90 The Testimony, March 2003

Although a strong supporter of the AV, the Baird quotes extracts from most Christadelphian author acknowledges that its translation of Job is writers on the subject to demonstrate the wide not as good as some other more modern ver- diversity of views, but he himself regards Elihu sions (for example, the RSV, the NIV and even in broadly positive terms. the Jerusalem Bible). When appropriate he refers He acknowledges that Elihu is brash at times, to these and many other translations, as well as but regards his views as sound and vital to Job’s the Hebrew text, to draw out the meaning. He education. Some readers might be unreceptive identifies a number of places where the original to a view about Elihu that differs from their text is unclear, and usually suggests ways in own, but the author’s reasoning on this matter is which these passages might be interpreted while very cogent. recognising the ambiguity in these cases. In a The Education of Job seems likely to become very few places—for example, Job 34:29,30—he one of our standard works on the book of Job. It does not even attempt exposition because of un- is a handsomely produced book that promises certainty about the text. Many readers will wel- much and delivers on the promise. It is recom- come this level of honesty. mended for students and readers alike, and There seem to be almost as many views about would be a valuable addition to the library of Elihu as there are expositors of the book. Brother any Christadelphian.

EDITOR: David Burges, 7 Whitehead Drive, Wellesbourne, Warwick, CV35 9PW. Science Tel. 01789 842692; e-mail: [email protected]

The feathered dinosaur hoax 1 Malcolm Edwards

N THE OCTOBER 2000 edition of the Na- involvement the fossil was given the full name tional Geographic magazine there appeared a of Archaeoraptor liaoningensis Sloan. Isomewhat low-key “Report to Members” in the form of an apology for an article in the No- The artful perpetrator vember 1999 issue entitled “Feathers for T. Rex”, The Chinese farmer who found the fossil was announcing the discovery by a Chinese farmer, not the innocent perpetrator of the hoax, as is two years earlier, of a fossil which was said to be suggested. He was a part-time fossil collector the ‘missing link’ between the so-called toothed who had previously sold his finds to dealers. He bird Archaeopteryx and reptiles. It was given the had used different fossil parts and had joined similar name of Archaeoraptor and declared to be them together with home-made glue. The result a feathered dinosaur. It turned out to be an em- was a birdlike body connected to the tail of a barrassing hoax for all those involved in the story. small dinosaur, to which he added legs from The apology covered five full pages, and the other collected scraps. selected writer, Lewis Simons, does not pull his The unnamed dealer to whom the farmer sold punches. This is how he summarises the whole his fossil defended him by saying that he genu- debacle: “It’s a tale of misguided secrecy and inely believed he had found a ‘missing link’ and misplaced confidence, of rampant egos clashing, was putting together what time itself had sepa- self-aggrandizement, wishful thinking, naive as- rated. Whatever the farmer thought, it does not sumption, human error, stubbornness, manipu- excuse the gullibility of the ‘experts’. lation, backbiting, lying, corruption and, most of all, abysmal communication. It is a story in which none of the characters looks good”. The Novem- 1. See also reference to the same story in “Science Up- ber 1999 article was written by Assistant Art date: Another fake fossil exposed”, The Testimony, Editor Christopher Sloan, and in honour of his Jun. 2002, p. 227. The Testimony, March 2003 91

The writing of the article to have unmatched pieces. Professor Timothy In February 1999 the dealer sold the phony fossil Rowe, who did the scan, said that the tail had no for US$80,000 to Stephen Czerkas and his wife, natural connection to the body and that there who are directors of a dinosaur museum in was a chance it was a fraud. By the time Currie Blanding, Utah. Comprehensively taken in, they had joined them, however, they had consulted constructed a model of the creature and added together and concluded that the body and tail plumage, and then consulted Canadian scientist did belong together. The scan alone had cost the Philip J. Currie at the Royal Tyrell Museum of Magazine Committee US$10,000. As Currie left, Palaeontology, Alberta, who in turn contacted the National Geographic TV crew entered the Christopher Sloan. building to commence shooting. Sloan was not even qualified to write the arti- In Denver, some three months after this, at a cle, but the Chief Editor of National Geographic, meeting of scientists who do not share the birds- William Allen, gave him the go-ahead. This is from-dinosaurs theory, serious doubts were ex- what Simons wrote about that: pressed about the scanning conclusions, and later “The Archaeoraptor story was originally to a Chinese scientist named Xu Ling, who had also appear in the magazine as a small, subsidiary looked carefully at the fossil, declared: “I am part of a broader piece on feathered dino- 100% sure we have to admit that Archaeoraptor is saurs. Sloan, who’d handled the artwork for a faked specimen”. Later, Currie was to admit numerous articles but had never written a that getting involved in the Archaeoraptor saga story, had convinced Allen to let him write was the greatest mistake in his life. Chief Editor this one. Publication was set for November, Allen was to add that while “extraordinary claims six months ahead. require extraordinary proof”, they had relied on “The association of Sloan and Currie “very ordinary proof”. would prove to be star-crossed. As a first- But was there any proof at all? Christopher time writer, Sloan committed the journalist’s Sloan feared that the article would damage his cardinal sin—he assumed that since Currie’s credibility. There is absolutely no doubt about reputation was so outstanding, there was no that. He commented afterwards, “I thought I need to stay on top of him or question him. was bringing in more than was expected, and it Currie became a collaborator rather than a turns out I was dragging in a monster”. source. Worse, Currie was so distracted by other commitments around the world that Was any lesson learnt? he gave the Archaeoraptor project short Predictably, the National Geographic magazine had shrift”. finally overstepped the mark in its unrelenting Sloan’s article trumpeted the discovery, sup- support of the evolutionist cause. The Archaeo- ported by ample paintings and photographs, raptor hoax will take much more living down one of the Czerkas model being prominently than either the Piltdown Man or Nebraska Man featured. Conspicuous headings stated that this hoaxes. There are even those who suspect that was “The best evidence since Archaeopteryx that Archaeopteryx itself was a clever hoax that has birds did, in fact, evolve from certain types of been covered up. This most recent one might carnivorous dinosaurs”, and that “We can now well have been as well, were it not for one say that birds are therapods, just as confidently or two honest scientists who became involved. as we say that humans are mammals”. One paint- This article has omitted much of the details in ing showed a downy baby Archaeoraptor emerg- Lewis Simons’ article, which, in turn, by his ing from its newly broken egg. own admission, does not tell the whole sordid There was never any Archaeoraptor, and the story. only egg there ever was, in this saga, was now But have the National Geographic Committee firmly on the faces of the National Geographic members finally learnt their lesson? One sus- Committee, particularly of Assistant Art Editor pects not. There must be many amongst them Christopher Sloan. who are aware of the evolutionary prejudice in most of their articles about the origin of life on The painful truth earth, but since the only alternative is Divine At the University of Texas in Austin the fossil Creation they are likely to persist in looking for was scanned by a High-Resolution X-Ray CT answers in the earth itself, and not from the God Facility in which it was revealed that it appeared of heaven.