by Jonathan Sarfati

A National Geographic (NG) article ‘Feathers for T. Rex?’ by the Senior Assistant Editor, Christopher Sloan, has attracted fierce criticism from some prominent evolutionists for its promotion of the idea that birds evolved from dinosaurs. The article even illustrated a baby T. rex with feathers, as well as putting feathers on another theropod dinosaur, Deinonychus. In a prominent heading, the article proclaimed: ‘We can now say that birds are theropods just as confidently as we say that humans are mammals.’ It was based on a fossil illegally exported  from Liaoning Province, China, tentatively named Archaeoraptor liaoningensis, allegedly a ‘feathered dinosaur’.

Dinosaur-to-bird theory: Problems!

Readers of Creation magazine should be familiar with the extensive scientific critiques of the dino-to-bird evolutionary theory, despite the sensationalist claims in the media — see some of articles hyperlinked. Even among evolutionists, some have refused to be swept along by the hype. For example, Alan Feduccia, a world authority on birds at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, wrote an encyclopedic book on living and fossil birds.  He pointed out much evidence against the dinosaur-to-bird theory, including the huge differences in lung and embryonic thumb structure. Also, dinosaurs have exactly the wrong anatomy for developing flight, with their large tails and hindlimbs and short forelimbs. And the so-called ‘feathered dinosaurs’ are ‘dated’ by evolutionists at millions of years later than undoubted birds.

His colleague, University of Kansas paleontologist Larry Martin, commented on the wishful thinking and bias of another ‘feathered dinosaur’ claim:

Evolutionist slams National Geographic for bias and ‘tabloid journalism’

But the NG article was the last straw in shameless sensationalism for Storrs Olson, Curator of Birds at the National Museum of Natural History of the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, DC. He wrote:

Among other things, Dr Olsen, an evolutionist, pointed out:

‘hollow, hairlike structures characterize protofeathers’ — as:

Piltdown bird?

Since Dr Olsen wrote that scathing critique of NG, even more disturbing news has surfaced. An eminent paleontologist in Beijing, Xu Xing, now claims that the fossil is not even genuine. Rather, ‘Archaeoraptor liaoningensis’ was really combined from the body and head of a birdlike creature and the tail of a different dinosaur. Dr Xu said that a fossil in a private collection in China contains the mirror image of the tail of the alleged Archaeoraptor.

But it mightn’t be a deliberate fake like ‘Piltdown Man’, a human skull and an ape’s jaw. Dr Xu said:

At the time of writing, research is still ongoing, but Czerkas said that Xu may be right, and National Geographic plans to publish a correction in the March issue.

After that, scientists in China claimed to have discovered yet another faked tail — this one added by a Chinese farmer to a flying pterosaur. Apparently this one has fooled the editors of Nature, another journal singled out by Dr Olsen (above) as overzealous to proselytize the dinosaur-to-bird theory.

History of hoaxes

This wouldn’t be the first time that National Geographic, in its eagerness to proselytise for the evolutionary faith, has rushed into print with ‘evidence’ that has turned out to be a hoax or an overblown claim that was later discredited. Many years ago, the magazine had a glossy picture displaying amazing artistic licence of our supposed ancestor, the ‘missing link’ Zinjanthropus boisei or ‘Nutcracker man’, discovered by Louis Leakey. Now no evolutionist would claim that this robust australopithecine was a human ancestor — see Marvin Lubenow’s book Bones of Contention.

And in 1972, NG and NBC flashed a story of a stone-age tribe called the Tasadays on the island of Mindanao in the Philippines. Only after the fall of the Marcos Government in 1986 did the truth come out in a Swiss newspaper with the headline ‘Steinzeitschwindel’ = ‘Stone Age Swindle’. It turned out that Manuel Elizalde, the Presidential assistant on National Minorities under Marcos, and a hunter Dafal, from a village of slash-and-burn farmers, had persuaded some families to strip and act like stereotypical ‘stone age’ people. It was easy money for Dafal and fame for Elizalde. We are unaware of any retraction by NG.

Some atheistic/evolutionary/sceptical/anti-Christian websites are, amazingly, trying to downplay the Archaeoraptor fiasco, by pointing out that it was ‘science’ that put it right. Of course, they deceitfully equate ‘science’ and ‘evolution’, although evolutionary wishful thinking was responsible for the hoax in the first place! And now they tell us that NG is a popular general interest magazine and not a peer-reviewed scientific journal — not a peep from them while NG’s shameless evolutionary sensationalizing remained unexposed! See also Be sceptical of the Skeptics!

What should we think about ‘feathered dino’ claims?

• Start with the Bible, the Word of the Creator God who was there, and never lies or errs. The Bible teaches that birds and other flying creatures were created on Day 5, while dinosaurs and other land animals, and man, were created on Day 6.

• Facts never speak for themselves; rather they are always interpreted within a framework, or paradigm. Most important are the two opposing frameworks of Christianity and materialism. And the dino-to-bird scenario has become a dogma into which the evidence must be twisted.

• Don’t believe everything you read in the media. Mostly, the media are biased towards evolution and against God. We should not be surprised that they splash supposedly pro-evolution ‘evidence’ on the front pages, but when this ‘evidence’ is refuted, even by other evolutionists, this is either buried in an obscure place, or not reported at all. This has happened repeatedly — remember the alleged life from Mars in an Antarctic meteorite, now almost universally discounted? See the articles hyperlinked. And it has happened with many other ‘missing link’ claims, including alleged ‘feathered dinosaurs’. Another example is Pakicetus, based on a few skull fragments, which was heavily touched up as a ‘missing link’ between land mammals and whales, to indoctrinate schoolteachers. As shown, the NG article simply takes media sensationalism to a new low. But for a change, the news media have publicised the Archaeoraptor problems — of course, accusations of fraud usually sell newspapers far better than quiet discrediting of ‘evidences’ for evolution that informed evolutionists no longer believe.

• There is nothing in creationist theory forbidding dinosaurs from having feathers — it would not make them any more a transitional form than the egg-laying mammals, the platypus and echidna. But so far the evidence is lacking. And even if they existed, it would not prove they evolved from scales — feathers are completely different from scales in just about every respect.

• The dino-to-bird claim has huge scientific problems as outlined above. In fact, Feduccia wrote: ‘All in all, I find the whole dino-bird business a total hoax.