Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Archeoraptor


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#1    Dante's Inferno

Dante's Inferno

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 448 posts
  • Joined:26 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:everywhere and nowhere

Posted 07 February 2007 - 05:35 AM

Hello evryone I've just recently watched a documentry concerning the Archeraptor (fake) fossil found in china.  At the end of the documentry it stated that the two body parts that had made up the fake were in fact from unknown species.  The hind legs were like a dinosaur complete with long tail but had a small bird like pelvis and the torso part was from a bird like creature that had claws on the wings and teeth in its beak.  As I am quite new to this forum I'm not sure if the topic has been discussed what I'm actually interested in is have there been any further research or documentaion released concerning the two separate species.  If anyone could help me it would be greatly appreciated  thumbsup.gif

" Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful" - Seneca the Younger.

"Is man an ape or an angel?"-Benjamin Disraeli

Tantum religio potuit suadere malorum.
(To such heights of evil are men driven by religion.)
-Lucretius, DE RERUM NATURA

#2    Ashley-Star*Child

Ashley-Star*Child

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 5,014 posts
  • Joined:25 Aug 2004
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Somewhere on this planet ;)

Posted 07 February 2007 - 09:34 AM

It was part bird fossil part raptor fossil. A complete fake which embarresssed Nat Geo and shows the losing battle for finding fossils of that calibre. They must be desperate to stoop that low.


Posted Image


#3    Dante's Inferno

Dante's Inferno

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 448 posts
  • Joined:26 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:everywhere and nowhere

Posted 07 February 2007 - 09:40 AM

Quote

It was part bird fossil part raptor fossil. A complete fake which embarresssed Nat Geo and shows the losing battle for finding fossils of that calibre. They must be desperate to stoop that low.



Thanks I think the same to however in the dicumentry it did state that the bird section had starnge caricturistics teeth in beak and claws on the end of tits wings how was that explained do you know?

" Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful" - Seneca the Younger.

"Is man an ape or an angel?"-Benjamin Disraeli

Tantum religio potuit suadere malorum.
(To such heights of evil are men driven by religion.)
-Lucretius, DE RERUM NATURA

#4    Ashley-Star*Child

Ashley-Star*Child

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 5,014 posts
  • Joined:25 Aug 2004
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Somewhere on this planet ;)

Posted 07 February 2007 - 11:00 AM

Hmm, not sure about that...I did have an article on it in one of my posts but it was like last year...


Posted Image


#5    aquatus1

aquatus1

    Forum Divinity

  • 19,354 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2004
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 07 February 2007 - 11:44 AM

Quote

Thanks I think the same to however in the dicumentry it did state that the bird section had starnge caricturistics teeth in beak and claws on the end of tits wings how was that explained do you know?


You are quite correct.  The archeoraptor fooled many people due a part of it actually being from a formerly unknown protoavis.  If it had been a complete fake, it would have been rather easily detected, as scientists had\ve learned to be somewhat wary of farmers who come in off the field with a relatively intact fossil, as it is, it took four months for the skeptics (not everyone was convinced of its authenticity) to find that it had been glued together.  What followed was a rather embarrassing example of human nature.  So many people had invested so much of their reputation into this find that the moment it was discovered to be fake, the backlash was brutal.  The National Geographic article you are likely referring to, in particular, was most harsh, with barely a line mentioning the part of the bird that was unknown (when being forced to admit to a mistake, you geenrally avoid using "unknown" when you can).  The skeptics suddenly found themselves in the opposite chair, trying to desperately get attention to their new fossil find which no one wanted to listen to due to its close association with archeoraptor.


#6    Dante's Inferno

Dante's Inferno

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 448 posts
  • Joined:26 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:everywhere and nowhere

Posted 07 February 2007 - 03:24 PM

Quote

You are quite correct.  The archeoraptor fooled many people due a part of it actually being from a formerly unknown protoavis.  If it had been a complete fake, it would have been rather easily detected, as scientists had\ve learned to be somewhat wary of farmers who come in off the field with a relatively intact fossil, as it is, it took four months for the skeptics (not everyone was convinced of its authenticity) to find that it had been glued together.  What followed was a rather embarrassing example of human nature.  So many people had invested so much of their reputation into this find that the moment it was discovered to be fake, the backlash was brutal.  The National Geographic article you are likely referring to, in particular, was most harsh, with barely a line mentioning the part of the bird that was unknown (when being forced to admit to a mistake, you geenrally avoid using "unknown" when you can).  The skeptics suddenly found themselves in the opposite chair, trying to desperately get attention to their new fossil find which no one wanted to listen to due to its close association with archeoraptor.



Yes unfortunately the feeling of embarrassement has stopped any further investigation it seems.  Its upseting really as like I said before when they discovered it was two separate creatures the research aprubtly stopped even though the fossil actually still comprised of two unknown species!  Hopefully someone out there is still intriqued enought to carry on with the research (wish I could get my hands on it!!)

" Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful" - Seneca the Younger.

"Is man an ape or an angel?"-Benjamin Disraeli

Tantum religio potuit suadere malorum.
(To such heights of evil are men driven by religion.)
-Lucretius, DE RERUM NATURA

#7    speshall mareens

speshall mareens

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 415 posts
  • Joined:20 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:not telling

  • "hand me the holy hand grenade!!" monty python, search for the holy grail

Posted 08 February 2007 - 02:42 AM

yes, they really should look into it more. if there is two unknown species why not? who cares if its got to do with a fraud. its a chance to better understand the evolution of birds. its an asian "piltdown man' really. the perfect missing link.

speshall mareens;
       the few,
    the proud the,
mentally challenged

#8    Raptorial

Raptorial

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 88 posts
  • Joined:16 Nov 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Among the creatures of the bayou

Posted 08 February 2007 - 11:37 AM

Quote

its an asian "piltdown man' really. the perfect missing link.

Actually, in fact it is often called the Piltdown chicken hoax.

My avatar created by thebarman in The Animated Avatar Workshop.

#9    aquatus1

aquatus1

    Forum Divinity

  • 19,354 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2004
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 08 February 2007 - 11:41 AM

Except that instead of being found frozen in a block of ice, it was found in the darkest, furtherest, reaches of the local supermarket freezer.


#10    speshall mareens

speshall mareens

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 415 posts
  • Joined:20 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:not telling

  • "hand me the holy hand grenade!!" monty python, search for the holy grail

Posted 08 February 2007 - 10:43 PM

piltdown man consisted of a skull found on a ditch dig next to a road. while your joke was funny, i just wanted ot point that out. it wasn't in a block of ice. i guess my asian piltdown man thing was close though tongue.gif

speshall mareens;
       the few,
    the proud the,
mentally challenged

#11    aquatus1

aquatus1

    Forum Divinity

  • 19,354 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2004
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 09 February 2007 - 01:54 PM

Quite right.  I was thinking about Frank Hansenís Siberskoye creature.  That's what I get for surfing when I should be sleeping.


#12    speshall mareens

speshall mareens

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 415 posts
  • Joined:20 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:not telling

  • "hand me the holy hand grenade!!" monty python, search for the holy grail

Posted 09 February 2007 - 10:44 PM

never heard of it. please explain.

speshall mareens;
       the few,
    the proud the,
mentally challenged

#13    aquatus1

aquatus1

    Forum Divinity

  • 19,354 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2004
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 10 February 2007 - 01:10 PM

Quote

never heard of it. please explain.


Back in the days of roadside carnivals, a man by the name of Frank Hansen was displaying a "missing link" in a traveling freezer.  For 35 cents, you got to peer through a double-paned glass at a huge block of ice containing some sort of furry hominind frozen since the beginning of time, yadda, yadda.  It was all fun and games until a reknown doctor (I believe his name was Sanderson), started talking about the creature being an Abominable Snowman, and this being the era of exploration and science and all, everyone jumped on the bandwagon.

You can google "mysterious", "creature", "ice", and you'll probably find some good articles.


#14    KGS3333

KGS3333

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 384 posts
  • Joined:09 Jan 2007

Posted 10 February 2007 - 01:21 PM

There is at least one other thread about this on UM (I started it).  This whole case is an excellent example of the extent to which scientists will go sometimes in order to make a name for themselves.  Sometimes they get caught, sometimes they don't.  It's really no different than a bank robbery.  In order to really cash in, you have to take some extreme risks; but if you end up succeeding, the payoff can be significant.  So there are always bound to be scientists who will go for it from time to time, and I think it's safe to say that much of what science tells us to be fact at the moment is questionable at best.  Just think back fifty years ago at all of the things that science touted as absolute fact that now no longer have much if any validity.

KGS


#15    Mattshark

Mattshark

    stuff

  • Member
  • 16,985 posts
  • Joined:29 Dec 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Liverpool, UK

  • Sea Shepherd, making conservation harder.

    If you care about wildlife, do not support these pirates.......

Posted 10 February 2007 - 01:38 PM

Quote

There is at least one other thread about this on UM (I started it).  This whole case is an excellent example of the extent to which scientists will go sometimes in order to make a name for themselves.  Sometimes they get caught, sometimes they don't.  It's really no different than a bank robbery.  In order to really cash in, you have to take some extreme risks; but if you end up succeeding, the payoff can be significant.  So there are always bound to be scientists who will go for it from time to time, and I think it's safe to say that much of what science tells us to be fact at the moment is questionable at best.  Just think back fifty years ago at all of the things that science touted as absolute fact that now no longer have much if any validity.

KGS

That is simply not true at all. You do not get lots of money for finding a new fossil, if your in paleontology to make a lot of money *EDIT*. There is next to no money in the field at all and thoe who make and sell the mismatched fossils are not scientists and no offence KGS but your scientific knowledge is no way near of a standard to call most of science into question.

Edited by Paranoid Android, 10 February 2007 - 03:56 PM.
Offensive remarks

Algae : Protists not Plants!

YNWA




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users