No, humans did not evolve from rodents. It's more like calling humans primates.
>It's not like birds existed back then.
Back when? There were birds before the other dinosaurs went extinct, so concurrently with T-Rex.
Its my understanding humans evolved from a rodent like creature that existed during the time of the dinosaurs. primates did not exist then.
also, humans did not evolve from primates. humans are primates.
Our ancestors might at some point have been rodent-like, in the sense that they looked somewhat like rodents (or rather, some rodents still look like them, as the rodents also evolved from the same ancestor). But they weren't rodents, and they didn't have the incisors that characterize rodents.
>also, humans did not evolve from primates. humans are primates
Yes, we evolved from primates, and thus still are primates, like how birds still are dinosaurs.
that's selection bias. only the avian 'dinosaurs' survived, but calling them dinosaurs would be like calling humans rodents. It's not like birds existed back then.
There seems to be a rush to try and put feathers on everything. We are finding some amazing specimens that are giving us amazing detail, such as the ankylosaur found in Canada. Yup, covered in scales and hard armor.
Now we got this T-rex crazed idea to put feathers all over them. It sort of reminds me of the 1990s who tried to put t-rex as scavengers / non predators because of 1 solitary data point. the data strongly suggests they were scaled (we found skin impressions of t-rex, they had scales). So now they are trying to say 'oh well maybe they had feathers elsewhere, or were covered in feathers when young'. sheesh.
> "Unfortunately, unlike bones, feathers do not fossilize really well"
if a leaf can be fossilized, I imagine so can a feather.