Dinosaurs are in the news these days, and not just because of their breakthrough discoveries.

A growing number of paleontologists are sounding the alarm about a high-profile auction where dinosaur fossils sell for exorbitant sums.In the latest example, 77 million years old Gorgosaurus Skeleton sold by Sotheby’s for over US$6 million in August 2022.

But that’s nowhere near the highest we’ve ever paid for a dinosaur. In May 2022, Christie’s will deinonychus Skeleton for $12.4 million. A few months earlier, Abu Dhabi’s Department of Culture and Tourism had paid Stan her staggering $31.8 million. T Rex From the Hell Creek Formation in South Dakota, the centerpiece of the Persian Gulf City’s new natural history museum.

Some scientists are very disappointed and are raising their voices. Steve Brusatte, a paleontologist at the University of Edinburgh, told the Daily Mail that auction houses turn priceless specimens into “no more than a rich man’s toy”. Thomas Kerr, of Carthage University in Wisconsin, is even more outspoken, saying that “greed for gold drives auctions.” He also said that wealthy elites, including actors Nicolas Cage and Leonardo DiCaprio, called them “thieves of time,” competing to win the best specimens at the game of juvenile one-upmanship. I expressed my dissatisfaction with the situation.

Most commentators trace the burgeoning dinosaur market to the biggest and most accomplished Sioux. T Rex I have found it. After the FBI confiscated it from the same group of fossil hunters who discovered Stan, Chicago’s Field Museum of Natural History acquired it for over $8 million in 1997, with financial support from Disney and McDonald’s. did.

But, as he notes in his recent book Assembling the Dinosaur, the commercial specimen trade is as old as the science of paleontology itself. And that history shows that the debate over whether to buy or sell dinosaurs contains deeper questions about the long-standing but hotly contested relationship between science and capitalism.

two sides of the debate

Paleontologists have valid reasons against the commercial sale of precious fossils. Science is fundamentally a community affair, and paleontologists have no way of assessing whether new discoveries are true or not when specimens are not available for public inspection. What if there are

This happens more often than you think. In the late 1990s, a private collector purchased what appeared to be a feathered dinosaur at a Tucson gem and mineral show. National Geographic then reported to great fanfare, claiming to be the “missing link” between dinosaurs and modern birds.Archaeoraptor” Fossil combined pieces from several different specimens to create a chimeric creature that never existed.

But commercial fossil hunters also make compelling claims. Most fossils first come to light through the natural process of erosion. However, erosion eventually destroys the specimen itself. There are not enough scientists to find all the fossils before they are lost. Therefore, the argument ensues that commercial collectors should be commended for excavating and preserving specimens.

Wealthy philanthropists keep their distance

Both sides of the argument make persuasive points. But as a fiasco all around.”ArchaeoraptorClearly, it’s worth asking whether financial incentives undermine trust.

Dinosaurs first caught the attention of geologists in the 19th century. In fact, these giant lizards didn’t get their name until comparative anatomist Richard Owen invented the biological category “dinosaurs” in 1842.

At the time, scientists didn’t treat dinosaurs quite like gold, silver, coal, or other valuable things that could be dug up from the ground. The museum purchased most fossils from commercial collectors, often using funds donated by wealthy industrialists like Andrew Carnegie. diplodocus carnegie.

The change began at the end of the 19th century, when concerted efforts to decommoditize dinosaur bones began, and museums began to distance themselves from the commercial specimen trade.

One impetus came from the museum’s wealthy patrons. I wanted to separate the museum’s philanthropic activities from the uncomfortable world of commerce. Philanthropists like Carnegie and JP Morgan funded cultural institutions to demonstrate their refined taste, appreciation for learning, and republican virtues, not to make business deals. was.

Moreover, the first Gilded Age was similar to the present in that economic inequality rose sharply. This led to widespread class struggles that could be very violent and bloody. It has begun to publicly display conspicuous generosity to show that isms can generate public goods in addition to profits.

For all these reasons, it was imperative that their philanthropy be viewed as a selfless act of true altruism, completely detached from the fierce competition of the marketplace.

Scientists take the lead

At the same time, paleontologists embraced the term “pure science” and argued that they created knowledge for its own sake, not for financial gain.

Scientists made themselves more credible by claiming that their research was not subject to financial corruption.

Ironically, scientists have found that claiming to be completely indifferent to money can attract more money. But it also required a clear line between the culture of capitalism and the practice of science, and was accompanied by resistance to obtaining specimens by purchase.

As scientists began to shy away from the commercial specimen trade, museums took advantage of generous donations from wealthy philanthropists to launch ambitious expeditions to allow scientists to collect fossils themselves.

New Gilded Age Dinosaurs

But their ability to dominate the civilian market for dinosaur bones didn’t last forever. The United States, in the midst of what some call the “New Gilded Age,” is back with a roar.

Today, the most spectacular dinosaur fossils often come from the Jehor Formation in northeastern China. And in many cases they are purchased from local farmers who supplement their income by looking for fossils as a side business.

As a result, the question of whether commercial incentives undermine trust has returned with a bang. Li Chun, a professor at Beijing’s prestigious Institute of Paleovertebrate Paleoanthropology, said more than 80% of all marine reptiles displayed in Chinese museums are often disguised to some degree to enhance their value. I’m assuming there are.

The age-old fear that commercial purposes threaten to detract from science is true. But it’s not just paleontology.

The epic implosion of Theranos, a tech startup that secured over $700 million in venture capital based on false promises of developing a better way to do blood tests, was combined with scientific misconduct. Just one particularly famous example of commercial deception. A great deal of scientific research is now paid for by people who have a commercial stake in the knowledge produced. From Exxon’s decision to hide early research on climate change to Moderna’s move to start enforcing its recent patents, you can see the impact. The mRNA technology behind the most effective COVID-19 vaccines.

Is it any wonder that so many people have lost faith in science?