I’m sure somewhere in Creationism’s headquarters there is a large red light with the word Deny! embossed on it. Maybe this light is connected to the internet and goes off every time a science article is published to remind the faithful of their solemn duty.
I’ve said this before (https://confessionsofayec.wordpress.com/2011/04/26/creationism-is-just-denialism/) and it’s still true today.
AiG HQ must have blown several bulbs when the recent excitement of the feathered Dinosaur tail in Amber was announced (http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/12/dinosaur-tail-trapped-amber-sheds-light-evolution-feathers).
The predictable AiG item (https://answersingenesis.org/dinosaurs/feathers/did-dinosaur-get-feathered-tail-caught-in-amber/) sets the tone of denial from the very first sentence. Scientists have discovered something, they’ve examined it and documented their results and now the hard work has gone public. What do our esteemed creationists do? They scour the releases looking for the tiniest bit absent certainty that they can use to lever in their mantra. Of course, all good science articles will include an element of uncertainty because science is like that. Room for further learning is included as standard. Faith based absolutism isn’t encouraged, and nor should it be.
The key feature of the specimen being discussed is that it has feathers like modern birds “essentially identical” claims AiG, a phrase that I could not find in the science reporting so I’m left wondering what gives them the confidence to state that. Unlike modern birds, there are bones present. This clearly makes it not like modern birds, so what is it?
AiG says it’s just a bird, because feathers, just like Archaeopteryx. They make no attempt to answer the problem of the bony tail, they’ve sown their seeds of doubt with the feathers declaration and have moved on. Fossil birds with bony tails and modern birds without bony tails is apparently not a problem they need to worry themselves with. The challenge of explaining how birds changed so dramatically is not in their remit, their job is to Deny! Deny! Deny!
In case there was any doubt, the AiG item finishes with
I reject the age assigned to these fossils, but it shows that small birds, perhaps juveniles, left evidence of their unquestionably bird-like anatomy in Burmese amber. So where is the evolution?
And exactly how long does it take tree sap to solidify into Amber and get buried? Deny! Deny! Deny!