DINOSAUR FRAUDS, HOAXES AND “FRANKENSTEINS”: HOW TO .

Number 2July 2008DINOSAUR FRAUDS, HOAXES AND “FRANKENSTEINS”: HOW TODISTINGUISH FAKE AND GENUINE VERTEBRATE FOSSILSMateus, O.1; Overbeeke, M.2 and Rita, F.31- Dept. of Earth Sciences (CICEGe-FCT), New University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal & Museu da Lourinhã, Rua João Luis de Moura, 2530-157 Lourinhã, Portugal.omateus@fct.unl.pt2- National Natural History Museum Naturalis, Leiden, The Netherlands & Faculty of Geosciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.m.overbeeke@hotmail.com3- Clínica Montepio, Caldas da Rainha, Portugal. fjrita@netvisao.ptABSTRACTDinosaurs and other fossils have been artificially enhanced, or totally forged, to increase their commercialvalue. The most problematic forgeries to detect are based on original fossils that are artificially assembled.Several techniques are suggested for detecting hoaxes: detailed visual examination, chemical analysis, Xray or CT-scan, and ultraviolet light.It is recommended that museums and paleontological researchers do not purchase and/or trade fossilslacking clear provenience information. Exceptions to that general rule should be closely examined usingtechniques described herein.RESUMO [in Portuguese]Os dinossauros e outros fósseis têm sido melhorados artificialmente ou completamente falsificados de formaa aumentar o seu valor comercial. As falsificações mais problemáticas são montagens artificiais de fósseisverdadeiros o que torna a detecção da fraude mais difícil. Várias técnicas são sugeridas para a detecçãodestes embustes: exame visual pormenorizado e crítico, análise química, raios X e tomografiacomputorizada e observação sob luz ultravioleta.Os investigadores e os museus de paleontologia são recomendados a não comprarem e comercializaremfósseis de proveniência duvidosa. Se isso for absolutamente necessário, sugere-se que efectuem os testesaqui sugeridos.SAMENVATTING [in Dutch]Dinosauriërs en andere fossielen worden mogelijk kunstmatig verbeterd, of compleet vervalst, om decommerciële waarde te verhogen. De meest problematische vervalsingen zijn gebaseerd op originelefossielen die kunstmatig zijn vervaardigd waardoor het lastig is om ze te identificeren als vervalsingen.Verschillende technieken zijn gesuggereerd om vervalsingen te herkennen: gedetailleerde en rationelevisuele inspectie, chemische analyse, X-ray of CT-scan, en ultraviolet licht.Paleontologen en musea worden aangeraden om geen fossielen aan te kopen en te verhandelen vantwijfelachtige herkomst. Als het absoluut nodig is, gebruik dan een gedetailleerde inspectie met detechnieken die hier beschreven staan.How to cite this article: Mateus, O.; Overbeeke, M. and Rita, F. 2008. Dinosaur Frauds, Hoaxes and “Frankensteins”: How to distinguishfake and genuine vertebrate fossils, Journal of Paleontological Techniques, 2: 1-5.www.jpaleontologicaltechniques.orgISSN: 1646-5806

Mateus et al, 2008: DINOSAUR FRAUDSINTRODUCTIONWHAT IS A FOSSIL FRAUD?The high economic value of rare fossilspecimens has fuelled their market value, firingthe imagination of fossil dealers and s. The production of fake fossilspecimens is particularly common in poorlydeveloped areas where fossil trading canrepresent one of the few ways to achieveeconomical survival. For example, China andMorocco are known to produce both genuineand fraudulent fossils, making the detection offake all the more difficult (Dalton, 2000, 2004a,2004b, Milner et al. 2001, Padian, 2000).Because complete specimens are rare, theycommand higher price. For this reason, forgersoften find it profitable to join multiplespecimens in order to assemble a fraudulentsingle skeleton that appears complete. Padian(2000) discusses in some detail the problematicnature of fossil trade and forgery with respectscience and education in the United States.The degree of fossil authenticity is broad,ranging from unadulterated fossils, to enhancedor merged original specimens, to completeforgeries containing no fossilized material at all.Milner et al. (2001) report several cases ofsculpted “fossils” from Asia, particularly fromChina.A subject of shame and embarrassment for theresearchers involved in their study, certainfrauds have been divulged to the public. Forexample, the famous “Piltdown Man”, a forgerymerging a modern human skull with the jaw ofan orangutan, was advanced as a singlespecimen of a putative primitive humanancestor that fooled anthropologists for decades(Weiner, 1955).One of the most conspicuous recent examplesof fraudulent composite dinosaur fossils is thefamous Archaeoraptor specimen from theLiaoning Province of China. This “discovery” wasthe subject of coverage by media sourcesincluding National Geographic and Nature(Rowe et al., 2001; Sloan, 1999; Zhou et al.,2002).Carefulexaminationsubsequentlyrevealed that the specimen represents at leasttwo and up to five, separate specimens thatwere fraudulently merged to assemble a single“individual” (Zhou et al., 2002).Fossil frauds are usually forged to obtain notonly profit, but also publicity. Cunning forgersmay put much training and effort to renderhoaxes as realistic as possible. Some forgedfossils are fantastically verisimilar to real fossilspecimens and may easily fool an incautiousfossil-buyer.The aim of this paper is to give the methodfraud recognition. The goal is to discussmethodology to detect frauds, and notdiscuss a buying setting, ethical behaviourseven to recommend how to buy fossils.2 Journal of Paleontological TechniquesofatoorA fraudulent fossil specimen is an object thathas been artificially transformed in order todeceive potential purchasers that it representsa genuine, unaltered fossil.There are three main kinds of hoaxes:1) Those that contain no original fossilmaterial, such as shapes carved in rock;2) Those that do contain original fossilmaterial, but are entirely or partially altered inorder to give the appearance of a morecomplete specimen (example: a sculpted carvedskull from a fragment of a limb-bone);3) Those that are true fossil but artificiallycombine from multiple individuals (mostly fromthe same species). Many of the most successfulfrauds are half-faked by incorporating generalfossil material to form a chimera. Such fraudsare more difficult to detect because they create“Frankenstein specimens” in which severalspecimens are joined to form a s monster created from parts ofseveral human individuals in the 1818 novel byMary Shelley. The chimera from the Greekmythology had different species parts: lionhead, posterior body of snake and main body ofa goat, while Frankenstein’s monster was ahuman made from parts of other humans.HOW TO DISTINGUISH FAKE AND REAL?To distinguish a real fossil from a fraud can bedifficult. Although many fraudulent fossils seemauthentic at first glance, with experience, onecan distinguish a fraud by simple observation.For those without such experience, a few simplebut effective techniques assessing specimenauthenticity are suggested here, including CTscans, acids, and UV-light.Close visual examination is capable of catchingmost attempts at fossil fraud. “Frankensteinfossils” can be distinguished with the nakedeye, or with the assistance of a microscope.Such fossils comprised of multiple individualsmerged into a single specimen can be detectedby identifying colour differences associated withdifferences in preservation. Colour differences

Mateus et al, 2008: DINOSAUR FRAUDScan be relatively minor, with one bone slightlydarker than the others, or major, preservingrange of different colours. Although suchforgeries can seem realistic to the untrainedeye, certain types of colour differences within agiven specimen are not natural, and present agood indication that the specimen is suspect.The completeness of a fossil skeleton can bethe first key in detecting a fraud. Althoughgenuine complete fossils are not unknown toscience, it is important to realize that suchfossils are rare and valuable. Not coincidentally,it is this rarity which encourages the forgery ofcomplete skeletons. Imperfections in fossilspecimens are often filled in with waxes, gluesor other materials (figure 1). Such media canbe used to attach two dissociated specimens, orto replace bones entirely. Detection of theseforgery techniques is often facilitated by using astereomicroscope or binocular lens, wherebywaxes are easily distinguished from true bonebased on their surface textures, reflectiveproperties, and colour patterns. Wax or gluecan also be distinguished from bone byscratching the surface carefully with a needle orairscribe. Bone tends to be harder and morebrittle than wax and inconsistencies in textureand scratch properties can often reveal areasfor concern.Figure 1. Forged assembled Psittacosaurus scapulocoracoidbased on genuine bone. Note the gap refilled by wax. Themiddle part of the shaft is slightly darker and the cracks arereddish, in contrast with the brownish cracks seen on otheraspects of the specimen. The crack shown in the inset isalso unnatural: it stops abruptly where the bone iscompleted by wax (specimen from private collection).Forgeries are often smoothed with sandpaper toblur the interface between true bone surfaceand filler materials. Whereas fossil bone surfacetexture tends to be coarse and rough, fossilbones treated in this manner take on a polishedsurface texture, devoid of natural imperfections.Excessive sanding may also reveal the internal3 Journal of Paleontological Techniquescortical bone texture. Inpremaxillae were sanded flat.figure2,theFigure 2. Forged assembled Psittacosaurus skull based ongenuine bone, in anterior view. The original bone was sandpapered.Sutures between bones, especially in the skull,are difficult to falsify and are often absent inforgeries. Forgers often use parts of real cranialbones in combination with other bonefragments (cranial or not) to create a skullshape, often quite realistic at first glance. Tocomplete the picture, forgeries are oftenencased in mixtures of sand and the actual rockmatrix encasing true fossils. For example,mosasaur bones and teeth from Morocco havebeen falsely assembled to create a toothbearing jaw. Cementing matrix around suchforgeries often makes them look moreauthentic, and teeth can even be prepared outof the matrix without it being obvious that theencasing “rock” is artificial. The false rockmatrix has a more plastic consistency, and theinterstices may retain wax or glue remains,which may be detectable during the regularpreparation process with airscribe.A simple chemical analysis can easily detectsuch frauds. Several acids, including formic acid(HCOOH, diluted to 20%), hydrochloric (HCl,diluted to 33%), acetic acid (CH3COOH, dilutedto 20%), can be applied to differentiate naturalfrom artificially cemented matrix. True rockmatrix and bone often reacts to the HCOOH andHCl, with small bubbles appearing on reactivesurfaces upon application. In contrast, mostwaxes, glues and artificial infill substances donot react to these acids. This convenient andinexpensivetestcanprovidenearlyinstantaneous detection of false materials. Inaddition, because many glues and waxes areinflammable, a simple lighter test can be usedto detect the use of such materials in suspectedforgeries. In these cases, glues and waxes oftenburn or melt when exposed to flame. Finally,acetone and other powerful organic solventscan be useful in the detection of artificiallycemented material associated with a suspectspecimen. These can easily reveal any paints, in