Debunking the Dinosaur Debacle: Questions of Quality

Josh Harmon, M.Th., M.Div., M.T.S.

Abstract

The field of paleontology has long been captivated by the allure of dinosaurs, but their mystique has sometimes led to complex challenges, including dinosaur hoaxes, fossil fabrication techniques, Hollywood’s commercial interests, and the intense conflicts between paleontologists. This article delves into the enthralling world of dinosaur-related controversies, shedding light on the multifaceted problems that have impacted the credibility of the dinosaur record.

When children visit a dinosaur museum, they are exposed to displays that blend elements of science, art, and, to some extent, fiction. These displays aim to educate and captivate young minds about prehistoric life, but it’s essential to distinguish between factual scientific representation and artistic interpretation.

At many museums, the exhibits are primarily based on scientific findings and research about prehistoric creatures. Scientists study fossils, bones, and other evidence to reconstruct the appearance and behavior of these ancient animals. The displays aim to showcase these scientific discoveries and provide an educational experience for visitors.

However, some artistic interpretation is also involved in creating these exhibits. Artists and designers work alongside scientists to bring these prehistoric creatures to life visually. They may use their creativity to fill in gaps where the scientific evidence is incomplete, making the displays more engaging and immersive for visitors.

This paper raises the possibility of deliberate manipulation in the early days of dinosaur research, proposing that bones from various animals were mixed and matched to create the concept of dinosaurs. While some dinosaur replicas and models may have been made from materials other than real fossils, they are often labeled as reproductions or artistic representations, and their purpose is primarily educational and informative rather than deceptive.

Museums containing dinosaur exhibits claim to strike a balance between science, art, and education. The displays are based on scientific research, but artistic elements are incorporated to make the experience more enjoyable and informative for visitors. It’s crucial to rely on evidence and scientific consensus when discussing the existence and nature of dinosaurs.

Means and Motivations

What could be the underlying motivations for such a deceptive endeavor? Some apparent motivations might include attempts to support the theory of evolution, challenge or cast doubt on the authenticity of the Christian Bible and the existence of the Christian God, and refute the concept of a “young-earth theory.” These motivations can have significant political and religious implications (Miller, Scott, & Okamoto, 2006).

A deistic concept of dinosaurs implies that if a higher power exists, it could have experimented with the idea of dinosaurs for a period before potentially discarding or losing interest in this creation, moving on to create humanity. This timeline of dinosaur history suggests an imperfect God who came up with the idea of humans as an afterthought, potentially conflicting with the biblical notion that God created humankind in His own image. It’s worth noting that dinosaurs are not mentioned in the Hebrew Bible.

There could also be considerable financial and economic benefits for museums, educational and research organizations, university paleontology departments, fossil discoverers and owners, and the book, television, and movie industries. These benefits could serve as strong motivations to ridicule open questioning and suppress honest investigations, as they depend on maintaining popular interest and belief in the existing dinosaur narrative (Falkingham & Lockett, 2018).

It’s essential to approach these discussions with an open mind and rely on evidence-based research to ascertain the validity of various claims and hypotheses surrounding dinosaurs and their prehistoric context. Balanced and honest exploration of these topics can lead to a deeper understanding of our planet’s past and its relevance to scientific, cultural, and religious perspectives.

Sir Richard Owen introduced the class Dinosauria in 1842 during a captivating two-hour speech, where he defined the original dinosaurs as Megalosaurus, Iguanodon, and Hylaeosaurus. However, these creatures were known only from fragmented specimens (Benton, 2000).  It wasn’t until the mid-19th century when purported dinosaur discoveries in North America provided an increasingly mainstream acceptance of their appearance (Switek, 2014).

The first recorded discovery of dinosaur remains in North America is generally attributed to Ferdinand Vandiveer Hayden in 1854, during his exploration of the upper Missouri River. He and his party found a small collection of isolated teeth near the confluence of the Judith and Missouri Rivers. These alleged dinosaur teeth were later described by Joseph Leidy, a paleontologist from Philadelphia, in 1856 (Cope, 1869).

The movie “Jurassic Park” serves as an example of how dinosaurs are portrayed larger than their actual size in museum displays. After the movie’s release, articles were written questioning the feasibility of such portrayals, including the alleged discovery of dinosaur DNA preserved in amber, which was later proven false (McAuliffe, 1993).

The credibility of Archaeopteryx was called into question early on, with the use of a modern feather pressed into cement to create a forgery sold to the British Museum (Havstad & Smith, 2019).

As for the motivation behind the discovery and promotion of dinosaurs, there could be various factors at play, including financial interests, the desire for prestige and fame, the need to publish papers for academics, and the influence of political and religious agendas.

The question arises whether the descriptions of dinosaurs in 1842 were based on actual discoveries or if subsequent findings were influenced to fit those descriptions.

The Bone Wars

In the late 1870s, dinosaur skeletons were claimed to be found in abundance in the Garden Park area of Colorado and at Como Bluff, Wyoming, which initiated the First Great Dinosaur Rush in North America (Larson, 2008). This surge was primarily fueled by the rivalry between two prominent paleontologists: Edward Drinker Cope from Philadelphia and Othniel Marsh from Yale University. Originally friends, they became fierce competitors in a legendary feud, involving armed field parties, spies, and intercepting shipments of fossils meant for each other (Dingus & Tyson, 1996). This raises questions about the shipment of fossils to the discoverers and the authenticity of the credits given to Cope and Marsh for discoveries that might not have been entirely their own. The true discoverers and their reliability are also brought into question.

In short, early dinosaur discoveries in North America played a crucial role in shaping our understanding of these prehistoric creatures. The rivalry between Cope and Marsh added drama to the pursuit of knowledge, raising questions about the sources of discoveries and the reliability of the historical accounts. Further research and analysis are necessary to shed light on the credibility of these findings and the contributions of various individuals to the field of paleontology (Dingus & Tyson, 1996).

In Grady (1995), it’s explained that C. H. Sternberg of the Geological Survey of Canada learned competitive bone hunting from Cope, who, along with his rival Marsh, engaged in intense scientific rivalry known as “the bone wars” during the 1870s and 1880s. Despite the underhanded tactics, this rivalry led to significant fossil collections (Rea, 2021). The Second Great Dinosaur Rush took place in southern Alberta, where another fierce collecting rivalry unfolded between Barnum Brown of the American Museum of Natural History and Sternberg (Brinkman, 2019).

The question arises as to why claims from individuals who engaged in “underhanded shenanigans in the history of science” should be believed (Grady, 1995)

Additionally, it’s noted that there were no recorded discoveries of dinosaurs by Native Americans, and the native American religion or tradition does not include beliefs about dinosaurs. The absence of prior discoveries of dinosaurs worldwide is also highlighted until the 19th century, when large deposits were found in various parts of the world (Redmond, 2005).

The sudden surge in discoveries is questionable, given that regions like Belgium, Mongolia, Tanzania, and western Germany, as well as the Americas, were inhabited and explored for thousands of years without any knowledge of dinosaurs. This prompts the inquiry into why such discoveries only occurred in the 19th century.

It’s mentioned that the late 1800s were considered the “golden age” of dinosaur paleontology, with many familiar dinosaur species discovered and named. Currently, there appears to be another “dinosaur renaissance” with new information accumulating rapidly (Currie, 2023). This observation raises concerns that people might have been deceived, and the discoveries could have been manufactured as an attempt to discredit the Bible.

The questions raised in this paper call for a critical examination of the historical context of dinosaur discoveries and the motivations behind scientific rivalries. It’s essential to approach these topics with an open mind and rely on evidence-based research to understand the true nature of dinosaur discoveries and their impact on scientific and cultural perspectives.

Enz (2005) discusses the presumed unearthing of the first comprehensive skeletal form of an alleged dinosaur, Hadrosaurus foulkii, in Haddonfield, New Jersey, eight years after the reference book was published. This dinosaur stood taller than a house, possessed bird-like pelvic structure, lizard-like tail, and remarkably, walked upright on two legs, foraging with arm-like forelimbs.

Regarding the discoveries and nature of findings, most dinosaur excavations are typically made by individuals with vested interests, such as paleontologists, scientists, university professors, and museum personnel, intentionally searching for dinosaur bones. This raises questions about whether these professionals have a well-kept secret about where to find such fossils that amateurs might not know. Moreover, there are instances of discoveries facilitated by professionals guiding amateurs or the government having prior knowledge of dinosaur findings. Special areas designated as dinosaur parks often require amateur dinosaur hunters to obtain a hunting license, adding to the intrigue (Smith & Johnson, 2020).

Some discoveries raise suspicions, with numerous bones and dinosaurs found together, suggesting possible planting of fossils. For instance, a quarry called the Ruth Mason Quarry contained the remains of at least two thousand beasts, leading to speculation about the reason behind so many bones found in one place (Bush, 2021).

Overall, these are thought-provoking questions about the circumstances and motivations behind certain dinosaur discoveries. It prompts the need for a critical evaluation of the methods used in paleontology and the transparency of the scientific process to ensure the credibility of prehistoric creature findings and avoid any potential misrepresentation.

Museum Incentives

It appears that individuals working for museums are often associated with significant and prolific dinosaur discoveries. For example, Dr. Luis Chiappe and Dr. Lowell Dingus claimed to have discovered a nesting site with thousands of dinosaur eggs and fossilized embryos and skin in a remote area of Argentina during an expedition (Chiappe, Dingus, Jackson, Chinsamy, & Fox, 1998). 

Compton’s Encyclopedia lists notable paleontologists and their prolific discoveries. Florentino Ameghino described thousands of fossil species excavated by his brother, Carlos, in Argentina, contributing to Argentina’s reputation as a fossil-rich area. Earl Douglass, a United States dinosaur hunter, claimed to have made significant discoveries in Utah, sending 350 tons of alleged dinosaur bones to the Carnegie Museum of Natural History in Pittsburgh during his career (Ameghino, 1910).

The presence of large quantities of fossilized bones in concentrated areas or discoveries made by a few individuals raises questions about the natural probability of such occurrences. Natural events like floods, volcanic eruptions, and landslides would scatter bones over a wider area. The concentration of dinosaurs in herds or groups at the same place might indicate a rare event like a mass extinction. Considering the long dominance of dinosaurs and their relatively long lifespans, the number of fossils found seems disproportionately high (Linse, Smith, Loxton, & Loxton, 2011).

The Cleveland-Lloyd Dinosaur Quarry is such an example, with more than 30 skeletons, 12,000 individual bones, and prehistoric eggs extracted from the site. Over 70 different animals and 14 species have been represented by bones taken from the quarry, with their casts and original skeletons displayed in numerous museums worldwide. The site was once a shallow freshwater lake where animals occasionally got trapped in the mud, and over time, their skeletons accumulated. Volcanic ash and sediment layers covered the area, and the bones fossilized over millions of years until they became recoverable by scientific excavations (Bilbey, 1998).

What is the likelihood of numerous dinosaurs becoming stuck in mud, and the convenient circumstances leading to an abundance of dinosaur fossils near the Earth’s surface? It raises an interesting point regarding the disparity between the number of dinosaur fossils and the scarcity of fossilized bones of extant animals, like bison, that once roamed North America (Linse, Smith, Loxton, & Loxton, 2011).

Additionally, some argue that petroleum, often considered a “fossil fuel,” may not have a biogenic origin entirely (Whitehead, 1973). Some evidence points to the presence of hydrocarbons in locations where a biogenic origin seems improbable or impossible (Smith & Johnson, 2020). This perspective challenges the notion that the alleged existence of dinosaurs is necessary to explain the origin of petroleum.

These points bring into question the concentration of dinosaur discoveries and the circumstances leading to their fossilization. A critical examination of paleontological practices and the factors contributing to the abundance of dinosaur fossils compared to other ancient animals is necessary.

Transport and Preparation

Currently, it’s common to use strips of burlap soaked in plaster to create protective jackets for prehistoric creature finds. To ensure the plaster does not directly touch the bone’s surface, a tissue separator is applied before laying the soaked burlap strips onto the fossil, covering it like a half shell. The end result is a bone completely encased in a mummy-like field jacket, making it ready for safe transportation.

Preparers and transporters work extensively with plaster, which is a regular part of their job. The frequent use of plaster might not raise questions or suspicion since it’s a common material in their field.

However, in the process of moldmaking and casting, preparers can fabricate missing pieces of an articulated skeletal mount, such as limbs, ribs, and vertebrae, using plaster, fiberglass, and epoxies. For reconstruction work on single bones, mache or plaster mixed with dextrin, a starch that adds adhesive properties and extra hardness to regular molding plaster, can be used to fill small to large cracks. Large missing fragments can also be sculpted in place using the same materials (Goodsell & Johnson, 2007).

Preparing difficult fossils in the laboratory can be time-consuming, taking months or even years to clean, consolidate, repair, and reconstruct them for study or display. This preparatory work is considered an art and skill performed by preparators (Goodsell & Johnson, 2007).

These methods raise questions about whether the public is being presented with altered versions of bones or if they are being deceived in any way. The boundary between science, art, and science fiction may become blurred when such reconstruction and preparation techniques are involved.

For instance, in the case of Hadrosaurus foulkii, it was discovered that an iguana skull was used as a model for the dinosaur’s skull in the original reconstruction. The sculpted iguana skull, which is now on display at the Academy of Natural Sciences in Philadelphia, was used due to the missing original skull (Prieto-Márquez, Weishampel, & Horner, 2006).

In a museum reconstruction of ancient creatures, bones from different types of creatures should not be knowingly mixed together or sculpted to create a public display. The use of modern animal bones in such reconstructions raises concerns about the accuracy and integrity of the exhibit.

The strong possibility exists that key dinosaur bones displayed in museums have undergone artificial modification through sculpting and carving (Linse, Smith, Loxton, & Loxton, 2011). Bone sculpture is a known human activity in various cultures, where existing bones are transformed into unrecognizable man-made objects. This raises questions about whether the dinosaur industry may engage in such practices.

Conclusion

The dinosaur industry is riddled with concerning aspects that raise doubts about the existence of dinosaurs:

1. Discovery of dinosaur fossils in large, concentrated quantities over the last two centuries contradicts natural probability and geological laws.
2. Dinosaur discoverers often have vested interests or biases, which may affect their findings.
3. Preparation and display of dinosaur fossils in museums raise questions about their integrity and source, leaving room for potential tampering and fraudulent activities.
4. The disproportionately high number of dinosaur bones compared to other animals raises questions about the fossilization process.
5. The implications of dinosaur discoveries on the theory of evolution and creation beliefs suggest hidden political or religious agendas behind promoting the dinosaur narrative.

Considering these issues, it’s possible that living dinosaurs never actually existed.

An investigation into the dinosaur industry is necessary, and critical questions must be raised. There is no conclusive evidence supporting the existence of dinosaurs. It’s plausible that the idea of prehistoric living dinosaurs was concocted by individuals with an evolutionary and anti-Bible agenda during the 19th and 20th centuries. However, organizations questioning or skeptical about dinosaur discoveries often lack sufficient funding and support, and struggle to breach the monolith of the dinosaur narrative.

Rather than blindly accepting the dinosaur narrative, it’s better to question and carefully consider these issues for the sake of good science.

“Turn away from godless chatter and the opposing ideas of what is falsely called knowledge,” – 1 Timothy 6:20

Josh Harmon is an associate professor with CAD University in the Department of Ministry. Blending his academic expertise in theology with an insatiable curiosity for prehistoric life, Josh’s literary pursuits have centered around the enthralling world of paleontology. As a passionate advocate for the fusion of faith and reason, his lectures invite readers to embark on a thrilling journey of discovery, exploring the wonders of both the ancient past and the human soul. Josh aims to inspire future generations of scientists, fostering an enduring yet humbled fascination with the divine mysteries of life that once roamed our planet