Czytaj książkę: «Too Big to Walk»
Copyright
William Collins
An imprint of HarperCollinsPublishers
1 London Bridge Street
London SE1 9GF
This eBook first published in Great Britain by William Collins in 2018
Text © Brian J. Ford 2018
Photographs © Individual copyright holders
Cover image © Natural History Museum, London/Science Photo Library
Brian J. Ford asserts the moral right to be identified as the author of this work
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
While every eff ort has been made to trace the owners of copyright material reproduced herein, the publishers will be glad to rectify any omissions in future editions.
All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. By payment of the required fees, you have been granted the non-exclusive, non-transferable right to access and read the text of this e-book on screen. No part of this text may be reproduced, transmitted, down-loaded, decompiled, reverse engineered, or stored in or introduced into any information storage and retrieval system, in any form or by any means, whether electronic or mechanical, now known or hereinafter invented, without the express written permission of HarperCollins.
Source ISBN: 9780008218935
Ebook Edition © May 2018 ISBN: 9780008218911
Version: 2019-05-17
Contents
Cover
Title Page
Copyright
Preface
Chapter 1: Dinosaurs and the Ancients
Chapter 2: Emerging from the Shadows
Chapter 3: The Public Eruption
Chapter 4: Great American Discoveries
Chapter 5: Drifting Continents
Chapter 6: Reptile Dysfunction
Chapter 7: How Microbes Made the World
Chapter 8: Wading with Dinosaurs
Chapter 9: Copulating Colossus
Chapter 10: Truth Will Out
Chapter 11: The Life and Death of Dinosaurs
Notes
Picture Section
Index
About the Author
About the Publisher
Preface
This is the updated, second edition of a book I didn’t want to publish. For decades I deliberated on the giant dinosaurs, pondering as the palæontologists unveiled their findings, and it was obvious that they were getting dinosaurs wrong. I waited for the truth to dawn, but it didn’t happen. The scientific evidence is now clear – the way dinosaurs are explained is incorrect. So this book has a bold and irreverent aim, for it sets out to demolish our present-day orthodoxies and to create a radical new view of how dinosaurs developed and the way they lived their lives. I am also launching a startling theory which shows how we have misunderstood the Cretaceous period, that great era when the gigantic dinosaurs held sway. Our current understanding is fundamentally misconstrued: the environment was different; the climate was different; the landscape was different. Dinosaurs were different. Everything we know about the age of the dinosaurs is misconceived, and producing this book has been the only way to revolutionize this entire scientific discipline. It has been a colossal undertaking.
We are going to travel back in time to see how the development of our planet was determined, how fossils were discovered, and how science started to understand evolution and the way the world became the way it is. As we set out on this extraordinary journey, I would like to thank the many dinosaur specialists around the world who have assisted with advice. Truly, I’d like to very much; but I cannot. None of them helped – instead, every dinosaur expert has attacked this new theory whenever it has appeared (or tried to). Those palæontologists around the world are so very antagonistic to every word within, that you may have pebbles thrown at your windows if one of them spies this book in your room. This iconoclastic review has been the target of bitter hostility and the most vitriolic insults, though my inquiries into dinosaurs were never intended to be about controversy, but simply about debating how those massive monsters evolved and how they lived their remarkable lives.
There is clearly a requirement for a detailed explanation of dinosaur research. As Larry Witham has pointed out: ‘It is bad news to science museums when four in ten Americans believe humans lived with dinosaurs.’1 There is certainly a need for a survey of the whole field, dating back to prehistory, looking at the pioneers and the early discoveries, and following how opinions have changed over the years.
Why did this study of such colossal creatures capture my attention, since I am a biologist preoccupied by the smallest microscopic living organisms – single cells? Dinosaurs were the largest animals ever, and should be far from my central interests. Yet there is a link between monstrous dinosaurs and microscopic cells. In 1993, Dippy the Diplodocus in the Natural History Museum in London had her tail raised. This long tail had rested on the floor since the skeleton was transferred to the entrance hall in 1979, but research had since shown that the tail could not have been like that in life. And so, in 1993 the massive tail was raised aloft, securely supported by stout steel. People looking at the skeleton found themselves imagining the fossil clothed in muscly flesh, the dinosaur sheathed in warty skin as it snarled at visitors. Not me: I always envisioned a minute microscopic muscle inside the tail, each one endlessly burning glucose to provide metabolic energy at a furious rate as it remained resolutely contracted, struggling to hold the heavy tail up against the downward clutch of gravity. No animal evolves to do this: half the dinosaur’s intake of food would be expended by the effort of simply holding the tail up in the air. Try standing erect with your arms held straight out sideways and see how long you manage. That standard view of dinosaurs was impossible. It was the single cell that proved it.
Dinosaurs have long been fantasized about by scientists. Palæontologists have been circulating silly stories about dancing dinosaurs and their complex sex lives and these scientists create complex caricatures of lifestyles that are based on nothing more than wishful thinking or idle guesswork. We need scientific evidence for our statements, and for the present-day theories there is little scientific backing. Every textbook and television documentary ever produced, all the sci-fi movies, newspaper and magazine articles published around the world, and every display in museums and theme parks, all are fundamentally misconstrued. What we have been taught about dinosaurs is wrong.
When I proposed my new theory, it was greeted by a hail of invective. ‘Who the hell …?’ demanded one commentator online; ‘WTF …?’ said another. The theory is ‘a rotting corpse’ and ‘a silly idea’ and reporting this ‘dinosaur nonsense’ is ‘bad science journalism’, while ‘Brian Ford’s wild, ignorant, uninformed speculation’ became the target for a petition signed by palæontologists all around the world and sent to the BBC after they broadcast an interview about it all. ‘The BBC and everyone else who carried this story should be ashamed,’ announced the palæontologists. The BBC carefully considered the petition, and said they felt that ‘Brian Ford was unlikely to be put off by the condemnation of the established experts.’ On that occasion, the BBC was right.
We like to think that revolutionary scientific theories are seized with open arms, but they are usually crushed by conventional conformity. There is a reason. In science you receive your funds for routine research that has a tried-and-tested track record; there is no academic support for something unexpected. Publications in science are subject to peer review, which means that a paper must proceed through a sequence of checks – carried out by the existing authorities in your field – before it is possible to publish. This is a sensible safeguard against an editor (who may know little of the topic) publishing something that’s muddle-headed or wrong. Writers have often said to me that they love the internet, because they can publish whatever they like without the intervention of an editor; believe me, that is why there is so much rubbish on the web. Editors are a scientist’s best friend. They can detect the infelicities that your readers would spot in an instant. I write a regular column in America and my editor in Chicago, Dean Golemis, has an editorial eye eagles would envy. In this book, after all its conventional processing, Golemis corrected dozens of infelicities others had missed. Never edit your own writing!
Yet peer review has a downside. If you are publishing a new theory which says, in essence, that the authorities in your field are heading the wrong way, then obviously they aren’t guaranteed to agree. An iconoclastic new theory is likely to be squashed before it gains currency. Establishment academics need to keep things under control or they lose their authority and, worse still, their funding. Although the opinion of our peers may guard against our publishing hastily, it can also conceal crucial new concepts. Peer review has become the single most pervasive obstacle to revolution in science.
It is also being seized upon as the key to success – not for the academics alone, but for the online community of entrepreneurs. Hundreds of newly invented journals with names conjured up to seem prestigious are being set up around the world. They send dignified missives to eminent professors, inviting them to become editorial advisers, and soon establish an editorial board of great names. The typefaces are chosen for their elegant and refined lines, and four-figure fees are demanded from authors for open-access publication. Apart from the time taken to set up and format the website, the running costs are minimal. Whereas an established scientific journal has high costs for paper and production, and for binding and distribution, these online enterprises have negligible outgoings and almost all the work is done by vain volunteers eager to see their names on the editorial page. The profits to the proprietor are immense. Their key to success lies in the extreme gullibility of scientists, to whom publishing peer-reviewed papers matters more than anything else. This emergent form of scientific publishing is a racket and it is exploiting the naïve vanity of academics and dignifying their hollow enterprise with the touchstone of peer review. Millions are being made every day because of this futile faith in a questionable concept.
Part of the problem is the lack of scientific awareness on the part of the media, which allows outrageous flights of fancy to proceed unchallenged. In any other field of endeavour – sport or politics, economics or art – commentators are quick to pounce on any infelicity and argue the toss with the most eminent of authorities. Politicians can hardly get a word in these days. But in the specialist sciences? The interviewers simply trot along lamely, asking anodyne questions, and allowing duplicitous answers to float away like smoke in summer sunshine, so that the scientist is confident they can say what they want. This is why pictures of imaginary planets feature in specialist magazines and newspapers, and on television, which have no basis whatever in reality. Scientists can get away with anything in this ignorant world, and dinosaur palæontologists have exploited that to the full. Most of what they tell us is fake news, stories spun to perpetuate their income and preserve their mystique.
In this book we will discover the facts about the way new knowledge was nudged from the revelations of research. We will see how philosophers came to realize how the Earth had changed, how the climate had altered, and how scientists came to understand that there had been eras populated by mighty, magnificent monsters. We will see how geology and palæontology were born and shall trace their roots from antiquity. When we consider evolution, we will encounter the hero worship of Charles Darwin – but I will also introduce you to a dozen people who came up with ‘evolution’ long before him. It was not his theory; it will come as a surprise to know that the word ‘evolution’ did not appear anywhere in Darwin’s book when On the Origin of Species was published; neither did the phrase ‘survival of the fittest’ – indeed, that expression was coined by someone else, and not by Charles Darwin. We will look back at the pioneering theories of continental drift proposed by Alfred Wegener and see how the theory of plate tectonics was being rejected in the United States within living memory; and I will surprise you with a dozen investigators who had the idea long before Wegener. The untold stories of the early movies made about dinosaurs also feature in the book, and so do some of the curious novels in which dinosaurs feature prominently. Through all this complex network of developing ideas we can follow the generations of dinosaur hunters and perceive how today’s conventions slowly emerged.
It took centuries before the strange fossilized remains found centuries ago on a beach, or dug out by quarrymen, were recognized for what they were. Yet I believe that the view of dinosaurs which those investigators bequeathed to us is wrong. I am going to demonstrate that the conventional conception of those gargantuan monsters pounding across the prairie, fighting like demons and roaring like banshees, is completely fanciful. I am going to show that the theory of birds as dinosaurs is not a new idea at all (it was first proposed in 1888), and I will show that it is absurd. There are animals very close to dinosaurs in our modern world, but they aren’t anything like birds, any more than a chihuahua is a kind of kitten. You have been told so many times that an asteroid or a meteorite was the cause of the dinosaurs becoming extinct, but we will discover that even this is wrong. That can never have been the case. If so, then all other reptiles – the crocodiles and tortoises, lizards and alligators, turtles and snakes – would have vanished at the same time.
In this book we will see how the names of dinosaurs were derived, and discover something of the times in which they lived. I have set down imperial and metric measurements, though have used ‘ton’ throughout. The ton, short ton and metric ton (or tonne) are all within 10 per cent of each other, and all the estimates of the weight of dinosaurs are approximate, some wildly so; therefore sticking to the single unit is sensible.
Why did I not wish to publish these investigations? My assumption was that some sensible palæontologist, somewhere, would draw the same conclusions; yet they didn’t. It was only when the global community of palæontologists advised on a series of updated television documentaries perpetuating these myths that I finally felt the time had come to say so. Even then I held back and delayed publishing anything. In the event, I announced my own alternative conclusions in a modest magazine article, only to find all my research universally condemned by the entire world of dinosaur palæontology. So, can an individual single voice revolutionize an entire modern scientific discipline? Could one person, in this modern world, challenge a major branch of science and show that all its protagonists are mistaken? Can a single scientist, in any field, still show that everybody else is wrong?
You tell me.
1
Dinosaurs and the Ancients
You cannot escape from dinosaurs. They are everywhere; indeed, you are probably sitting on top of one as you read these words. Fossil dinosaurs are abundant wherever there are Mesozoic sedimentary rocks, and they occur in every continent, even the Antarctic. Everywhere there are books, games, movies and television documentaries; since Sheryl Leach created Barney the Dinosaur in 1992, it has become one of the most famous (or notorious) new cartoon characters, and you can wade through pages of dinosaur toys online. For ten dollars, you can pick up a frightening pair of foam rubber dinosaur claws that, assuming you do not have relatives of a nervous disposition, you may wear like gloves. Dinosaurs dominate the media; indeed, the first popular cartoon character in the history of movies was a dinosaur. It was not Mickey Mouse (who began life as Mortimer), or Betty Boop, or even Felix the Cat. They were all released in the 1920s and 1930s, whereas a dinosaur named Gertie had become the world’s first famous cartoon character in a film that was released before World War I. Gertie was a smiling, endearing sauropod, created by Winsor McCay who had enrolled to study art in Chicago in 1899. He released his movie Gertie the Dinosaur at the Palace Theater, Chicago, on February 8, 1914, and soon it became a nationwide hit. His cartoon character had been drawn from the skeleton of a brontosaur in the American Museum of Natural History (A.M.N.H). I have lectured in that historic venue and have seen those dramatic dinosaur displays. Truly, they are awesome. Gertie was portrayed with vivid realism, with her tail resting on the ground and dragging along behind her, just as you’d expect, much like a present-day crocodile.
A dinosaur named Gertie was the world’s first popular cartoon character, launched in 1914 by Winsor McCay of Chicago. The backgrounds were drawn by John A. Fitzsimmons, and McCay based the dinosaur on popular accounts of a Brontosaurus.
More recently we have seen those stunning digital re-creations in the Jurassic Park movies, where huge sauropod dinosaurs rear up for leaves, standing on their huge hindlegs, then hit the ground with their forelimbs to create an earth-shattering crunch. Disney even released a film about a friendly dinosaur, which had facial musculature unlike that of any reptile and which made doe-eyed expressions of maternal devotion as she smiled affectionately at her young. On television, we have become accustomed to dinosaurs throwing up clouds of dust as they pound across the arid scrub, we have seen a planet populated by dinosaurs, and have watched people walking with them. Yet these are all wrong. The evolution of dinosaurs has been misconstrued. In this book, we will take a new look at the latest evidence about dinosaurs and find that they were very different from everything that you have been told before.
Conventional portrayals of herbivorous dinosaurs show them in a familiar modern landscape, usually in a landscape of desert or scrub. Scientific evidence shows this cannot be the case: they consumed huge amounts of lush vegetation. (http://wallpoper.com/wallpaper/dinosaurs-desert-400302)
The standard books will tell you that the study of dinosaurs began when Sir Richard Owen coined the term in 1842, but dinosaurs were actually discovered thousands of years before that. They even feature in rituals that date back to prehistoric times, and their fossils have been known to scientists for centuries. Although palæontology first became popular in Queen Victoria’s England, more than 1,000 different fossil species had already been identified when she was still a young monarch, long before the word ‘dinosaur’ had even been coined. When the pioneering dinosaur hunters appeared, some were daredevil characters (one of whom is said to have inspired the character of Indiana Jones), others were quiet and modest geologists who hated writing about their discoveries, along with crazy extroverts, thieves and saboteurs, plagiarists and commercial speculators who smuggled skeletons and became wealthy. Many are fantasists, given to wild speculation without a shred of scientific evidence to back it. Since the 1970s dinosaurs have been a hot topic of discussion, and as we shall see, new species are constantly being named. Today, fresh dinosaur sites are being discovered all around the world and we have recorded a total of some 1,850 genera of dinosaurs that lived between 245 and 66 million years ago. Where did this all start? How did we become aware that the Earth had changed – and when did people realize the true nature of fossils?
Palæontologists will tell you that China is a new hotbed of dinosaur discoveries. Research is continually revealing fresh information, and strange unheard-of dinosaurs are being recorded. Of course, this is true; but it is not as new as people say. The Chinese have known about dinosaurs since the Stone Age. The fossilized skeletons were taken as the remains of gigantic monsters, and it is those that gave rise to the legendary depictions of dragons. Dragons were real – they were dinosaurs. Chinese medicine believes in the administration of tinctures from fearsome creatures to heal and invigorate humans. Thus, just as the bones of present-day predators – like brown bears and tigers – have been used for thousands of years in traditional Chinese medicine, so have the bones of mighty dinosaurs. The Chinese for dinosaur is kǒnglóng (恐龍), meaning ‘terrible dragon’, and their existence was written about by Hua Yang Guo Zhi in the Western Jin Dynasty (AD 265–316). Since the fossil remains of dinosaurs showed that they were the most powerful of all creatures, their bones would logically provide the strongest cure. The tradition persists to this day, and many village communities still regard dinosaur skeletons as the remains of real dragons. Reporter Kevin Holden Platt writes that, during a recent palæontological dig in Henan Province headed by Dong Zhiming of the Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology in Beijing, Dong told of villagers who were said to be using dragon bones in their homeopathic medicines. When he investigated, he found that the bones they were using were the petrified remains of gigantic sauropod dinosaurs. The tinctures were used to treat dizziness and cramp, and were also applied to help wounds heal.1
In the street markets of today’s China, fossilized teeth and claws of dinosaurs are sold in markets where they are described as being those of dragons. Many families own them, sometimes as curios, sometimes as charms, believing them to be from genuine dragons. Not only did this view persist among the rural communities, but such legends still linger among some city-dwellers. Turn to the chinahighlights website and you will see that their section on dragons begins by reassuring readers that dragons are not actually real.2
To Western eyes this is as absurd as a written reminder that elves and fairies are merely imaginary. Yet this reminds us how powerful are the age-old legends of dragons in Chinese eyes. Western myths about dragons may also have originated from the discovery of huge fossils in Europe, though it is also possible that the legends spread from China along the ancient Silk Road.
Remarkable dinosaur-like creatures can be seen on an ancient seal carved from jasper 5,500 years in present-day Iraq, now in the Louvre in Paris. Such images have led people wrongly to believe that our predecessors were acquainted with dinosaurs.
Chinese traditions tell that it was a dragon that sowed the seed of their race. Thousands of years ago, it is said that a tribal leader, Yandi (炎帝), was born out of his mother’s telepathic communication with a mighty dragon. Huangdi (皇帝 the yellow Emperor) and the dragon launched the prelude to the Chinese people when Yandi became the Emperor’s deputy. So the ancient Chinese took to referring to themselves as originating with Yandi and Huangdi, as well as being descendants of the Chinese dragon. The dragon is first recorded in Chinese archæology in the Xinglongwa culture, which dates back more than 7,000 years. Sites excavated from Liangzhu, and from the Yangshao era in Xi’an, include clay pots bearing dragon motifs, and a Xishuipo burial plot in Puyang from the Yangshao people reveals a skeleton of a human flanked by mosaics made from seashells, with a tiger on one side and a dinosaur dragon on the other. The Chinese were the first to record their impression of dinosaur fossils, though they were not alone.3
From ancient Mesopotamia comes an exquisite seal made some 5,500 years ago that seems to show a dinosaur. It is a small cylindrical seal carved from green jasper and shaped like a barrel, which could be rolled across wax or clay to leave an impression. This example was excavated at Uruk in Mesopotamia (now Iraq) and is in the collections of The Louvre in Paris. Uruk was once a large and advanced civilization for its time, with impressive buildings and a complex hierarchical social structure. The creatures that were engraved into the surface of their seals often represent domesticated or wild animals, though this example is unusual. It seems to have the appearance of a sauropod dinosaur, and could perhaps have been inspired by a fossil. We know that fossils were known to the ancients, because of writings that date back 1,000 years. The Book of Healing (in Arabic: کتاب الشفاء) was written by the Persian philosopher Ibn Sīnā (Persian: ابن سینا), who is known to present-day Western scholars as Avicenna. His is a remarkable book, covering natural history and mathematics, astronomy and even music, and was written between AD 1010 and 1020. The work is not all his, of course; this was meant as a compendium of current knowledge and contains much information from the ancient Greek writers including Aristotle and Ptolemy, together with the findings of other Persian and Arabic writers. He wrote of fossils as if they were familiar objects, and believed that fossilization occurred when subsidence caused the release of a ‘petrifying virtue’ that subtly transformed substances into stone. He felt that there was nothing surprising about this; it was no more remarkable than the ‘transformation of the waters,’ he wrote.
Notions of the movement of the Earth’s surface and changes with geological time were part of the common currency in the ancient Middle East, though they did not emerge in European philosophy until they were expounded by Magnus Albertus, a physician and polymath, born in 1200, who became widely regarded as the greatest German mind of the Middle Ages. He also wrote of fossils, saying that the rocks around Paris were a rich source of ‘shells shaped like the moon’ that were enveloped by viscous mud and were preserved by the ‘dryness of the stone’.4 For centuries in the West, the occurrence of fossilized seashells on raised ground was taken as evidence of the biblical flood.
Travel now across the world to Cambodia, where the Khmer people live, and at Angkor Wat you will find an ancient image of a dinosaur. There is a stegosaur carved into a wall in the temple of Ta Prohm which was constructed on the orders of the god-king Jayavarman VII and was dedicated in AD 1186. Surviving records show that more than 12,000 people lived in the temple compound at its peak, including 18 high priests and 615 dancers, with another 100,000 villagers dwelling nearby, trading with the temple authorities and providing goods, food and services. Carved into the temple walls are numerous symbolic images, and they were protected by being overgrown with jungle vegetation for centuries so that the building, even though penetrated by massive tree roots, escaped being restored by overeager Europeans. The stegosaur carving has been cited by creationists to show that humans were acquainted with living dinosaurs. The likeness, they say, is anatomically correct – but it isn’t. A real Stegosaurus had a small head and a pointed, spiked tail; the carving at Ta Prohm has a distinctive, larger, head and there is no sign of the typical stegosaurian spiked tail. The dorsal plates are vividly carved, but a living stegosaur had two rows of plates that were more numerous than in the carving. This temple decoration was emphatically not carved by someone who had a living dinosaur as the reference for the image. They could, however, have seen petrified remains. The fossil of a Stegosaurus trapped in limestone strata often reveals only one set of dorsal plates, and it is perfectly reasonable to assume that the head (or the tail) was absent. Stegosaurs had proportionately tiny heads, and the skulls of fossilized dinosaurs are usually missing. Partial fossils are far more abundant than complete dinosaur skeletons, and it is easy to see how an ancient sculptor would have invented a head for his carving. Some present-day amateurs claim that the large plates along the back of this carving ‘more closely resemble leaves’ and they try to assert that the Ta Prohm carving is ‘a boar or rhinoceros against a leafy background’. Like so much scholarly speculation about dinosaurs, this is fanciful. The evidence offers nothing to suggest this is right.5
It has even been alleged that there are no stegosaur fossils in Cambodia by which the carving could have been inspired, but this ignores several realities. First, there are stegosaur skeletons all around the world and they are widespread. Political and academic instability for many years led to a failure for palæontology to develop in Cambodia, and important fossil finds are only now being discovered. Cambodia today is not what it once was. The ancient Khmer empire used to occupy part of Thailand and a great swathe of present-day Vietnam and extended up across today’s Laos. All this is an area now known to be rich in dinosaur fossils including Stegosaurus, and fossils have been recorded at Angkor Wat, near the site of the ancient temple. There are plenty of opportunities for that temple stonecarver to have known a well-preserved fossilized stegosaur skeleton, some 700 years before that dinosaur was first revealed to scientists in the Western world.
