Page 108 - The Origin of Birds and Flight

Some evolutionist publications equate the fact that in peacocks and
certain other bird species, the males are more brightly colored and
showier than the females with the sexual selection thesis set out by
Darwin in his book The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to
Sex, published in 1871.
In sexual selection, the stronger, more impressive animals in a pop-
ulation are more attractive to the opposite sex and thus have more off-
spring. According to this distorted logic, the showy patterns and
designs in some male birds are features acquired over time, as a result
of females “naturally selecting” more physically impressive males.
However, no scientific findings square with Darwin’s thesis. Such inter-
pretations are nothing more than an evaluation of the attributes of liv-
ing things through an evolutionist preconception.
One evolutionist scientist who opposed to such interpretations set
his views out in Nature magazine:
There are several other possible reasons for sexual differences
which this study did not address, says Trevor Price of the University
of California at San Diego, who also works on differences between
bird species. For example, he says certain territorial species that
fight a lot show large sexual differences, perhaps because bigger,
brighter males intimidate invaders and win more fights—and more
mates. Nonetheless, these male populations maintain diversity,
Price says, as duller males can sneak in some copulations while
flashy males are busy fighting. 1
To maintain that bird feathers were shaped by evolutionary mecha-
nisms, adherents must describe mutations that could lead to the form
changes in feathers, but without harming the host creature. In fact,
however, there is no evidence that such mutations are possible.
Furthermore, the frequency of such mutations in nature must be esti-
mated and in the light of this genetics data, a calculation made as to
whether such an evolutionary process is actually possible. One similar