The rad dino that was the size of a hummingbird and had more teeth than any other dinosaur? Yep not a dino, just a lizard apperantly. :(
Anyone else more disapointed with this than they should be?
Posted Oct 20, 2020, 8:47 PM UTC
I'm more disappointed in how Nature handled the situation. Issuing a retraction for something as small as a misclassification error is not standard. Nature was probably trying to distance itself from the Burmese amber situation, but in so doing, created a situation where future studies will have to cite a retracted paper.
I'm more disappointed in how Nature handled the situation. Issuing a retraction for something as small as a misclassification error is not standard.
It could be the amber situation, like you said. That said, there are a lot of rumors dating to before the retraction that Lida Xing withheld contradictory information from the rest of the team that would have made it clear it was not a dinosaur. (I feel a little dirty posting rumors like this, but Nature did not say it was retracting because of ethical concerns about sourcing.)
It's still a lizard with a head shape that doesn't seem quite like any other species of lizard I'm aware of.