An article titled "If T. Rex fell, how did it get up, given its tiny arms and low center of gravity?" carried on the Scientific American web site on 9 May, 2007, considered Tyrannosaurus rex, which Darwinists have for a long time insisted on regarding as an intermediate form. This fossil, which has been the subject of evolutionist conjecture because of various of its anatomical features, has been insistently proposed by Darwinists as evidence for the fictitious transition from reptiles to birds. However, hundreds of pieces of evidence refuting this claim have come to light, despite which attempts are still made to use T. rex for Darwinist propaganda.
An article titled "If T. Rex fell, how did it get up, given its tiny arms and low center of gravity?" carried on the Scientific American web site on 9 May, 2007, considered Tyrannosaurus rex, which Darwinists have for a long time insisted on regarding as an intermediate form. This fossil, which has been the subject of evolutionist conjecture because of various of its anatomical features, has been insistently proposed by Darwinists as evidence for the fictitious transition from reptiles to birds. However, hundreds of pieces of evidence refuting this claim have come to light, despite which attempts are still made to use T. rex for Darwinist propaganda.
This claim, which was repeated in the article in question, which is supported by no scientific evidence, and which has no other aim than to depict the fossil in question as evidence for evolution, has come into the spotlight on previous occasions, and its invalidity has been well understood. You can read our response to the claim under discussion HERE.
