Re. The BBC does it again

["Christopher Lavers" <Chris.Lavers@nottingham.ac.uk>]

"Birds have feathers and fly. Dinosaurs didn't have feathers and couldn't fly." 

OK, which of you experts told 'em this? :o)

I'm with Luis. Even as a lurker I spent the programme in a permanent cringe. 
And Horizon used to be so good. What can we do to stop these morons debasing 
our subjects?

C


Luis Rey wrote:
> 
> After watching this evening what the BBC "Horizon" has done re-writing
> history once again in the presentation the 'Archaeoraptor' fiasco, I
> think there should be a serious debate of how pop science programs
> continue to present (manipulate I would say) information.
> Not only this program's 'novelty value' was already several years too
> late,  it also distorted the truth (well known by anyone that has
> followed the forgery case), withheld and twisted the readily available
> information and finally made a mess of all the valuable and serious
> people that were duped to be interviewed and form part of the program.
> The 'Archaeoraptor'  case was originally more a problem about legal
> issues and personal reputations than a problem for dinosaur science
> itself. I remember that immediately after the photographs were published
> in National Geographic, we already were talking that it was a forgery...
> but it didn't affect any ideas concerning the dinosaur and bird link
> since we already had so much evidence and other feathered specimens and
> dinosaur anatomy.
> 'Archaeoraptor' was irrelevant at that level. Still the program kept
> insisting in ignoring all the other evidence (no mention whatsoever any
> other specimens like Protarchaeopteryx, Caudipteryx, Beipiaosaurus and
> Sinosauropteryx... all already well known then. No mention that there
> were dozens of feathered specimens being discovered and in preparation,
> and so on) and  fabricated a case that actually made disappear the
> importance  of even Archaeopteryx itself and turned 'Archaeoraptor' into
> the Holy Grail, the Missing Link... even in the face of the forgery,
> since the (at least) two animals that form the composite both are
> presented as  'unique' missing links themselves: "Nobody had seen before
> a bird with teeth"... and that kind of fallacious arguments.
> And we may add that the program was still being done two months ago,
> well after other perfectly preserved specimens have been discovered
> including  Norell's "Dave" and well after they spent quite a lot of time
> questioning a lot of people around.
> The question is, if I noticed all the misinformation and twisted
> argumentation it was because I knew the case so well. What about for the
> people that really didn't know anything about it? What about all the
> Horizon programs that are about scientific areas that are not our
> personal expertise? How can  anyone trust the BBC on Zoology, Astronomy,
> Genetics or Anthropology?  The BBC has been caught red-handed again.
> These programs are supposedly made to educate people.
> 
> Where's the responsibility in TV programs that are to be considered
> 'serious' in divulging science?
> 
> Luis Rey
> 
> Visit my website on http://www.ndirect.co.uk/~luisrey 

-- 
 *********************************************************************
  Michael S. Edmunds                      GX Technology Corp.
  Systems Support Manager                 5847 San Felipe, Suite 3500
  Email: mike@gxt.com                     Houston, TX 77057 
  tel: 713-789-7250                       http://www.gxt.com 
  fax: 713-789-7201

    "We are all, by any practical definition of the words,
     foolproof and incapable of error."
                                       - HAL9000

 *********************************************************************