15 February 2002
Groupthink: the Search for Archaeoraptor as a Metaphoric Tale
missing the link between "freedom fighters" and "terrorists"
- / -
The Archaeoraptor fossil hoax provides interesting learnings of how the best
and the brightest can be lured into false conclusions through improper handling
of evidence. It concerns the purported discovery of a bird-like dinosaur --
a much sought "missing link". The story of this particular hoax has
many elements that are instructive for those exploring the controversial boundaries
between "freedom fighters" and "terrorists", notably in
the light of the evidence collected by the intelligence agencies against networks
such as al-Qaida and those claimed to be supporting them.
In the case of the fossil, the question to be asked is why the scientific community
is so quick to embrace flawed evidence? And why would such a highly reputable
institution as the National Geographic Society fall short in its efforts to
verify such an amazing discovery? For creationists such as Charles Colson, the
answer is that: "They're desperate. You see, the lack of any evidence for
transitional forms is one of Darwinism's dirty little secrets, and some scientists
would do just about anything to keep it a secret--even to the point of fabricating
But the larger question is why this same pattern of thinking may be reflected
in the approach to evidence regarding the relationship between terrorists and
the historical figures in every country that -- after independence -- are presented
as heroic freedom fighters. There are many ironies to the pattern between the
On 15 October 1999, at a press conference in Washington D.C., the National
Geographic Society announced the discovery and interpretation of the newest
fossil called Archaeoraptor liaoningensis (meaning "ancient bird of prey
from Liaoning"). The press conference coincided with the November 1999 issue
of National Geographic magazine and its article "Feathers for T. rex?
New birdlike fossils are missing links in dinosaur evolution." According
to National Geographic, Archaeopter ". . . is a true missing
link in the complex chain that connects dinosaurs to birds. It seems to capture
the paleontological `moment' when dinosaurs were becoming birds." According
to their press release, the anatomy of Archaeoraptor proves a feathered
theropod dinosaur was capable of flight. It was "perhaps the best evidence since
Archaeopteryx that birds did, in fact, evolve from certain types of carnivorous
Much to the embarrassment of all concerned, several lines of evidence subsequently
revealed Archaeoraptor to be a forgery in which bones of a primitive
bird and a non-flying dromaeosaurid dinosaur had been deliberately combined.
The fossil reportedly came from Early Cretaceous beds of China that have produced
other spectacular fossils transitional between birds and extinct non-avian dinosaurs.
Chinese paleontologist Xu Xing, a doctoral student at the Institute of Vertebrate
Paleontology and Paleoanthropology (Beijing) subsequently contended that Archaeoraptor
is a combination of two fossils: one of the body and head of a birdlike creature
and the other of the tail of a dinosaur. Xing said he had found another fossil,
in a private collection in China, that was the mirror image of the supposed
tail of the Archaeoraptor. He stated:
After observing a new feathered dromaeosaur specimen in a private collection
and comparing it with the fossil known as Archaeoraptor [pages 100-101],
I have concluded that Archaeoraptor is a composite. The tail portions
of the two fossils are identical, but other elements of the new specimen are
very different from Archaeoraptor, in fact more closely resembling
Sinornithosaurus. Though I do not want to believe it, Archaeoraptor
appears to be composed of a dromaeosaur tail and a bird body.'
National Geographic magazine published a note in its March 2000 issue
saying that CT scans of the fossil appear to confirm Xing's observations and
"revealed anomalies in the fossil's reconstruction."The magazine said details
"will be published as soon as the studies are completed."
The discovery that it was a hoax resulted in a barrage of comment from the
creationist community. With the publication of "Feathers for T. rex?"
by Christopher P. Sloan in its November 1999 issue, National Geographic
was considered to have reached an all-time low for engaging in sensationalistic,
unsubstantiated, tabloid journalism.
It is useful to explore the parallels, in the treatment of the evidence, between
the approach to the fossil and the approach to terrorism. [A more extensive
review of distortion in the handling of evidence is presented in https://www.laetusinpraesens.org/docs/evidence.php]:
Prestigious institution: The hoax centres on the investigations instigated
by the National Geographic Society as the "world's largest nonprofit scientific
and educational organization". In the case of the investigation of terrorism,
it centres on the prestigious Central Intelligence Agency and its associated
Use of top specialists: The National Geographic Society charged the
"top American specialists in the field" -- from the world's superpower
-- with verifying the facts using the most rigorous methodology. In 150 years
it had never been associated with misrepresentation of facts to the public.
According to President George Bush, the CIA deployed every possible specialist
resource to review the evidence concerning terrorism following the 11th September
Use of best high-tech: The fossil was studied, using high-resolution
X-ray CT analysis, at the University of Texas -- uniquely equipped with the
best technology in the world for this purpose [more].
The investigation into terrorism was conducted using an amazing array of high
tech communications and surveillance equipment, including the full resources
of Echelon and the renowned computers of the National Security Agency.
Deadline: The National Geographical Society needed answers fast -- for
a publication deadline. The American intelligence community needed answers fast
to respond to public anxiety concerning government action on terrorism.
Blame shifting: Once the hoax was exposed all those involved shifted
into high gear in terms of behind the scenes finger pointing and blame shifting.
In the case of 11th September, and the much discussed failure of the intelligence
community, a similar pattern was evident.
Groupthink: The announcement of the "missing link" by one
of the most prestigious, widely-known, and highly-respected American institutions,
resulted in unquestioning acceptance of the evidence as presented. Some critics,
such as creationists, have wondered how open the academic community would have
been to their comments once the announcement had been made. Similarly, in the
follow-up to the 11th September attacks, every pronouncement by the CIA or the
FBI has been treated as factual -- despite a succession of embarrassments, notably
regarding the identities of a number of the suiciding highjackers subsequently
found to be elsewhere and alive.
Inappropriate questions: Clearly those specialists seeking to confirm
the validity of the fossil discovery locked themselves into a pattern of asking
the wrong questions -- and were delighted with the answers that they received
as a result. In the case of the investigation of the 11th September attacks,
a whole array of answers has been provided which have been questioned in various
ways by non-Americans. As with the Oklahoma bombing, the anthrax attack is proving
to be of quite different origin than was suggested by initial answers to preferred
questions about it.
"Distant whistleblowing": Surprisingly it was not the "top
American specialists in the field", but a distant doctoral student in what
might be rated by them as a low-tech Third World country, who raised doubts
regarding the authenticity of the fossil and showed it to be a fake. And in
the case of chains of evidence regarding terrorist networks and links, notably
in relation to Iraq's support, it was in Third World countries that questions
were asked about the quality of the evidence regarding such links -- views later
echoed by some in European countries.
Necessary field work: Establishing that the fossil was fraudulent required
investigative work "in the field" and "on the ground" in
the area from which the fossil was supposed to derive. This was undertaken by
a non-American sensitive to the socio-economic conditions of the peasants that
provided many similar fossils. Understanding the nature of "terrorists"
might also be assumed to require work "in the field" in those areas
that engender views distinct from the American worldview. It was made clear
that the American intelligence community had few people capable of speaking
the language of the culture engendering "terrorists" and was therefore
ill-equipped to visit their communities and understand the conditions under
which they lived.
Financial rewards: The National Geographic's publishing deadline
was tied to the urgencies of its revenue generation process. This curtailed
the research and inhibited follow-up of any contra-indications. The peasants
locating such fossils were intimately involved in fossil "assembly"
because of the higher financial rewards for "complete" rather than
"incomplete" fossils. Many of the Chinese fossil birds on the commercial
market have some "reconstruction" to make them more saleable. The
illegal yet highly profitable market of Chinese bird fossils has enticed the
local farmers into creating marketable fossils, real or not. In contrast, the
intelligence services seeking "evidence" for terrorism made very extensive,
and urgent, use of financial rewards to those providing any form of information
(although the $25 million offered for Osama bin Laden does not seem to have
been sufficient). It might be asked to what degree such rewards biased the nature
of any "fruitful" information they were offered by those desiring
to benefit from them.
Reconstructive technology: Those who derive benefit, whether academic
or financial, from fossil forgery now have access to a range of technologies,
including adhesives and fake rock, that make it difficult to spot forgeries
without the use of X-rays. Similarly the technologies available to intelligence
agencies, seeking to fabricate evidence in support of their own interpretations,
have now become extremely sophisticated.
"Glue": The different pieces of the fossil were glued together
to present the alluring evidence for a bird-dinosaur. How is it that the best
specialists did not detect the problematic nature of the joints in their extremely
detailed examination of the fossil -- using the best methodologies and equipment
in the world? In presenting a coherent case for the nature of the terrorist
threat, how is it that the intelligence specialists of the world's superpower
remain inattentive to the nature of the "adhesive" holding the facts
together -- as repeatedly pointed out by critics in other countries?
Inconsistencies: The pieces of the composite fossil forgery subsequently
revealed structural inconsistencies that had been ignored in the initial enthusiasm
about its significance. The coherence of the terrorist hypothesis attached to
al-Qaida has justified a massive war effort -- despite inconsistences in the
nature of the pattern of evidence sustaining that coherence, and on which a
Senate committee has subsequently been asked to report.
Deception: In justifying their "honest mistake", those who
had been deceived by the fossil claimed that it had clearly been constructed
by someone who was both highly intelligent and competent -- and well-informed
about anatomy. The intelligence services have claimed that those behind the
11th September attacks were also highly intelligent, both as planners and in
their understanding of the "anatomy" of large buildings and their
vulnerabilities to massive destruction. But, as specialists in deception themselves,
it might also be asked whether the counter-intelligence services are fully aware
of the level of deception to which they may have been exposed in their evaluation
of the pattern of facts and chains of evidence.
Misunderstanding composites: imposing a desired pattern on the evidence
The clues, partly detected by the Chinese palaeontologist, and subsequently
so obvious to others, included the following:
- curious mirror symmetry between leg parts
- equivalence between rock cracking patterns
- the supposed tail of Archaeoraptor matched the tail of a small dinosaur
from the same type of rock where Archaeoraptor had been found
- nature of the non-junction between the upper "bird" part of the
fossil and the lower "dinosaur" part
The question is whether those locked into groupthink would have asked the questions
Xu Xing asked, as a doctoral student, and reached the conclusions he reached
-- or whether they would have only seen what they so desperately wanted to see.
In the current focus on terrorism, the most fundamental unasked question is
how to handle the complex conceptual interface between "terrorist"
and "freedom fighter". What is the nature of the junction between
these two value-charged categories? For Americans the question is highly sensitive
because of their systematic pattern of denial (repeatedly analyzed by Noam Chomsky)
regarding their own admitted official involvement in "terrorism",
notably in Latin America in the 1980's. Whose freedom were they fighting for?
How should such categories be applied to the earlier relationship between the
American pioneers and the Indians into whose territories they encroached?
It is interesting to see the dinosaur part of the fossil as a metaphor of all
the retrograde qualities carried by the notion of "terrorist". The
rapacious dinosaurs could certainly be considered as the ultimate "terrorists"
of their period. Evolutionists would like to see them as having evolved into
birds -- the ultimate symbol of freedom in the modern world, as epitomized by
the dove. The transition from any pre-revolutionary perception of a "terrorist"
to a post-revolutionary (if successful !) perception of a heroic "freedom
fighter" is extremely difficult to handle within any discipline or mode
of discourse. There are however many concrete examples in each country that
has gone through this independence process -- as perhaps best epitomized by
Nelson Mandela. Precisely what defines terrorism is not always a matter of universal
agreement. In the words of a much-quoted observation: One man's terrorist is
another man's freedom fighter. Acknowledged terrorists are even awarded the
Nobel Peace Prize -- as are some, notably in the USA, that are accused of supporting
For the western world at this time, there is therefore a major problem with
handling any composite "terrorist/freedom fighter". Although evolutionists
welcome "transition forms" such as Archaeoraptor, the corresponding
term most used by those familiar with any "terrorist/freedom fighter"
is "ambiguity". A particular individual may indeed engage in actions
which could be most easily characterized as "terrorist" -- or others
more easily considered characteristic of "freedom fighter". Indeed
this ambiguity may even be present in the psychology of a successful "freedom
fighter". Many American movies have focused on the ambiguity in dangerous
convicted criminals conscripted into dangerous military action in heroic service
of their country.
But now that countries have all achieved their independence, in the western
world at least, the notion of "freedom fighter" is an unwelcome one
in free societies bedevilled by urban and other forms of violence. It is fine
to have national heroes in the past who might today be labelled as "freedom
fighters". But in fact the heroic figures from the past are not labelled
in this way -- just as "terrorist" is not used to label other historical
figures. Both are relatively new terms.
It is therefore vital, especially for those who fear social unrest -- as exemplified
by the opposition to corporate globalization -- to discover a new composite
form in which the concepts of "terrorist" and "freedom fighter"
are conflated. And if the evidence for this is inadequate or flawed -- then
it must necessarily be provided and reinforced by whatever means are necessary.
Those aspiring actively, in an unwelcome manner, to freedom -- "the freedom
flighters" -- must be grafted onto "terrorists" as the rapacious
dinosaurs of modern society. By associating any protester, endeavouring to occupy
the moral high ground, with this hybrid, such higher aspirations can be successfully
condemned by the lower associations.
There is a further irony to the comparison of the two stories in that it is
the creationists, especially in America, who are most critical of such fossil
evidence for evolution. On the other hand it is precisely those associated with
fundamentalist Christianity in America -- and supportive of creationist views
of evidence against evolution -- who have been most active in assessing evidence
for political views out of sympathy with their own as "evil" and "terrorist".
Archetypal twist: bird-like dragons
Composites, like the sphinx, are of fundamental importance to the kind of individual
psychic integration explored by C G Jung and others interested in the myths
of cultures around the world. But the Knights Templar and the Freemasons fell
victim to much-publicized misunderstanding of composite icons central to their
Just as the relationship of dragons and dinsosaurs has long been a theme of
speculation, there is a long tradition of mythical beasts combining bird-like
aspects (symbolic of more evolved awareness) with those of more savage animals
(symbolic of nature in the raw). The case of Archaeoraptor may well prove
to be part of that symbolic process:
- At the dawn of Christianity, dragons were portrayed as two-footed lizards
and as lion-like beasts. The early Egyptian dragons were serpent-like, the
Babylonian beast was a composite mammal-reptile, early Indian mythology depicted
crocodile-dragons, and South American dragons were decidedly bird-like. The
Chinese Lung dragon was - and is - a composite of nine different animals.
- The griffin or gryphon is a mythical quadruped with the foreparts of an
eagle and the rear, tail and hindquarters of a lion. The griffin has profound
poetic and religious significance. In classic mythology griffins were guardians
of Scythian gold treasures and in Greece were the guardians of godly treasures.
Griffins sat at the feet of Apollo, held a paw on the zodiac and emitted light.
The hounds of Zeus were akin to griffins and guarded tombs. The duality bird-lion
may denote divinity and mortality, a theme that reverberates in Christianity.
- Garuda, the Devourer, was originally an ancient Hindu sun symbol, half vulture,
half-man, who served as the vehicle of the god Vishnu and his wife, Lakshmi,
and lived on a diet of nagas (snakes), the ultimate creatures of the earth.
In Buddhist belief, Garuda became the vehicle of Vajrapani and, paired with
a twin, the symbol of the transcendent Buddha Amoghasiddhi.
The significance of the challenge, framed by palaeontologists as the search
for the "missing link", may be more fruitfully understood in terms
of the psycho-cultural integration explored by Jung and others for individuals.
But there may well be a "missing link" to be found in the psychic
integration of humanity as a whole. Similarly the challenge of relating and
distinguishing those characteristics of humans framed by the archetypes of the
honourable "freedom fighter" and the dishonourable "terrorist"
may also require understandings from disciplines of the psyche.
In both cases efforts to conflate and confuse the categories, or to maintain
the distinctions rationally, may be doomed to failure. A different approach
is required to understand the nature of the "missing link". It may
require new thinking.
It is therefore interesting to consider the resources being allocated by the
American military to "psychological operations" to deal with those
that oppose them. These may include blackening the character of opponents by
whatever means possible. Opposing leaders may be falsely accused of extreme
mistreatment of women, psychoses, cannibalism, and the like. All evidence relating
to matters touching on "national security" has now become questionable.
But, as with the activities of the intelligence agencies, little effort is however
made to focus on the nurturing of such a vital link -- perhaps tantamount to
(re)growing the broken spinal cord between the two extremes of the human psyche.
The broken junction between the unrelated fossil parts does indeed symbolize
a larger challenge -- above all in the light of the hopes of evolutionists that
they should be organically joined.
There have been relatively few comments on the psycho-cultural dimensions of
the crisis in world society associated with the 11th September attacks and the
It may be useful to see the evocation of "evil", as an explanatory
factor for the USA and the UK, as associated with the kinds of dimensions that
C G Jung was wont to explore. Unwittingly, it is possible that George Bush is
re-legitimizing the kinds of mythical dimensions which help to reframe and re-enchant
a society that has grown increasingly alienating and meaningless under the homogenizing
influences of cultural imperialism.
The danger is that simplistic imposition of patterns of explanation may be
used to determine social policy. Efforts may be made to manage the instabilities
of society by the invention of novel threats and the fabrication of disasters.
The learnings from the simple tale of the Archaeoraptor forgery may
be useful in distinguishing meaningful conclusions from those that are simply
the wishful thinking of those in desperate need of simplicity and quick fixes.
In July 2004, over two years after the above paper was completed,
two formal investigations were completed into the intelligence processes
in the USA and the UK that had resulted in the interventions in Iraq
in 2003. Both of these emphasized the role of "groupthink" --
as explored in the above article.
USA: A US Senate Intelligence Committee investigation report
on the U.S. Intelligence Community's Pre-War Assessments on Iraq,
9 July 2004) concluded that the principal claims justifying the invasion
of Iraq -- that Saddam Hussein had biological and chemical weapons
and was developing nuclear weapons -- were fundamentally wrong and
the result of a "global intelligence failure". The report placed most
of the blame on the CIA, which it notably faulted for a tendency to
cling to the conventional wisdom, or "groupthink", about Saddam's weapons
programme. One Senator commented: "Leading up to September 11,
our government didn't connect the dots. In Iraq, we are even more culpable
because the dots themselves never existed" [more]
Senator Jay Rockefeller report, while not specifically addressing it,
made it clear that a kind of intelligence community "groupthink" affected
not just the U.S. agencies, but also "extended to our allies and to
the United Nations and several other nations as well, all of whom did
believe that Saddam Hussein had active WMD programs. This was a global
intelligence failure" [more | more]
UK: In the report Lord Butler's Review
of Intelligence of Weapons of Mass Destruction (13 July
2004) specifically warned of the risk of group think in the UK
intelligence service. He recommended that a "structured challenge" and
a "Devil's advocate"
approach should be built in to how the intelligence community develops
its evidence. The manner whereby the UK government and its intelligence
service convinced itself of the need to invade Iraq now appears to
be a classic case of group think. [more | more]
Question: With respect to what other topics do governments and
intergovernmental agencies become locked into group think? Are examples
of groupthink to be found in relation to overpopulation, environmental
degradation, exploitation of non-renewable resources, pension funds,
health, global warming, etc?
Steven A. Austin. Archaeoraptor: Feathered Dinosaur from National Geographic
Doesn't Fly. March 2000, Institute for Creation Research [text]
Charles Colson. The Archaeoraptor Fraud: This Bird Will Never Fly. Conerstone
Church Online. 31 January 2000 [text]
Tim Friend. Dinosaur-bird link smashed in fossil flap. USA Today [text]
Jeff Hecht. Piltdown bird. New Scientist, 29 January 2000 [text]
R. Monastersky. All mixed up over birds and dinosaurs. Science News Online,
15 January 2000 [text]
National Geographic News. Archaeoraptor Statement. 3 February 2000 [text]
The Archaeoraptor Fraud of National Geographic Magazine: the "Piltdown
Archaeoraptor Was Used to Brainwash School Children For Many Years? [text]
Kristin Leutwyler. The Jigsaw Fossil Part dinosaur, part bird? All wishful
thinking. Remains dubbed Archaeoraptor liaoningensis are a hoax. Scientific
Corey S. Powell. It's a Bird, It's a...Dinosaur? Fossil finds heat up the
debate over the origins of our feathered friends. Scientific American [text]
High-Resolution X-ray CT Analysis of the Archaeopter Forgery [text]
The Archaeoraptor Hoax: Why "Scientists Had Previously Thought" is Such A
Commonly Used Phrase in Articles About Science [text]