Instead Of Glory, The Finder Of A Rare Dinosaur Fossil Faces Charges Of Theft

[Guest Nicholas]

I fought the law, but the law won....

Find the article HERE!

[Bill]

GOOD!!

[Guest bmorefossil]

well that sucks... but if he did take it off that property, well he should know better. It happens all the time here in Maryland then they think they can take the stuff to the museums lol!!!

[Bill]

I would say he did know better. That's why, if it's true, I said "GOOD".

[ebrocklds]

gps units are cheap and land ownership info is free. having worked with dinos so much you think that this guy would have know the rules. obviously he did, that is why the little raptor stayed hidden for so long. that guy gives commercial paleo guys a bad name. even if he helped to start a museum, he doesn't play by the rules. this is the type of stuff that will get the government to ban all fossil collecting by amatures.

Brock

[grampa dino]

This guy is the sort of person to give every bone (fossil) hunter a bad name.

How many other times has he done this sort of questionalbe acts?

[mommabetts]

People like that makes everyone look bad!!!!!!!!!! They deserve to go to jail. If you are going to play you should follow the rules.

[Boesse]

Actually, within paleontological circles, Murphy has been known to be a bit of a crook for a while. I'd say he gives paleontologists a bad name as well; not because I consider him to be a paleontologist, but because he calls himself one.

Take for example leonardo, the well preserved Brachylophosaurus he discovered. Murphy claims right and left that it preserves intact soft tissue, and preserved internal organs, and seeks publicity all the time; it is highly annoying to hear the headline "unique dinosaur mummy from montana preserved with internal organs" for the 23rd time. It isn't news anymore. And worse, there's only been one (barely) peer-reviewed publication about it; instead of doing research, he just contacts every newspaper he can find.

Many dinosaur paleontologists (including MSU's own Jack Horner) and taphonomists (researchers who specialize in studying fossil preservation, like myself) have looked at it, and there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever for any internal organs, or soft tissue for that matter (or impressions of either). So far, there is just sandstone filling in the inside of the skeleton (just like normal), and lots of skin impressions - its nothing new, as a matter of fact, just a better example than other dinosaur "mummies" (there are several known; additionally, the term 'mummy' is a misnomer in this case, something that Murphy unfortunately perpetuates; a mummy has dried out, dessicated soft tissue; there is no part of the animal other than bone, and surface impressions of skin on mudstone, made when the animal fell into the mud when or after it died).

ANYWAY, no matter how many actual paleontologists (Bob Bakker doesn't count) look at this thing and say "Nate, there's nothing aside from bones and skin impressions - no soft tissue, no impressions of internal organs", he ignores it, and another headline appears two days later titled "unique dinosaur mummy from montana preserved with internal organs", for the 24th time.

And in this case, he flat-out lied to the landowners, a HUGE no-no. Generally speaking, if there's any question of whether the landowners will want to keep the fossils after excavation, museum crews generally just avoid those lands. No paleontologist wants to spend a summer doing all the hard work to excavate an important new skeleton that may represent a new taxon just to have the landowner say at the end "oh ya, we're keeping that. Thanks for all the hard work, fellas." Odds are, if Murphy had just told them, they would have let him keep it, if he had been honest. If they were the type to prefer to keep it, he shouldn't have bothered with their land.

Ya know, I actually recall overhearing a conversation Murphy had with a professor from my department at the SVP meeting in 2006; Nate said something along the lines of "we just got a new dromaeosaurid skeleton out of the Judith River Formation, its a real beauty". It had been collected only a couple months before, I'm sure its the same thing.

Phew, I'm done.

Bobby

[tracer]

there's been some really interesting posts on the forum lately. too bad none of them were mine, but still...

[Guest Nicholas]

Thanks for the clarification Bobby, I understand why this would bother you so.

[Guest bmorefossil]

wow i never knew it was that bad, I know how it can be, here in Maryland we are not allowed to dig in the cliffs but that does not stop people, I have seen skulls destroyed, skeletons broken apart and verts taken, its horrible to see the wholes but I have seen people doing it!!!! Right in front of me, pretty sad.

[Traviscounty]

Saw this tidbit.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090415/ap_on_...6qVh1xVN5cPLBIF

[Guest solius symbiosus]

Merged for continuity.

[Frank Menser]

This is very troubling, especially when there is so much being done in the attempt to curtail fossil collecting in general from everyone except museums. I think every amateur collector would love to make a discovery even if the only reward is a tagged specimen on display at a college or state facility. Of course the thank you notes from the museums for the donations are kind of nice to have too. (I have several )

It's like most anything else where there is the possibility of a buck being made. Someone gets careless or greedy and then the rest of us have to deal with the fall out.

[mommabetts]

I think that they should not have taken the jail time out, this is not the first time that he has been caught. There is no telling how many times he has done this, he just got caught this time. From his record, I am sure he will keep doing it also, if they are just going to slap his wrist and say don't do this anymore.