As you will see in the videos below, we can critically examine the evidence for physical feathers on dinosaurs. Because the evidence is (now) overwhelming that many species placed within the non-avian dinosaurs exhibit some form of feathers, some creationists are arguing that those species actually should not be considered 'dinosaurs' but 'true birds'. Those shrill arguments have infested the peer review system of certain creationist journals, with even the most rudimentary systematic terminology (family names, even) being criticized as 'evolutionary'. From a creation biology perspective, however, it does not matter if you label a given species as 'bird', 'dinosaur', or both, because those higher-level secular-based taxon designations do not apply to baraminology, or the study of Created Kinds.
We can use 'birds' as a shorthand polybaraminic or ethnozoological umbrella grouping, but penguins do not have a common ancestor with parrots, nor with hummingbirds or ostriches. There is no such thing as a 'Bird Kind'. Trying to distinguish a 'true bird' from a 'true dinosaur' is irrelevant to creation biology, and it matters not if you lump birds and non-avian dinosaurs together within a secular-based taxonomy. (Evolutionists are going to believe in evolution regardless, so arguing for a bird-dinosaur split is not a particularly useful anti-evolution tactic either.) We cannot even say that all birds were created on the same day during Creation Week, because that assumes that there were no individually created flightless bird kinds (which would have been been created with land animals).
Our goal in creation biology is to better understand the Created Kinds and how those Kinds were affected by the Flood, whether disappearing, surviving for a time after, or continuing today. Be careful not to turn poor argumentation into idolatrous sacred cows.
