These evolutionists have a wagon train full of conjectures, guesses, bad extrapolations and the like. For that matter, when scientists fiddled with chicken embryos and the secularist press went wild like drunken cowboys shooting holes in the saloon roof, saying how modified beaks were like dinosaur snouts. The storytelling was liberally enhanced by a fantasy illustration, but the whole thing was a lot of noise about no big deal. See "Dinosaur-faced Chickens?" for more about that.
I reckon that it's about faith in evolutionism, not science, that keeps people believing the impossible dinos-to-dicksissel evolution story. There are many changes that would need to be made (never mind the absence of transitional forms), including lungs, feathers, flight, and so on. No half measures, either, like a partly-evolved lung system or something, because the critter wouldn't be able to live. And if you can't live, you can't evolve, even if such evolution were possible.
Most evolutionists now believe that birds evolved from dinosaurs. However, there are well-informed evolutionary dissenters who are experts on birds, such as Alan Feduccia, his late colleague Larry Martin, Theagarten Lingham-Soliar, John Ruben, and Storrs Olson. As with many issues, we should differentiate between observations and interpretations of these, and between the direct teachings of Scripture and models to elucidate these teachings.To read the rest, migrate on over to "Did dinosaurs evolve into birds?"