Editing Archaeoraptor (section)

==Ongoing confusion==
The fossils involved in the "Archaeoraptor" scandal have led to ongoing confusion over taxon names. In December 2000, ''Microraptor'' was described in ''Nature''.<ref name="Xuetal2000">{{Cite journal |doi=10.1038/35047056 |last1=Xu |first1=Xing |last2=Zhonghe |first2=Zhou |last3=Xiaolin |first3=Wang |date=7 December 2000 |title=The smallest known non-avian theropod dinosaur |url=http://research.amnh.org/%7Esunny/microraptor.pdf |journal=Nature |volume=408 |issue=6813 |pages=705–708 |pmid=11130069 |bibcode=2000Natur.408..705X |s2cid=4411157 |access-date=15 June 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081217154907/http://research.amnh.org/%7Esunny/microraptor.pdf |archive-date=17 December 2008 |url-status=dead }}</ref> Zhou ''et al.'' (2002) examined the upper body of the "Archaeoraptor" fossil and reported that it belonged to the previously-named genus ''[[Yanornis]]''.<ref name="Zhou02" />

===''Dinosaur Museum Journal''===
In 2002 the Czerkases published a volume through their Dinosaur Museum titled ''Feathered Dinosaurs and the Origin of Flight''. In this journal, they described and named several species.<ref name="Czerkas">{{cite web| last = Czerkas| first = Stephen A.| title = Feathered Dinosaurs and the Origin of Flight| publisher = The Dinosaur Museum| year = 2002| url = http://www.dinosaur-museum.org/featheredinosaurs/chapters.htm| access-date = 2008-06-13| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20080617200533/http://www.dinosaur-museum.org/featheredinosaurs/chapters.htm| archive-date= 17 June 2008 | url-status= live}}</ref> Of the six species named in the book, five are disputed.

Despite the work of Zhou ''et al.'' (2002), Czerkas and co-author [[Xu Xing (paleontologist)|Xu Xing]] described the upper portion of the "Archaeoraptor" fossil as a new bird genus, ''[[Archaeovolans]]'', in the ''Dinosaur Museum Journal''. The article does include the caveat that it might be a specimen of ''Yanornis''.<ref name="Czerkas2002">Czerkas, Sylvia J. ed. (2002) "Feathered Dinosaurs and the Origin of Flight" ''The Dinosaur Museum Journal'' Volume 1. Blanding, Utah, USA. The Dinosaur Museum, August 1, 2002</ref> Thus, this same fossil specimen has been named "Archaeoraptor", ''Archeovolans'', and ''Yanornis'' in different places.

Across the monographs in the ''Dinosaur Museum Journal'', Stephen Czerkas built a case for his controversial view that maniraptoran dinosaurs are secondarily flightless birds. In so doing, he criticized prominent paleontologists. In the text on ''[[Cryptovolans]]'', Czerkas accused Dr. [[Mark Norell]] of misinterpreting the fossil BPM 1 3-13 as having long leg feathers due to the "blinding influences of preconceived ideas."<ref name="Czerkas2002"/> Though Norell's interpretation was correct, Czerkas added leg feathers to his reconstruction of the fossil in the art that promotes the traveling exhibit.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.fresnomet.org/exhibition/feathered_dinosaurs|title=Feathered Dinosaurs and the Origin of Flight – Fall 2008 to March 1, 2009|access-date=2008-06-14|publisher=[[Fresno Metropolitan Museum of Art and Science]]|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080511065332/http://www.fresnomet.org/exhibition/feathered_dinosaurs|archive-date=11 May 2008|url-status=dead}}</ref>

Two other taxa that Czerkas and his co-authors named were later treated as junior synonyms by other authors. Czerkas' ''Cryptovolans'' was treated as ''Microraptor'',<ref name="Feducciaetal2005">{{Cite journal | doi = 10.1002/jmor.10382 | last1 = Feduccia | first1 = Alan | author-link = Alan Feduccia | last2 = Lingham-Soliar | first2 = Theagarten | last3 = Hinchliffe | first3 = J. Richard | year = 2005| title = Do feathered dinosaurs exist? Testing the hypothesis on neontological and paleontological evidence | journal = Journal of Morphology | volume = 266 | issue = 2| pages = 125–166 | pmid = 16217748 | s2cid = 15079072 }}</ref> and his ''[[Scansoriopteryx]]'' was treated as ''[[Epidendrosaurus]]''.<ref name="Feducciaetal2005"/><ref name="Padian2001">Padian, Kevin. (2001) "Basal Avialae" in "The Dinosauria" in ''The Dinosauria: Second Edition'' University of California Press. 2004.</ref> Czerkas described ''[[Omnivoropteryx]]'', noting that it was similar to ''[[Sapeornis]]''. Later specimens of ''Sapeornis'' with skulls demonstrated that the two were probably synonymous.<ref name="Zhou03">{{Cite journal | doi = 10.1139/e03-011 | last1 = Zhou | first1 = Z. | last2 = Zhang | first2 = F. | year = 2003 | title = Anatomy of the primitive bird ''Sapeornis chaoyangensis'' from the Early Cretaceous of Liaoning, China | journal = Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences | volume = 40 | issue = 5| pages = 731–747 | bibcode = 2003CaJES..40..731Z }}</ref>

Another taxon that Czerkas assigned to the [[Pterosauria]] and named ''[[Utahdactylus]]'' was reviewed by Dr. Chris Bennett. Bennett found multiple misidentifications of bones and inconsistencies between Czerkas' diagrams and the actual fossils. Bennett found the specimen to be an indeterminate diapsid and criticized the previous authors for publishing a species name when no diagnostic characters below the class level could be verified. He made ''Utahdactylus'' a ''[[nomen dubium]]''.<ref name="Bennett2007">Bennett, S. Christopher (2007) "Reassessment of ''Utahdactylus'' from the Jurassic Morrison Formation of Utah", ''Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology'' 27(1):257-260 March 2007.</ref>

===Traveling exhibit===
{{update|type=section|date=October 2017}}

In 2001 Stephen and Sylvia Czerkas compiled a traveling exhibit containing 34 other Chinese fossils. The show is titled ''Feathered Dinosaurs and the Origin of Flight''. The [[San Diego Natural History Museum]] paid a set fee to the Dinosaur Museum to display this show in 2004. When the show opened, Dr. [[Ji Qiang]] told reporters from ''Nature'' that about a dozen of the fossils had left China illegally. Ji arranged with the Czerkases to assign accession numbers to three of the most valuable specimens, thus formally adding them to the collection of the [[Chinese Academy of Geological Sciences]] in Beijing, although they remain in the possession of the Czerkases. Stephen Czerkas denied Ji's assertion that the fossils were illegal. Sylvia Czerkas told the journal ''Nature'' that she had worked out an agreement with officials of Liaoning Province in 2001 to borrow the fossils and that they were to be repatriated in 2007. Through March 2009, however, the show was scheduled for the [[Fresno Metropolitan Museum of Art and Science]] in California. According to ''Nature'', the Czerkases refused requests to make the officials from Liaoning available for an interview.<ref name="Dalton, Rex 2004. pp. 5"/>

Many scientists consider it unethical to work on fossils if there is any chance that they have been smuggled, and many disregard privately owned fossils altogether.<ref name="Hopkin2007">Hopkin, Michael (2007) "Paleontology journal will 'fuel black market'" ''Nature'' (news) 445:234-235 18 January 2007 {{doi|10.1038/445234b}}</ref> Some professionals feel that private collectors put fossils in private hands where science may not be able to access or study them. Some believe that private collectors may damage important fossils, subject them to forgery, and obscure their origins or evidence about their ages. Illegal dealers have also participated in and may encourage, governmental corruption. Another philosophy argues that if scientists could bend their ethics and agree to publish on important private fossils, this would encourage private holders to make them available for study.<ref name="Hopkin2007"/>

The fossil most recently appeared in an exhibition in Wollaton Hall, near Nottingham, titled [[Ground Shakers To Feathered Flyers|Dinosaurs of China: Ground Shakers to Feathered Flyers]], where it was exhibited along with fossils of ''Yanoris'' and ''Microraptor'', its main components.<ref name="Primary Times 2017">{{cite web | title=Dinosaurs of China: Ground Shakers to Feathered Flyers | website=Primary Times | date=2017-11-01 | url=https://www.primarytimes.co.uk/nottinghamshire/listings/dinosaurs-of-china-ground-shakers-to-feathered-flyers-122239 | access-date=2019-06-24}}</ref>

===Taxonomic history===
In April 2000 Olson published an article in ''Backbone'', the newsletter of the National Museum of Natural History. In this article, he justified his views on the evolution of birds, but also revised and redescribed the species "Archaeoraptor liaoningensis" by designating just the tail of the original fraudulent specimen as the [[type specimen]].<ref>Storrs L. Olson, 2000. Countdown to Piltdown at ''National Geographic'': the rise and fall of Archaeoraptor. ''Backbone'', newsletter of the Department of Vertebrate Zoology, National Museum of Natural History, 13(2) (April): 1–3.</ref> To prevent the tainted name "Archaeoraptor" from entering [[paleornithology|paleornithological]] literature, this redescription assigned the name to that part of the chimeric specimen least likely to be classified under [[Aves]], rather than to the portion which was later shown to represent a true bird species. Olson presumed that the ''National Geographic'' article had already validly named the fossil, and he, therefore, failed to explicitly indicate the name was new, as demanded by article 16 of the [[International Code of Zoological Nomenclature|ICZN]] as a condition for a name to be valid. Several months afterward Xu, Zhou, and Wang published their description of ''Microraptor zhaoianus'' in ''Nature''.<ref name="Xuetal2000"/>

===Creationism===
[[File:Microraptor fossil1.JPG|thumb|''Microraptor zhaoianus'']]
The scandal is sometimes used by creationists like [[Kent Hovind]], Kirk Cameron, and Ray Comfort to cast doubt on the hypothesis that birds evolved from dinosaurs.<ref>{{cite web| title = Hovind Debate| publisher = YouTube.com| date = 2006-02-26| url = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMpk7WerFWw| access-date = 2008-06-13}}</ref> Many creationists insist that no missing links between birds and dinosaurs have been found, and commonly point to "Archaeoraptor" as evidence of misconduct performed to support the evolutionary theory.<ref name="EF">{{cite web| title = Evolution Fraud| publisher = Northwest Creation Network| year = 2008| url = http://www.nwcreation.net/evolutionfraud.html| access-date = 2008-06-14| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20080621131058/http://www.nwcreation.net/evolutionfraud.html| archive-date = 21 June 2008| url-status = dead}}</ref><ref name="Sibley">{{cite web| last = Sibley| first = Andrew| title = Feathered dinosaurs and the Disneyfication of palaeontology| publisher = The Creation Science Movement| date = 2005-09-16| url = http://www.csm.org.uk/news.php?viewmessage=34| access-date = 2008-06-14| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20061030015410/http://www.csm.org.uk/news.php?viewmessage=34| archive-date = 2006-10-30| url-status = dead}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Second Look Causes Scientist to Reverse Dino-Bird Claim |url=https://www.icr.org/article/second-look-causes-scientist-reverse |access-date=2022-03-05 |website=www.icr.org |language=en}}</ref> They see "Archaeoraptor" as a "Piltdown Bird". However, contrary to the [[Piltdown Man]], "Archaeoraptor" was not deliberately fabricated to support some evolutionary claim.<ref>Chambers, Paul, (2002), ''Bones of Contention'', John Murray (Publishers) Ltd, London, p. 249</ref> Furthermore, the authenticity of "Archaeoraptor" would not have been essential proof for the hypothesis that birds are theropods, as this is sufficiently corroborated by other data; paleontologist [[Christopher Brochu]] concluded in November 2001: "That birds are derived from theropod dinosaurs is no longer the subject of scholarly dispute."<ref>Brochu, Christopher A. (2001), "Progress and future directions in archosaur phylogenetics", ''Journal of Paleontology'': Vol. 75, No. 6, pp. 1185–1201</ref> Though playing the role of "terrestrial dinosaur" in the "Archaeoraptor" affair, the ''Microraptor'', showing wings and clear traces of [[rectrices]], is generally assumed to have had at least a gliding capacity and is itself an excellent example of a transitional fossil.{{cn|date=December 2022}}