Recent from talks
Archaeoraptor
Knowledge base stats:
Talk channels stats:
Members stats:
Archaeoraptor
"Archaeoraptor" is the informal generic name for a fossil chimera from China in an article published in National Geographic magazine in 1999. The magazine claimed that the fossil was a "missing link" between birds and terrestrial theropod dinosaurs. Even before this publication, there had been severe doubts about the fossil's authenticity. Further scientific study showed it to be a forgery constructed from rearranged pieces of real fossils from different species. Zhou et al. found that the head and upper body belong to a specimen of the primitive fossil bird Yanornis. A 2002 study found that the tail belongs to a small winged dromaeosaur, Microraptor, named in 2000. The legs and feet belong to an as yet unknown animal.
The scandal brought attention to illegal fossil deals conducted in China. Although "Archaeoraptor" was a forgery, many true examples of feathered dinosaurs have been found and demonstrate the evolutionary connection between birds and other theropods.
According to National Geographic's report, the story of "Archaeoraptor" began in July 1997 in Xiasanjiazi, China, where farmers illegally but routinely dug in the shale pits and sold fossils to dealers for a few dollars. One farmer found a rare fossil of a toothed bird, complete with feather impressions. Nearby, he found a feathered tail and legs. He cemented several of these pieces together to make a more complete-looking fossil. It was sold in June 1998 and smuggled to the United States.
By the fall 1998 annual meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology in Utah, there were rumors of a primitive bird fossil in private hands. The fossil was presented at a gem show in Tucson, Arizona. The Dinosaur Museum run by dinosaur enthusiast Stephen A. Czerkas and his wife, Sylvia Czerkas, purchased it in February 1999.
The Czerkases contacted paleontologist Phil Currie, who contacted the National Geographic Society. Currie agreed to study the fossil on condition that it was eventually returned to China. The National Geographic Society intended to get the fossil formally published in the peer-reviewed science journal Nature, and follow up immediately with a press conference and an issue of National Geographic.
Slade and the Czerkases intended the fossil to be on display in the museum for five years. Sloan says that in the spring of 1999 Czerkas agreed to return the fossil to China immediately after publication. Currie contacted the Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology in Beijing, and National Geographic flew the IVPP's Xu Xing to Utah to join the team.
Examining the fossil on March 6, 1999, Currie saw that the left and right feet mirrored each other perfectly; that the fossil had been completed by using both slab and counterslab; and that there was no connection between the tail and the body. On July 29, 1999, Timothy Rowe made CT scans of the fossil at the High-Resolution X-ray CT Facility of the University of Texas at Austin, determining that the tail and the lower legs were not part of the larger fossil. He informed the Czerkases on August 2 that the whole could be a fraud. In the first week of September, Currie's preparator, Kevin Aulenback, went to the museum to prepare the fossil for study. Aulenback concluded that the fossil was "a composite specimen of at least 3 specimens...with a maximum...of five...separate specimens", but the Czerkases angrily denied this. Currie did not inform National Geographic about the matter.
On August 13, 1999, the team submitted a manuscript titled "A New Toothed Bird With a Dromaeosaur-like Tail" under the names of Stephen Czerkas, Currie, Rowe, and Xu, to the journal Nature. The paper mentions in two places, and includes a figure illustrating the point, that one of the legs and the tail are counterparts that were composited into the main slab. On August 20 Nature rejected the paper, indicating that as National Geographic had refused to delay publication, there was too little time for peer review. The authors then submitted the paper to Science. Two reviewers informed Science that "the specimen was smuggled out of China and illegally purchased" and that the fossil had been "doctored" in China "to enhance its value." Science rejected the paper. According to Sloan, the Czerkases did not inform National Geographic about the two rejections.
Hub AI
Archaeoraptor AI simulator
(@Archaeoraptor_simulator)
Archaeoraptor
"Archaeoraptor" is the informal generic name for a fossil chimera from China in an article published in National Geographic magazine in 1999. The magazine claimed that the fossil was a "missing link" between birds and terrestrial theropod dinosaurs. Even before this publication, there had been severe doubts about the fossil's authenticity. Further scientific study showed it to be a forgery constructed from rearranged pieces of real fossils from different species. Zhou et al. found that the head and upper body belong to a specimen of the primitive fossil bird Yanornis. A 2002 study found that the tail belongs to a small winged dromaeosaur, Microraptor, named in 2000. The legs and feet belong to an as yet unknown animal.
The scandal brought attention to illegal fossil deals conducted in China. Although "Archaeoraptor" was a forgery, many true examples of feathered dinosaurs have been found and demonstrate the evolutionary connection between birds and other theropods.
According to National Geographic's report, the story of "Archaeoraptor" began in July 1997 in Xiasanjiazi, China, where farmers illegally but routinely dug in the shale pits and sold fossils to dealers for a few dollars. One farmer found a rare fossil of a toothed bird, complete with feather impressions. Nearby, he found a feathered tail and legs. He cemented several of these pieces together to make a more complete-looking fossil. It was sold in June 1998 and smuggled to the United States.
By the fall 1998 annual meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology in Utah, there were rumors of a primitive bird fossil in private hands. The fossil was presented at a gem show in Tucson, Arizona. The Dinosaur Museum run by dinosaur enthusiast Stephen A. Czerkas and his wife, Sylvia Czerkas, purchased it in February 1999.
The Czerkases contacted paleontologist Phil Currie, who contacted the National Geographic Society. Currie agreed to study the fossil on condition that it was eventually returned to China. The National Geographic Society intended to get the fossil formally published in the peer-reviewed science journal Nature, and follow up immediately with a press conference and an issue of National Geographic.
Slade and the Czerkases intended the fossil to be on display in the museum for five years. Sloan says that in the spring of 1999 Czerkas agreed to return the fossil to China immediately after publication. Currie contacted the Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology in Beijing, and National Geographic flew the IVPP's Xu Xing to Utah to join the team.
Examining the fossil on March 6, 1999, Currie saw that the left and right feet mirrored each other perfectly; that the fossil had been completed by using both slab and counterslab; and that there was no connection between the tail and the body. On July 29, 1999, Timothy Rowe made CT scans of the fossil at the High-Resolution X-ray CT Facility of the University of Texas at Austin, determining that the tail and the lower legs were not part of the larger fossil. He informed the Czerkases on August 2 that the whole could be a fraud. In the first week of September, Currie's preparator, Kevin Aulenback, went to the museum to prepare the fossil for study. Aulenback concluded that the fossil was "a composite specimen of at least 3 specimens...with a maximum...of five...separate specimens", but the Czerkases angrily denied this. Currie did not inform National Geographic about the matter.
On August 13, 1999, the team submitted a manuscript titled "A New Toothed Bird With a Dromaeosaur-like Tail" under the names of Stephen Czerkas, Currie, Rowe, and Xu, to the journal Nature. The paper mentions in two places, and includes a figure illustrating the point, that one of the legs and the tail are counterparts that were composited into the main slab. On August 20 Nature rejected the paper, indicating that as National Geographic had refused to delay publication, there was too little time for peer review. The authors then submitted the paper to Science. Two reviewers informed Science that "the specimen was smuggled out of China and illegally purchased" and that the fossil had been "doctored" in China "to enhance its value." Science rejected the paper. According to Sloan, the Czerkases did not inform National Geographic about the two rejections.
Recent media