as i understand it the claim of dinos with feathers is open to other explanations but even if some of them did it does not follow that they began turning into birds [by what ever inexplicable pathway].i k now that word was challenged and i have not checked a dictionary but assuming that "inexplicable" means being incapable of explanation i think it appropriate.gaps in the theory are admitted and no explantion is offered except the assurance that it is still being sewn up.
darwin may well have agonized over a lack of transitional forms and he would still.he just expected that time would validate him and he died in blind faith because over 150 years and probably tons of fossils later there is only a handful of debatable candidates. micro changes in rodent fur hardly accounts for the aquisition of new info in dna needed to facilitate mouse to man evolution.
rob-i did watch the vid-twice.a bit tech so i have no comment,at least not yet.pete