Higgs boson has proven to scientists that the “Big Bang theory” is untenable. It will be interesting to see what they come up with next to try and prove an explosion of nothing provided everything in an orderly and purposeful fashion.
The cells of our retinas perform billions of complicated calculations per second before the image even makes it to the brain. It would take the world’s fastest computer hundreds of hours to do the same calculations.
20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,…Romans 1:20
LikeLike
Eliza,
It’s amusing how they continually profess themselves to be wise, but end up looking like fools as it says 2 verses down from the one you quoted. And all for the sake of pretending God doesn’t exist when they inherently know he does.
LikeLike
they never explain how or why a dinosaur with a three chambered heart and cold blood and solid bones in the legs and head managed to transition to a warm blooded four chambered heart with hollow bones including the head, (and they shrank to boot) and how dinos who incubated eggs in dirt transition to brooding the young, having a brood patch, complex nest building beautiful singing (I cant imagine reptiles having beauitufl singing voices)and extensive special air sacs and breathing arrangements not seen in reptiles.I guess people will believe what they want, and if they want to believe scientists are infalliable as far as integrity or lack there of, then that is their choice. if there is nothing then the results are nothing, if there is something that something better be powerful, intelligent and wise because to create a universe like ours, to be in the goldielock zone in space, as scientists calls our earths position, and to have a atmosphere that protects us from dangerous rays and asteroids and meteors, and gravity just right stuff like that, I mean there is no way there would be enough accidents to create life, in fact how can an accident even start life if nothing existed before hand?
LikeLike
Roberta,
Very good points that are among hundreds of reasons not to believe in macroevolution.
LikeLike