Passage Summary: A fossil only proves birds came from dinosaurs if it belongs to one creature, but since this fossil is just a mix of bones found in different spots, it doesn't prove anything.

Conclusion: The recently discovered fossil does not provide evidence for the theory that birds evolved from dinosaurs.

Reasoning: Evidence for this evolutionary link requires the fossil to come from a single animal, but this fossil is a composite of bones from different locations.

Analysis: The argument sets up a necessary condition: for the fossil to be evidence, it must be from a single animal. It then points out that the fossil is a 'composite' from various parts of a site. To make the conclusion follow perfectly, we must assume that being a composite from different parts of a site automatically means it is not from a single animal. Look for an answer that bridges this gap by defining 'composite from various parts' as 'not from a single animal.'