Why the World has to ignore David Peters and ReptileEvolution.com

I recently posted on Facebook
about ‘The first flightless pterosaur’ preprint on ResearchGate.net that then had 739 reads since 2018. Zero comments or questions. This is a Late Jurassic roadkill fossil, SoS 2428 which I studied firsthand on a trip to Germany in 2007 while attending a pterosaur symposium.

In response…

Paleoartist Nicole Birk-Miller
reposted Darren Naish’s Tetzoo.com 2020 webpage, “Why the World has to ignore David Peters and ReptileEvolution.com” which begins…”And so it is that I must once more write about the great eternal menace of our age: David Peters.”

So did Dr Naish.

My reply series follows:
“Alright let’s talk about Dr Naish’s take-down starting with the chicken skull. “in which he [David Peters] claimed to find new bones in the skull of the domestic chicken.” No new bones were claimed. Just the ones all tetrapods have or had. No ‘standard’ chicken skull was shown for comparison. The colorizing [of] bones is standard procedure now, especially for µCT scans.”

“Dr Naish’s caption: “some assorted 2020 images generated by Peters, depicting anurognathid pterosaurs. The selection of skulls at right reveal numerous oddities that sure look a hell of a lot like misinterpretation of damage. In contrast, Bennett’s reconstruction (in the grey box) looks sane and like a real creature. Note that Peters seriously promotes the existence of anurognathids with flat, disc-like skulls.” This is absolutely so! – except Bennett’s reconstruction puts the eyeball in the antorbital fenestra. He mistook the toothy maxilla for a giant sclerotric ring on the left. No such matching ring was found on the right. Click here for details:” http://reptileevolution.com/anurognathus-SMNS.htm

“Dr. Naish’s caption: “this illustration – produced by David Peters, depicting his interpretation of the Chinese anurognathid pterosaur Jeholopterus – reveals part of the problem. Peters is proud of this image (and others like it), and thinks that it demonstrates his ability to ‘find’ numerous tiny details ‘overlooked’ by other workers. But the details concerned are not genuine details of anatomy. This is a form of pareidolia.” The vague, small illustration in the upper left was the published image by the original authors in 2003. Again Dr Naish does not provide his interpretation of the crushed elements. That would have been the scientific method. Here’s the reconstruction when those crushed elements are assembled back to their invivo positions, and the soft tissue is real. I acknowledge all earlier errors. Everyone goes through a freshman learning phase. BTW: This is the vampire pterosaur Dr Naish reports, “experts dismiss.” The abstract states, “Unlike other pterosaurs, the hyper-extendable and flexible manual claws were capable of parallel insertion into a wall-like substrate, in this case, dinosaur skin. Pedal digit V was longer than in any other pterosaur, apparently to increase puncture leverage for anterior claw penetration, like a church key can opener. The sharp terminal phalanx of pedal digit V could be injected posteriorly for unshakable pedal adhesion.”

“Finally, let’s talk about Dr Naish, the author you cite. He earned his PhD and spent $$ to get it. I did not. If I were Dr Naish and some guy from the States came along and started publishing in all the top journals without putting in the years of low pay servitude grad students and PhD candidates go through, I, too, would feel cheated on both sides of the equation. If I were Dr Benton and some guy from the states just invalidated my Scleromochlus hypothesis for the origin of pterosaurs and dinosaurs, I would also enlist a young David Hone as my student to disrupt this intruder. And one more thought…”

“PS, Since Dr Nash brought in Dr Cau, let’s talk about the Andrea Cau phylogeny = cladogram published by Dr Naish in which Sharovipteryx and Cosesaurus arise from tanystropheids (as first published in Peters 2000), but Anurognathus, then Pteranodon + Eudimorphodon arise from Scleromochlus. Longisquama nests with Coelurosauravus. 1. No matrix was made available to study the scores Cau applied to the taxa. Errors and oversights might have been entered. Matrices for my cladogram are available either by email or at FigShare. 2. There is no indication that Cau examined Sharovipteryx, Cosesaurus and Longisquama firsthand. No specimen tracings are provided. No reconstructions are offered. 3. Too few pterosaurs were employed. Cau nested Triassic Eudimorphodon with Cretaceous Pteranodon and highly derived Late Jurassic Anurognathus was their last common ancestor. In contrast, I produced a cladogram of 2340 taxa that minimized taxon exclusion here: http://reptileevolution.com/reptile-tree.htm and one focused on 267 pterosaurs and their outgroups here: http://reptileevolution.com/reptile-tree.htm in which Triassic pterosaurs appear first, then Jurassic pterosaurs, then Cretaceous pterosaurs. Finally, please note that Scleromochlus has the tiniest hands and fingers and it lacks a pedal digit 5, which pretty much puts it out of contention to be a pterosaur ancestor. It is a bipedal basal crocodylomorph sharing a long list of traits with others of its kind.”

Dr Naish’s webpage was meant to be a take-down
of ‘an eternal menace.‘ Longtime readers will recognize that hyperbole and suppression are not part of the scientific method. Moreover any sort of emotion = feelings should be scrubbed out of any publication that purports to follow the scientific method.

_______

In conclusion, I’ll repeat,
“If I were Dr Naish and some guy from the States came along and started publishing in all the top journals without putting in the years of low pay servitude grad students and PhD candidates go through, I, too, would feel cheated on both sides of the equation. If I were Dr Benton and some guy from the states just invalidated my Scleromochlus hypothesis for the origin of pterosaurs and dinosaurs, I would also enlist a young David Hone as my student to disrupt this intruder.”

We are primates. Food, sex, habitat and status drive us. Recognize that in yourself and in others and you’ll be able to understand when we all go on the offensive/defensive.

“The flak only gets heavy when you’re over the target.”