Ceratopsians and Phylogeny

I have been writing a series, critiquing Carl Kerby’s critique of a phylogenic chart. My main point has been that the chart does not say what Kerby says that it says. Kerby argues that the chart shows that “one thing stayed one thing and never changed into anything else.” I’ve brought up that the lines on the chart represent orders and sub-orders of animals. One of the limbs on the tree even represents birds. Within these orders and sub-orders are immense diversity. In the original post, I brought this up.

Just look at "W" which represents the suborder Ceratopsians. They were both bipedal and quadrupeds.

Kerby works with Answers in Genesis and both he and they generally argue that all ceratopsians are one created kind.

Even though breeding studies are impossible with dinosaurs, by studying fossils one can ascertain that there was likely one Ceratopsian kind with variation in that kind and so on.[1]

As I pointed out, ceratopsians do not just include the four legged dinosaurs that remind everyone of Triceratops. It also includes bipeds like Yinlong[2] and Psittacosaurus[3]. There are actually three different families of bipedal ceratopsians[4]. Clearly, Kerby and Answers in Genesis both accept Yinlong and Triceratops as diversity within created kinds.

 If this amount of diversity is accepted, I fail to see why feliformia cannot be considered a single created kind.  Surely the differences between Yinlong and Triceratops are no bigger than the differences between Hyaenidae (hyenas) and Felidae (biting cats and Sabre-tooth cats).[5]