Imminent FulfillmentImmortality,  Safety, Empowerment, Equality, KnowledgeUnity, Society

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to
  one who is striking at the root."
- Henry David Thoreau
Site Sections, Subject List, Reading Sequence, and Article Synopses

Miscellaneous Articles

Can We Agree on these?
Critical Issues
Unity Agreement Outline
Valid vs feaux intellectuals
Some Atheist Questions
What is a Prophet?
Cult Assessment Criteria
The Brothers Karamazov
Critique of A New Earth
Buddhist Violence
Some Pertinent Parables
Euhemerism & Catastrophe
Ancient Scholastics
Thoughts on Meditation
Kahlil Gibran on Law
The Great Pyramid
Brother? James Ossuary
Model for Visions & Dreams
Modern Echoes-Catastrophe
The Bergamo Experience
In Search of Moses
Personal Experience
Why I'm not Christian
Importance of Catastrophism
Ancient Explosion Reports
How the World Will End
Unity Church Letter
Reactionary Feminism
Some Conclusions
Pensée Journal Issues
Video-lecture links

A Challenge to Papers on Growth of Dinosaurs
Published: December 16, 2013

A dinosaur hobbyist who made his name as a Microsoft multimillionaire published a scientific paper on Monday alleging “serious errors and irregularities” in dinosaur research involving some of the world’s top paleontologists.

Nathan P. Myhrvold, formerly of Microsoft, says he found discrepancies in papers on the growth rates of dinosaurs.

The research, some of it dating to the 1990s, analyzed skeletons of different ages to estimate how quickly dinosaurs grew. For example,a 2001 paper, published in the journal Nature, estimates that the giant dinosaur Apatosaurus had a growth spurt of 12,000 pounds in a year.

The papers, particularly a 2004 paper in Nature on the growth of Tyrannosaurus Rex, were influential in offering an explanation for why some dinosaurs were much larger than their relatives and slashed decades off the estimated life span of the creatures.

The accuser is Nathan P. Myhrvold, a former chief technology officer at Microsoft who is well known in the worlds of avant-garde cuisine and patent law. The lead author of the papers in question is Gregory M. Erickson, a professor of anatomy and paleobiology at Florida State University.

Dr. Myhrvold’s article, published by the journal PLoS One, says Dr. Erickson’s papers contain major mistakes, including graphs that do not match the data and curves that do not match the reported equations. And Dr. Myhrvold’s revised estimates put the maximum growth rate of Apatosaurus at about a tenth of what Dr. Erickson and his colleagues had reported.

Dr. Erickson declined to be interviewed, but issued an email statement noting that the papers had been the work of teams of scientists and had been peer-reviewed.

Dr. Myhrvold’s “reinterpretation of our data, although reaching moderately different conclusions on a species by species basis, strongly supports the cardinal conclusions that we reached regarding how dinosaurs grew,” the statement said. “The bottom line is that the empirical findings of our research group stand, and we stand behind them.”

Dr. Myhrvold, a physicist, said he was not accusing Dr. Erickson  or his collaborators of deliberately falsifying or manipulating data, because he could not know how the errors occurred. But in a letter to Nature, Science, PLOS One and other journals that published Dr. Erickson’s work, he raised the possibility.

“At the very least these problems are serious errors that merit correction in the literature,” he wrote. “The problems also appear to be consistent with scientific misconduct, which may factor into any resulting investigation.”

Last week, Dr. Myhrvold emailed the scientists who had collaborated with Dr. Erickson on the papers to alert them. “I tried very hard to reproduce the results of these papers,” he told them, “and I failed to do so.” In exhaustively describing what he thought were mistakes in the papers, Dr. Myhrvold wrote, “This includes cases where the data set appears to have been altered or fabricated.”

Some of Dr. Erickson’s co-authors agree that the papers have errors that should be corrected. “I’ll be interested to see how Greg responds scientifically to Nathan’s claims,” said Kristina A. Curry Rogers, a professor of geology at Macalester College in St. Paul, who was a co-author of the 2001 paper in Nature. “If he has data to the contrary, then he can present that. If he does not, then he can explain that.”

Dr. Curry Rogers said Dr. Myhrvold had provided ample information and explanation backing up his assertions. “All his methods are laid bare,” she said. “Anyone who wants to challenge him can do it.”

Other co-authors of Dr. Erickson’s include Mark A. Norell, chairman of paleontology at the American Museum of Natural History; Philip J. Currie, a professor of dinosaur paleobiology at the University of Alberta; and Peter J. Makovicky, associate curator of paleontology at the Field Museum in Chicago.

Dr. Myhrvold said he had raised some of the issues a year ago with Dr. Makovicky, who promptly acknowledged the errors and was amenable to correcting them.

In an interview, Dr. Makovicky confirmed that “There is some kind of mismatch in our paper,” adding that another team member had done the statistical analysis. “He’s right on that point. I didn’t produce those numbers. I can’t tell you why.” He added, “I’m happy to ’fess up.”

After leaving Microsoft, Dr. Myhrvold founded Intellectual Ventures, a company that buys patents from inventors. It has been praised for defending the patents, but also derided as a “patent troll” for using them to extract lucrative fees from technology companies.

He also created “Modernist Cuisine,” a six-volume opus on the science of cooking, and he has published papers on a range of academic topics including climate change, terrorism and dinosaurs. In 1997, his computer models suggested that giant sauropod dinosaurs could have flicked their tails at supersonic speeds.

About two and half years ago, Dr. Myhrvold came across a 2009 paper by Dr. Erickson as he was trying to answer the question, “Why were dinosaurs big?” He said data in two of the graphs, one plotting the length of the thigh bone versus age, the other mass versus age, conflicted with each other. “I instantly knew that this couldn’t be correct,” Dr. Myhrvold said.

Dr. Myhrvold said he contacted Dr. Erickson, asking for the original data. While Dr. Erickson answered some questions, he said the data was on a computer he had gotten rid of and later that he did not have time to answer more questions, Dr. Myhrvold said.

Dr. Myhrvold was able to obtain some of the data from other researchers and thought he could do a better statistical analysis. Last year, he submitted a paper with his calculations — a fairly esoteric scientific disagreement about how best to extract reasonable generalizations from a limited number of fossils.

Dr. Erickson was one of the reviewers and argued strongly against publication. While praising Dr. Myhrvold’s accomplishments and saying the calculations appeared to be numerically correct, Dr. Erickson said the paper would not advance scientific understanding.

“In fact it will hurt our field by producing inherently flawed growth curves, misrepresenting the work of others, and stands to drive a wedge between labs that are currently cordial with one another,” he wrote


Site note: The last statement by Dr. Erickson seems to be a travesty that infects so much of what has now become the religion of scientism. "Science" and its politics has now become more important than truth! Suppressing information, criticizing valid challenges, and resistig and marginalizing the challengers has now become acceptable for keeping the "cordiality". More of the age-old poisonous thinking.

Home  Site Sections  Complete Article Map   Contact  Store  Contributions