Archaeoraptor: Featured Dinosaur from National Geographic Doesn't Fly
by Steven A. Austin, Ph.D.
Download Archaeoraptor: Featured Dinosaur from National Geographic Doesn't Fly PDF
National Geographic Society is widely known as one of the most
important promoters of the theory of organic evolution in the
eyes of the public. Louis and Richard Leakey might have remained
obscure paleoanthropologists except that their research on fossil
evidence for human evolution was generously funded and heavily
publicized by the National Geographic Society. Now the idea that
birds are simply feathered theropod dinosaurs is the prominent
evolutionary doctrine being promoted by the society.
Recent scientific research funded by National Geographic
concerns what have been called "feathered dinosaurs" from lower
Cretaceous strata of the Liaoning province in China. This new
research program appears to be directed specifically at changing
what the world believes about dinosaurs and their relationship
to birds. A recent episode concerns the discovery and promotion
of a particular Chinese fossil appearing to be a combination of
bird and theropod dinosaur. Is it actually evolution's missing
link between dinosaurs and birds? The episode concerning the fossil
provides an extraordinary peek into the peculiar ideology and
journalistic slant of a cadre of zealous scientists and the National
Geographic Society that promotes them.
The Fossil's Discovery and Interpretation
On October 15, 1999, at a press conference in Washington D.C.,
the National Geographic Society announced the discovery and interpretation
of the newest fossil called Archaeoraptor liaoningensis
(meaning "ancient bird of prey from Liaoning").1 The
press conference coincided with the November 1999 issue of National
Geographic magazine and its article "Feathers for T. rex?
New birdlike fossils are missing links in dinosaur evolution."2
The turkey-sized animal according to National Geographic
". . . is a true missing link in the complex chain that connects
dinosaurs to birds. It seems to capture the paleontological `moment'
when dinosaurs were becoming birds."3 According to
their press release, the anatomy of Archaeoraptor proves
a feathered theropod dinosaur was capable of flight. The features
include:
. . . a very advanced, birdlike shoulder structure,
wishbone and big sternum—all indicating the animal was a
powerful flier. Remains of feathers surround the specimen's bones.
Yet its tail was strikingly similar to the stiff tails of a family
of predatory dinosaurs known as dromaeosaurs, which includes the
"raptors" of Jurassic Park.4
Several remarkable characteristics are noted. "This mix of advanced
and primitive features is exactly what scientists would expect
to find in dinosaurs experimenting with flight,"5 and
"It's a missing link between terrestrial dinosaurs and birds that
could actually fly."6 The arms of the fossil are quite
wing-like, much longer than would be expected of a normal theropod
dinosaur.
A two-page photograph of the rock slab containing Archaeoraptor
appears with the article.7 The description and interpretation
of Archaeoraptor was accomplished by two scientists funded
by National Geographic: Stephen Czerkas of the Dinosaur
Museum (Monticello, Utah) and Xing Xu of the Institute of Vertebrate
Paleontology and Paleoanthropology (Beijing, China). The fossil
was studied under normal light, uv light, CAT scan, and x-ray.
Czerkas said, "It's a missing link that has the advanced characters
of birds and undeniable dinosaurian characters as well." Czerkas
was also commissioned by National Geographic to produce
a life-size sculpture of Archaeoraptor. Both Czerkas and
Xu appeared at the news conference on October 15, 1999, in Washington
and endorsed the authenticity of the fossil. Also endorsing the
fossil and its "feathered dinosaur" interpretation in Washington
was Philip J. Currie of the Royal Tyrrell Museum of Paleontology
(Drumheller, Alberta). Currie is widely known for his belief that
theropod dinosaurs had feathers and were warm-blooded creatures.8
The National Geographic magazine boldly states the implications:
". . . we can now say that birds are theropods just
as confidently as we say that humans are mammals. Everything from
lunch boxes to museum exhibits will change to reflect this revelation."9
The public impact of the National Geographic Society promotion
of Archaeoraptor has been enormous. Not only has the fossil
appeared in the magazine, but in the public display in "Explorers
Hall" (October 15, 1999, to January 18, 2000, at NGS headquarters
in Washington) and on the TV program, "National Geographic Explorer"
(November 14, "Dinosaurs Take Wing" on CNBC). Canadian Broadcasting
Corporation (CBC) televised a lengthy interview concerning the
fossil with Philip Currie. All the major news services carried
the story from National Geographic worldwide. Numerous
Internet websites report the fossil, including several children's
educational sites. These stories circulated just after the Kansas
State Board of Education in August adopted new science standards
that deleted references to "macroevolution."
The Fraud is Exposed
Numerous scientists voiced skepticism about both the claims and
even the fossil itself. In particular, two scientists played important
roles in asking questions that grounded Archaeoraptor.
Storrs L. Olson, the curator of birds at the Smithsonian Institution
wrote:
With the publication of "Feathers for T. rex?" by Christopher
P. Sloan in its November issue, National Geographic has
reached an all-time low for engaging in sensationalistic, unsubstantiated
tabloid journalism.10
Specifically, Olson had been asked by the National Geographic
photographer before the October 15, 1999, news release to examine
the photographs of the three Chinese fossils that later went on
public display and before the article was published in the National
Geographic. Olson wrote, "More importantly, however, none
of the structures illustrated in Sloan's article that are claimed
to be feathers have actually been proven to be feathers." Larry
D. Martin, paleontologist at the University of Kansas specializing
in bird fossils, also could not see feathers.11 Furthermore,
Martin's examination of photographs (not the actual rock slab
of Archaeoraptor) caused him to propose the hypothesis
that the pieces of the fossil had been assembled and could include
more than one animal.12 The dinosaur-looking tail hardly
seemed to go with the bird-looking body. Furthermore, a close
inspection of the photos indicated that bones were missing between
the tail and the body.
To seal the matter, upon his return to China, Xing Xu knew that
the authenticity of Archaeoraptor could be confirmed if
the counterpart of the fossil slab could be located. The fossil
had been discovered when an original slab had been split open,
and only one side of the slab had been used by the National Geographic
Society. Remarkably, Xu is reported to have found the counterpart
slab in a Chinese collection, but it did not authenticate the
assembly on display at the National Geographic Society.13
It appears that two separate fossils had been joined together.
Stephen Czerkas also admitted evidence that the Chinese fossil
hunters who found the specimen glued sections together,14
but he still holds that the tail may go with the body of the fossil.15
Philip Currie could no longer accept the authenticity of Archaeoraptor
and expressed true remorse for having been duped.16 A
science news writer described the situation in January 2000:
Red-faced and downhearted, paleontologists are growing
convinced that they have been snookered by a bit of fossil fakery
from China. The "feathered dinosaur" specimen that they recently
unveiled to much fanfare ap-parently combines the tail of a dinosaur
with the body of a bird, they say.17
Conclusion
The events surrounding Archaeoraptor provide a rare peek
into the ideological and journalistic slant that can be placed
upon public promotion of a missing link. Sloan's statement, ".
. . we can now say that birds are theropods just as confidently
as we say that humans are mammals"18 is the editor's
unfounded assertion, designed to sway public perception, not a
statement of a scientist documented with facts. Editorial propaganda
needs to be countered with attention to detail and empirical evidence.
Storrs Olson at the Smithsonian Institution may have the best
analysis of lessons learned from the Archaeoraptor affair:
The idea of feathered dinosaurs and the theropod origin
of birds is being actively promoted by a cadre of zealous scientists
acting in concert with certain editors at Nature and National
Geographic who themselves have become outspoken and highly
biased proselytizers of the faith. Truth and careful scientific
weighing of evidence have been among the first casualties in their
program, which is now fast becoming one of the grander scientific
hoaxes of our age—the paleontological equivalent of cold
fusion.19
Recently, another "Chinese fossil" published in Nature
magazine has been questioned.20 Thus, as often occurs
when "proof" for evolution is revealed in the media, especially
before careful description of the claim appears in the scientific
literature, the evidence is overstated or, in this case, fraudulent.
Sometimes time and careful study is all it takes to disprove such
"proofs."
References
1 NGS press release of October 15, 1999,
contact persons Barbara Moffet and Ellen Siskind, posted on Internet
at URL http://www.nationalgeographic.com/events/releases/pr991015.html.
2 C. P. Sloan, "Feathers for T. rex? New birdlike
fossils are missing links in dinosaur evolution." National
Geographic 196:98-107, November 1999.
3 NGS press release October 15, 1999.
4 NGS press release October 15, 1999.
5 NGS press release October 15, 1999.
6 Sloan, 1999, p. 100, quoting paleontologist Stephen
Czerkas.
7 Sloan, 1999, pp. 100-101.
8 J. Qiang, P. J. Currie, M. A. Norell and J. Shu-An,
"Two feathered dinosaurs from northeastern China." Nature
393:753-761, 1998.
9 Sloan, 1999, p. 102.
10 Storrs L. Olson, open letter dated November 1, 1999,
to Peter Raven at National Geographic Society. Peter Raven is
the senior scientist at NGS.
11 Olson, open letter dated November 1, 1999.
12 R. Monastersky, "Smuggled Chinese dinosaur to fly
home" Science News 156:328, November 20, 1999.
13 R. Monastersky, "All mixed up over birds and dinosaurs,"
Science News 157:38, January 15, 2000.
14 Monastersky, 1999.
15 Monastersky, 2000.
16 Monastersky, 2000.
17 Monastersky, 2000.
18 Sloan, 1999, p. 102.
19 Olson, open letter dated November 1, 1999.
20 Zhonge Zhou, curator of birds at the Institute of
Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology in Beijing, is quoted
by USA Today (February 1, 2000, p. 2A) as claiming that
a tail was added to a fossil pterosaur from Liaoning published
by Kevin Padian of the University of California at Berkeley in
the prestigious British science journal Nature 398:573,574,
April 15, 1999.
* Dr. Austin is Chairman of the Geology Department in
the ICR Graduate School.
This article was originally published March, 2000. "Archaeoraptor: Featured Dinosaur from National Geographic Doesn't Fly", Institute for Creation Research, http://www.icr.org/article/464/ (accessed December 01, 2008).
Want to use this article? View our Ethical Use Policy. To receive more articles from ICR, signup for a free subscription to our online and print publications.