DWA: Heheh. Fluid, eh?

Yes, fluid. That is the what would be expected when there is diversification due to descent with modification. More fossils make for better determinations, but enough specimens with enough salient features are not always available.

DWA: This saga gives me pause, and also satisfaction that one can/should not have to take smug presumptive garden variety evolutionist pronouncements too seriously.

You mean the ones made by scientists or the ones aimed at six-year olds?

DWA: ----Maybe the original Science author would even allow some consideration of intelligent design, if asked point blank? Ya think?

I think...not.

DWA: Thanks for the help. It appears, then, (intermediate conclusion) that even forthright paleontologists would disagree with the numerous misleading recent headlines, chickens coming in a line from tyrannosaurus rex.

I would hope so. Angus would have a field day with that answer.

DWA: We could have fun following-up on this story, watching for any ready complaints in letters to the editor about the twisting of the meaning of the scientific-tending article.

I doubt they would appear in Science as the article in that journal was not twisted. On the other hand, why don't you write a letter to the editor and complain?

DWA: Summary: Like a cat burglar, some evolutionists creep around in the fossil beds looking for doors that aren't locked and ready suckers to take, swapping eggs between nests, making cuckolds out of upright tyrannosaurus citizens.

Well, fossil poaching IS big business these days, but remember that the object of your scorn here is popular media, not "evolutionists". Are you willing to apply the same level of scrutiny to the stuff IDeists publish? If so, that would be a change for you.

DWA: Corollary: Misuse of impressive DNA decoding in the media of some T. rex tissue to support a bastard immoral porpoise/chicken, and trick the uncautious.