One cannot "easily" postulate a series of simple changes, each presenting a selective advantage, that would convert a scale into a feather. Insulation...sexual selection... That is a gross oversimplification of biologic reality.<quoted text>
One can EASILY postulate a series of simple changes, each presenting a selective advantage, that would convert a simple scale over time into a bump, a spike, insulating plumage, perhaps even display plumage, all for millions of years before a flight feather emerged.
The scientifically logical explanation of evolutionary change, accepted by 99% of biologists, has been explained to you 100 times.
If you can "easily" postulate such a pathway, then why don't you do so without glossing over critical details? While you're at it, consider the improbability of each mutation you invoke for such a transmutation.
Your simplistic explanations only validate what I am saying...that you misrepresent biologic complexity.