A laborer
in the southern English village of Piltdown uncovered a skull in 1908. This skull was given to Charles Dawson, who
was an amateur geologist at that time.
He quickly saw the potential for continued archeological finds in
Piltdown. A few years later Sir Arthur Smith Woodward, a leading geologist at
the Natural History Museum and Charles Dawson had also discovered a portion of
the missing lower jawbone, or so they believed.
The
findings were presented to the Royal Geological Society in 1912. Their fellow scientists were pleased to have
finally found the connection between apes and humans. Although, not all the scientists
were convinced that the skull and jawbone were from the same specimen. In 1917, Dawson claimed to find more human
fossils as well as a canine tooth a little later near the original dig
sight.
In 1953,
chemical testing of fluorine established the fossils were falsely
represented. It was confirmed the human skull
was more modern than expected and the jaw was that of an orangutan with filed
down teeth to appear flat similar to human teeth. Staining the bones with an iron solution and
chromic acid created the appearance of age.
Microscopic examination revealed the teeth were modified to appear more
human.
Needless to
say, scientists as well as the English people were outraged by the fraud as
well as embarrassment for foolishly believing a hoax. Of course, Dawson was labeled as fake and all
his other archeological finds had also been forged.
Up to this
point, the field of science had been thought to include only scholars and
honest gentlemen. The expectation that
archeological findings were presented and supported by a renowned scientist,
Sir Arthur Smith Woodward, possibly placed the human fault of believing what
was presented as fact. Unfortunately, credentials and lack of ethics created a
negative impact in the science community.
Removing
the human factor is impossible as humans thought processes are necessary. Theories are based on thoughts and ideas of
humans. The hoax has made it more
difficult to establish scientific findings as legitimate. The only positive
effect of the hoax is the creation of a chemical, which allows scientist to
date of origination.
The
Piltdown Hoax is probably the most famous paleontological hoax ever. The hoax has been significant for the
attention, which was paid to the issue of human evolution and also the length
of time that elapsed from its discovery to the exposure of the findings as a
hoax.
The lesson
learned is to verify many sources, research, and studies prior to believing
what is presented. Also, remembering titles and education do not always make
for ethical and moral behaviors.
Great job and great post. I like how you explained that human nature cannot be removed from science and I agree I think that having human nature in science makes it better, and think yes we will look closer at recent discoveries to not be fooled again but mistakes make us stronger and we will go on. Mistakes are part of life and as long as you learn and not repeat we will all be fine...
ReplyDeleteGood job on your post. Its unfortunate that this had to happen in the history of the scientific community. But like you mentioned in your post a positive effect from all of this was the creation of a chemical, that allows scientists to date of origination.
ReplyDeleteNice post Morgan! You did a good job explaining the incident thoroughly. I liked your comment on human thoughts and ideas being the basis of scientific theory. Without the human factor, we would not even be able to start with analyzing our scientific past.
ReplyDeleteGreat post, but I'm not sure that I agree with you when you said, "Up to this point, the field of science had been thought to include only scholars and honest gentlemen." This implies that there has never been a fraud in the scientific community until Piltdown, which is not true. Hoaxes and frauds have existed well before the Piltdown Hoax, and will continue to exist after it. Science is a competitive field with great amounts of recognition, and there will always be people willing to break the rules to gain that recognition.
ReplyDeleteNice post, from the research you have done to your thoughts on some of the points given! I enjoyed reading from your perspective on this one. I also like the life lesson you have learned from this, make sure to research every aspect thoroughly before presenting anything as there can be mistakes made.
ReplyDelete"Their fellow scientists were pleased to have finally found the connection between apes and humans."
ReplyDeleteDoes that accurately represent the significance of this find? Or is that just another way of saying "missing link"? ;-) Did you get a chance to review the background information on why this term is a problem? It is still a problem is you find another way to say the same term. There is no direct horizontal connection between humans and non-human apes. This is a family tree, not a chain of links. To find the "connection", you need to go back to the common ancestor. Piltdown was not that common ancestor. He represented only a possible ancestor of modern humans, with no ancestral connection to non-human apes.
Additionally, by this time, the relationship between humans and non-human apes was recognized in the scientific community. It was no longer an issue of *if* humans evolved from a common ancestor with non-human apes, but *how* they evolved. So, if Piltdown had been valid, what would it have taught us about *how* humans evolved from that common ancestor?
There may have been an inclination to believe that "gentlemen scientists" wouldn't falsify data, but there was still and understanding that scientists would be expected to validate conclusions on new discoveries. The question is why scientists failed to do their job in this instance. Could national pride have played a role? And what about the perpetrators themselves? Why did they create the hoax in the first place? What faults played a role there?
Good explanation of the technologies that uncovered the hoax, but other than better technology, what about the scientific method itself helped to uncover the hoax? Why were scientists still investigating this find some 40 years after it was uncovered?
I agree, we need humans to create the questions and hypotheses which drive the process of science and to make the intuitive leaps and connections computers wouldn't be able to see.
(Note: The hoax didn't lead to the chemical fluorine. That was always around. I'm not sure the fluorine analysis was created for this purpose either. It was developed and Oakley realized it may shed light on the fossil which had already begun to raise questions.)
Good life lesson.