#Archaeoraptor

[paleopalsfacts]

The dinosaur that shouldn’t have been named

For a while before we had dinosaurs like Microraptor and Archaeopteryx we had the theory that Dinosaurs were linked to Birds but didn’t have the hard evidence like a linking species between the two to prove it.  During this look for a “missing link” farmers in China were digging for fossils illegally and looking to sell what they could find on the black market.  Eventually a farmer did find a rare fossil that did prove interesting and might have been that “missing link” paleontologists were looking for.  The only problem was that it was incomplete, Incomplete fossils are less valuable then complete fossils so to remedy this the farmer combined a different fossil from a nearby site in a way he thought looked correct to him in the hope no one would notice.

“Archeoraptor” fossil [A]

When the fossil was brought to the US it was sold to the The Dinosaur Museum in Blanding Utah.  The museum was run by Stephen A. Czerkas and his wife Sylvia Czerkas.  Stephen did not hold a degree in paleontology but was a dinosaur enthusiast and made some beautiful sculptures.  He arranged for patrons of his museum to provide the $80,000 needed to purchase the fossil.

The Czerkases got in contact with Phil Currie a well-known Canadian Paleontologist to take a look at the fossil under the condition that it would eventually go back to China as according to authorities no fossils were to leave China.  Phil then contacted the National Geographic Society who intended to get the fossil published into the scientific journal Nature and then follow up with a press conference and a spotlight in an issue of the National Geographic magazine.

Initially the Dinosaur museum wanted to keep the fossil in their museum for 5 years before sending it back to China but after Christopher Sloan (the writer for the National Geographic article) said he would not write on it if it was not sent back home immediately after publication they changed there mind.

This is also about the time they flew Xu Xung, a well renowned paleontologist from China to help work on analyzing the fossil.  When Phil did the initial examination on the fossil it was immediately clear that something was off.  And after a CT scan it became clear that some amount of fraud was afoot.  The Czerkas then insisted on keeping this information private.  Phil sent his preparator Kevin Aulenback to get the fossil ready for further study.  Kevin also concluded that the fossil must be a composite skeleton but the Czerkas denied this and still never told National Geographic about any of this.

The team then started creating the paper for Nature, In the paper it was specified that parts were composited.  Nature rejected the paper because National Geographic refused to delay their publication so there was no time to peer review the paper.  The paper was then submitted to Science, a different scientific journal and was also rejected because Science learned about the fossil's suspicious past and origins. 

National Geographic decided to publish without peer review and the fossil was revealed to the public in a press conference in October 1999 and was then put into the November copy of National Geographic.  It was described as a missing link that helped provide the connection between dinosaurs and birds.  Worst of all though it was named "Archaeoraptor liaoningensis" (with a disclaimer saying this name wouldn’t count but with the assumption that the Czerkas paper would eventually be released).  This is horrible because it sidestepped the academic process of naming a new species through a scientific paper and took the honor of naming the new species away from the people who did the work and opened the door for journalists to rush publication to cement a name they wanted instead.  Along with, you know, naming a dinosaur that didn’t exist confusing further any future papers on the subject.

Image showing the two separate species that make up Archeoraptor 

National Geographic then started their investigation into all of this unraveling this whole tangled mess of miscommunication and hurt egos.  In the end the Czerkas showed remorse in their part in these events saying they made "an idiot, bone-stupid mistake".  Most participants in this also felt regrets for their part.

“Archaeoraptor '' is often used by uninformed people to dismiss the connection between birds and dinosaurs and to discredit paleontologists.  In reality though all paleontologists and professionals who came in contact with the fossil noticed something was wrong and it was simply the lack of any communication and probably a bit of sunken cost fallacy that lead to this embarrassment.  Also many connections have now been found that validate the bird dinosaur connection including. “Archaeoraptor” will serve as a lesson for future paleontologists on knowing the origins of the specimens they study and working with private collectors.

Sources Bellow

Images

Jonathan Chen, CC BY-SA 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons

Entelognathus, CC BY-SA 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons

Links:

Bonus!

Fun pictures from the Dinosaur Museum:

[cinder-starlight]

My dinosaur friend spawned in with an idea and now I’ve made the wildest dinosaur couple

A therizinosaurus and his (yes that yassified ostrich is a man) archaeoraptor gf

Edit: they have names now, The big fella is Juniper Hemlock and his smol gf is Cedar

[wan2san]

Blow Ink Art of an Archaeoraptor

(It doesn't look perfect because I couldn't control the ink as much as I wanted)

[spuddragon]

Drawing I made for Archaeoraptor of their dragon, Mehdiz. This was for another forum drawing game!

[irradiatedsnakes]

furry reigens :] microraptor archaeoraptor, which is definitely a real genus. these are all panel redraws!

[taulupis]

for the ask game: 📷 🦖 💄

📷 What’s set as your phone’s lockscreen?

🦖 Favorite extinct animal?

I like the archaeoraptor, they seem friendly :3

💄 Do you wear makeup?

Eye shadow and eyeliner, both black! I dont wear them often though, because i tend to rub my eyes 😅

[fiendishsly-fr]

Been a while since I've drawn anything, so here is Archaeoraptor's dragon Koirin for the doodle the dragon above you thread!

[mutiniir]

Oh god... That's Denis... I haven't heard of that name in a long time

He's my former mutual and he was racist, creepy, an active k*wif*rms user, and a lot of other things

He was really into paleontology and pre historic fish and had cool art but the guy was downright gross

THANK YOU. JESUS CHRIST THIS DRIVES ME INSANE EVERY FUCKING TIME BE NICE TO THE PSYCHROLUTES GOD

[lulu9843]

what are your top five dinos???? 🦕🦕🦕🦕🦕

Microraptor

Parasaurolophus

Carnotaurus

Portoceratops

Archaeoraptor

yes. i am a nerd when it comes to dinos. sue me.

[balanceoflightanddark]

Bigger, Scarier, More Teeth

Paleontology is, by its very nature, a very speculative science. For most of its history, we've only had fragmentary remains of ancient animals that sometimes have no easy modern day counterpart to compare with. Of course, the field is also good at self correcting these errors, which means our image of dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures is constantly evolving. While admittedly we may never know with 100% accuracy what these animals were like, we can certainly narrow down and tweak our perception to come up with the closest possible image.

Then...there's instances where dinosaurs were deliberately modified. Not a case of misidentification mind you. Cases where the animal was physically altered in order to seem more impressive or threatening.

Case in point: the Giganotosaurus from Jurassic World Dominion. One of the most recent examples, the Giga was depicted with a row of spines running along its crocodilian esque back. Naturally, we have no evidence of these in actual specimens and was probably added to make the final big carnivore of the series look more threatening.

Admittedly I'm not gonna harp on too hard about this since there is a difference between a fictional portrayal and something that's supposed to be accurate and the Jurassic Park series isn't really known for its accuracy. This is honestly just a bench mark for what we're working with and a notable and recent example.

What's a bit more headscratching when said altering happens in more scientific portrayals of dinosaurs.

Take shrinkwrapping for example. For decades, shrinkwrapping was the standard fair in portraying dinosaurs. What it involved was basically showing visible bone structures underneath the skin of the animal.

The results were...

...basically skeletons with skin stretched over them.

The idea, as pointed out by Mark P. Witton in the link above, is not just to portray them as fast, agile, bird like animals, but also matching a popular but inaccurate depiction:

Secondly, images of prehistoric animals as heroically-built, powerful beings are preferred by many merchandisers and palaeoart fans, these interpretations most closely matching the erroneous but popular portrayal of prehistory as a savage struggle for survival, where only the most powerful animals survived.

Thing was, these depictions completely ignored the muscle and tissue underneath the skin which gives the animals more bulk in favor of portraying them as more intimidating. Which in retrospect didn't work since if a dinosaur looked shrink-wrapped in real life, it probably was starving, ill, or basically on the verge of death.

In contrast, there are some artists that go the complete opposite direction. As is the case with David Peters and his...unique look at pterosaurs.

David Peters, a once respected independent researcher and artist, once claimed that he was able to identify hidden features and anatomical structures in pterosaur remains that no-one else had been able to identify. These include elongated fleshy crests, spines, and extravagant feathers.

The results speak for themselves. It's almost astonishing that anybody would think that any animal could even fly with that amount of extra weight and protrusions.

Now while we can poke fun at paleoart all day, the thing is that altered dinosaurs or other prehistoric animals aren't just restricted to art alone. There have been cases where specimens themselves have been altered to look more impressive.

Such is the case with Irritator challengeri, a spinosaurid first discovered in Brazil, South America in 1996. While the original specimen is noted for having one of the most complete skulls of any spinosaurid anywhere, its name is referring to a much more...interesting background.

Irritator wasn't actually discovered by scientists. It was purchased from a fossil dealer which made its way to Germany’s Stuttgart State Museum of the Natural Sciences. In this case, material from the back of the skull had been removed, and placed on the tip of the snout, making the skull appear longer. Presumably this was to make the specimen more marketable. Paleontologist David Martill and his team had to painstakingly remove the altered bit of the snout and restore them to their original location. It was such a pain, they eventually named the species Irritator due to the difficulty of removing and reattaching the material without damaging the specimen.

But even the case of Irritator is nowhere near the levels of altering than the case of Archaeoraptor. AKA: the dinosaur that was completely made up.

Like with Irritator, the Archaeoraptor specimen was an altered fossil (also known as a chimera) sold on the fossil market. Though instead of a single specimen, it was several individuals put together to create a complete product that would sell for a much higher price. Smuggled out of China and sold in the US for $80,000 USD during 1999, it ended up in the hands of amateur dinosaur enthusiast Stephen Czerkas who wanted it to be the centerpiece of his museum in Blanding, Utah. Working with noted paleontologist Phil Currie and Chris Sloane of the National Geographic magazine, they determined that the specimen was the long sought-after missing link between dinosaurs and birds. A groundbreaking discovery like this would've revolutionized the field. So much so the magazine did a story on it and christened it Archaeoraptor even before a more formal study could be conducted.

The result: a complete disaster and embarrassment to both paleontology and National Geographic when it was revealed to be a hoax. Creationists had a field day, practically tearing the reveal apart and used it as evidence against paleontologists and their work. The zeal for the missing link resulted in an absolute blunder for science.

Ironically though, it's now believed that the two species used in the specimen belong to Yanornis (an early bird) and the famous Microraptor, both of which are stronger contenders for the title of "missing-link".

Here's a link to an excellent video by Dino Diego that goes into detail if you're interested: The Bizarre Archaeoraptor Hoax - YouTube

Needless to say, the field of paleontology is full of fabrications and falsehoods. And more often than not it's difficult to truly pick out what's real and what isn't. Which is a problem since it draws into question the validity of both research done by paleontologists, the work of paleoartists, and the very specimens themselves. Naturally it should come to no surprise that researchers need to be diligent in how dinosaurs and other prehistoric animals are portrayed and studied. Especially when sensation overcomes the truth many work so hard to find.

[korybing]

I’m a real paleoartist now! I have 19 illustrations of various extinct animals in the upcoming book, The Last Days of the Dinosaurs by Riley Black! It’s all about the days, years, and centuries after the asteroid impact that killed all the non-avian dinosaurs!

I had SO much fun with these! Riley is simply a delight to work with and this book is so good! The book officially releases April 26th, but you can preorder it now!

[greater-than-the-sword]

@argentumcor

Featherlike tissues on the most famous feathered therapod, Sinosauropteryx, are plausibly just decayed collagen tissues although maybe I'm still just extremely salty about the archaeoraptor hoax , but it does make you wonder why things with such allegedly solid evidence need to be hoaxed.

Not to mention that sinosauropteryx is ostensibly later on the timeline than archaeopteryx, and should be closer to birds even though it's more reptilian, although that only matters if you're trying to make an evolutionist argument, I suppose. Caudipteryx is another alleged feathered dinosaur (actually a bird) younger than other birds.

Creation.com believes that the discovered collagen structures more likely point to a ridge/crest or frill like those found on other lizards today.

Large therapods with their reptilian hips and reptile lungs seem to be poor candidates for just assuming they had feathers, especially when you take into account the evidence for at least several of their relatives having it is just wishful thinking in the first place.

I consider "toothed/clawed bird" to be a real category (some of these even exist today!) but at the same time also am very skeptical of any land bound dinosaurs having feathers. If you're not already taking "evolutionary biologists make things up and will lie out their ass" as a given, you should start. It's shocking how many things we take for granted because of straight up hoaxes and I will never stop being enraged about it.

Cant deal with the velociraptor feathers shit

Anyone have REAL fossil proof of this?? Even actual creationists are parroting this BS now

[bradsmindbrain]

comics!Jack spends most of his full moon nights being overwhelmed by city smells and sounds and trying to find wilderness. His catchphrase might as well be "Must find the forest!" Ted is a walking forest. Match made in heaven. Like I don't know under what circumstances the two would find themselves stuck in a city on a full moon, but I fully believe Ted's smell would be enough to keep Jack's werewolf calm and happy (above and beyond 'of course his boyfriend's smell makes him happy.' Smelling like green growing things reaches Jack on a primal level) Heck, maybe that's how they met. Jack as a werewolf went seeking trees, found Ted instead

Ooh, I like this a lot! While I do believe the two met under different circumstances, I agree that Ted’s scent is probably enough to keep Jack mostly docile. While I think Jack severely overestimates how dangerous he is during the full moon, he’s arguably even less dangerous when Ted is around, Ted’s scent is calming, safe. Honestly, Jack is a lot more comfortable during the full moon when Ted is close.

[thepearlyphoenix]

_{Just spend two days on a shitpost comic of a game lag... I'm such a serious artist! :V} I was playing Saurian again and the game seemed to be glitch so every animal couldn't walk anywhere. But when I tried to move closer to an archaeoraptor from behind his head turned, kinda twisted his neck, mouth wide open and stared at me. Kinda freaky but still made my day.

[pileof3pancakes]

No.

It Babey.

weird lookin pigeon y’got there 

[irradiatedsnakes]

YOU FUCKING KNOW WHAT TIME IT IS BABEEEEY!!! yeah woo furries yeah woo. talk about designs and species stuff below the cut, plus some bonus drawings!

mob is a house sparrow, and ritsu is a eurasian tree sparrow! i wanted the two of them to be Very Normal animals. and also i like birds. house sparrows are one of the most widespread birds out there, and the closely related eurasian tree sparrow is has a similarly wide range across (shocker) eurasia. there's not much more normal then a little sparrow, i think. one of my earlier ideas was a beetle, also. mob's hairdo is also very inspired by the gloster canary, a fantastic little breed of canary with a bowlcut. look it up, i promise you won't be disappointed. also, i usually make siblings similar but related species, for the sake of design variety, which is why they're not the same species.

reigen is a microraptor! this design sprung from these doodles i did yesterday of him as a generic dromaeosaur-

and i knew i wanted him to be a dromaeosaur or similar winged nonavian dino, because i love how the design works with him. he HAS to have hand wings, i think they can make his hand poses even more fun. i wanted his species choice to reflect his Fraudulence in some manner- so my original choice was dakotaraptor, well known for the original published specimen including multiple bones which were actually from a turtle. however, dakotaraptor has a very rounded and robust face shape, which didn't fit what i wanted to do with reigen. turns out though, there was a semi-famous fossil hoax published in natgeo purported to be the "missing link" between birds and nonavian dinosaurs, called "archaeoraptor" (not acheroraptor, which is a real dinosaur) which was actually a fake made of parts from microraptor and the early bird yanornis.

tome is a european badger!! the smooth and swoopy shapes i think work with her design very well. i think she can digging in the ground for telepaths. i also wanted to include the black-and-white stripes into her hair!

dimple is a kitty cat. :)