Olson presumed that the National Geographic article had already validly named the fossil .
Olson therefore failed to explicitly indicate the name was new , as demanded by article 16 of the ICZN as a condition for a name to be valid .
Olson presumed that the National Geographic article had already validly named the fossil , and he therefore failed to explicitly indicate the name was new , as demanded by article 16 of the ICZN as a condition for a name to be valid .