Dan On 9/22/2011 4:27 AM, Mickey Mortimer wrote:
So it would have been better to remain ignorant about Nyctosaurus' crest morphology than to have it published on and later (probably?) lost to science? I know the standard reply is that the descriptions now have no scientific value because they can't be independantly verified, but no one ever applies this to fossils which are lost in other ways. JVP has published papers discussing the Spinosaurus holotype for instance, and unlike KJ2, that doesn't even have a possibility of being recovered for science. It's also published papers discussing Quetzalcoatlus northropi, which has been virtually hidden from researchers for decades. How are we supposed to verify Langston's descriptions under these conditions? And what happens a century or two from now when specimens like Dryptosaurus break down from handling and pyrite disease despite being housed in museums? Will Dryptosaurus then fade from paleontological reality because no one can verify the published descriptions and photo graphs, even though the majority of experts use them for their information now? If you want to try to discourage fossil sales by not publishing on sold fossils, that's a political position people could discuss (though I doubt the policy has much effect on fossil sales). But it also denies the world scientific knowledge, even if that knowledge is based on temporary examination, which is the same of all paleontological knowledge in the long run. As for me, I'd rather learn everything we can, even when conditions aren't ideal. There are a finite number of fossils out there, we can't afford to be choosy if we want to know about them all. Mickey Mortimer ----------------------------------------Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 10:14:43 +0100 From: mike@indexdata.com To: Mark.Witton@port.ac.uk CC: dinosaur@usc.edu Subject: Re: The fate of Nyctosaurus specimen KJ2 On 22 September 2011 09:44, Mark Witton<Mark.Witton@port.ac.uk> wrote:Hi folks, I recall reading a discussion a while back about the unknown whereabouts of the fancy antlered Nyctosaurus specimens described by Chris Bennet in 2003. I'd heard they were up for sale online and, lo, one of them has recently been reposted at everyone's favourite online auction. [URL redacted] Note that the skull has been reconstructed and, apparently, the matrix smoothed over with plaster. With no casts of the original available in any museums (that I know of, anyway), this is something of a loss to pterosaur science. I'm wondering what state the original material is actually in now and, should this specimen ever make its way into a public collection, how long it would take to undo all the 'improvements'.*sigh* Folks, this is exactly why the SVP has a zero-tolerance attitude to privately owned specimens. From Bennet's (2003) paper: "Recently, two new specimens were collected that demonstrate that Nyctosaurus had a large cranial crest. The specimens were collected by Mr. Kenneth JENKINS of Ellis, KS, and were purchased by a private collector in Austin, Texas, who intends to retail them permanently. I acklowledge that scientifically informative specimens should normally be conserved in an appropriate museum, but have opted to describe these specimens now" Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind.
-- Mike.