Re: "Archaeoraptor" really two animals

[Jeff Hecht <jhecht@world.std.com>]

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