[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: "Archaeoraptor" really two animals



At 9:35 PM -0700 4/7/00, Phillip Bigelow wrote:
 > WASHINGTON (AP) - Six months after proclaiming a newly discovered fossil to
 > be a possible link between dinosaurs and birds, the National Geographic
 > Society has confirmed that the find is really a composite of at least two
 > different animals.

Another case of National Geographic Society "doing" science via a press
conference?  AAARRGGGHHH!

[clipped]
A peer-reviewed, team-authored paper, such as a Rapid Communication in
_JVP_, would have been a more appropriate venue.

In this case, I disagree. The news of the fakery has been out for months in the press, and it was appropriate to confirm it when the definite comparison was made. This is not the sort of development that would get fast turnaround in the big journals since Archaeoraptor was never published in the first place. It might not even be publishable as such, only as part of an overall description of the bird part of Archaeoraptor (said to be quite interesting). -- Jeff Hecht