I'm not a paleontologist, but my children consider me an authentic fossil. This week PLoS ONE published an important paper featuring a fossil find (lots of good coverage here at Scienceblogs; Brian at Laelaps has a characteristically thorough run down). The discovery of this primate skeleton has implications for the human evolutionary tree, something that hasn't escaped the attention of the inimitable Edward Current:
- Log in to post comments
Is he being serious or is this a spoof? I find it quite hard to tell.
Anonymous: It's satire, but it says something about the religious right you can't be sure.
It's a spoof. He does it very well.
IF it is satire then this guy is good . . . very good. He has the wingnut patter down to a science (pun intended) and could put Ray Comfort to shame.
One thing I am a little concerned with, however, is all the hype this fossil find is getting. This thing has been in a private collection for almost twenty years, its place in the record unrecognized during that time, and the chain of evidence is not as strong as it should be. The opportunity for fraud is definitely present and it would be a disaster if it all turned out to be a hoax.
If it is true, and it is likely that it is, this will be a very important find. The âMissing Linkâ crap and the media buzz do not help matters overall. This fossil is but another piece of the puzzle. A key piece perhaps, but a piece nevertheless.
Edward Current is a satirist and quite a good one at that.
Possibly one measure of good satire is how many who should get the joke, don't.
The fossil apparently hung on someones wall for 20 years as a piece of art (understandably so if you look at it, its quite beautiful). It probably says more about the general level of knowledge of the public that it took so long before someone recognized the unique scientific value of the piece.
As for the idea of it being a fake like the chinese archaeoraptor of a few years back I suspect its beyond creationist hoaxers for a couple of different reasons. First it is, as 'missing links' go, nothing special - its quite simply an early primate fossil with nothing earth shatteringly surprising to tell us. Its not a surprise that such animals existed and it wouldn't be surprising if another such fossil of a similarly early was also found.
The other such hoxes involved piecing together fragments of different origins while this fossil is in a single block - a much more difficult task to manage - not to mention the fact that the hoaxer would need to get all the anatomical details correct (a creationist who knows biology? Come on !)