Tuesday, November 18, 2014

Piltdown Hoax

The fossil was discovered by Charles Dawson in 1912, while digging in a gravel pit in a Little Village called Piltdown. The fossil would have been the missing link between apes and humans and the possibility of humans forming from early ape discoveries. By the term "missing link", I mean it would have gave many scientist proof that humans from the early century came from apes. Charles Dawson invited Arthur Smith Woodworth and Father Pierre to join him in his discovery in Piltdown. Arthur Smith Woodworth was the first to announce the findings of the fossil in  Piltdown at a meeting in December 1912 in front of the Royal Geology Society. Scientist cheered the news in and were enthusiastic about the situation. Scientist end up discovering other human like fossils in other countries like Asia and China which didn’t familiarize with the discovery in Piltdown. It wasn't until 1953 when scientist came up with a machine that gave better results in which they tested Charles Dawson findings and found out his fossils were stained to make them appear as if they were from the early century. Scientists had also discovered the teeth on the jaw fossil had been filed down to make it seems as if it belonged to the first humans when it belonged to no other than a female orangutan.
                Charles Dawson was trying to discover something first in London. There were early human fossil findings, but never in London. Charles Dawson tricked many scientists for about forty years for his early human discoveries, which were never found after he passed away. Many scientist were extremely unhappy. They opened up a case to determine who was behind the Piltdown Hoax. After this incident, it made scientist question how many of Dawson’s discoveries were fraud.
            Scientists launched the first full scale analysis with better dating methods. Scientist were able to determine how old a fossil was by measuring fluoride content of fossils. Under a microscope they notice the teeth were shaved down, and that the jaw bone was dated thousands of years ago. In which they noticed the findings from Piltdown were forged.  
            No I would not want to remove the human factor. Human’s play a huge role in science. Many scientist have found many different aspects of the world just by looking for the first findings of the early humans. Science comes with many errors, the point of science is to come up with a theory and keep testing it until it becomes right before you publish it.
            I believe taking information from unverified sources is wrong. The whole point of science is being able to test your theory which helps you and others come up with either the same conclusion or a brief argument with scientific proof that your theory may have been wrong. I believed Dawson was wrong for tricking colleges and friends into thinking his findings were legit when in reality, they were completely fraud. Made many scientist question all his other memorable findings. I believe it is best to leave a discovery alone without any proof backing up your theory.

1 comment:

  1. Just some clarifications on your opening synopsis:

    First of all, humans *are* apes, so saying that we have evolved from apes misconstrues our evolutionary relationship with our non-human relatives.

    Second, by this time, our genetic relationship with non-human apes wasn't really in question. That is why is it incorrect to identify this fossil as a "missing link" as it's key significance. What science was still trying to understand was *how* humans evolved from that common ancestor. The significance of this find (had it been real) is that it supported Arthur Keith's idea that humans developed larger brains early in the evolutionary process. We know now that this is incorrect.

    Other than these two important points, good synopsis.

    The question about "faults" is asking for what motivated the people involved in this hoax. Yes, it is possible Dawson wanted to find the first English hominid (though we still aren't sure he was the culprit), but why did he want to be able to make that claim? Ambition? Greed? And why did the scientific community accept this find so quickly, with so little skepticism? There were two sides to this hoax, the perpetrators and those who didn't do their jobs and check the fossil find to validate it. It is important to understand the motivations on both sides.

    Can you describe the dating method that uncovered the hoax? Also, why were they still studying this fossil find some 40 years after it was discovered? What positive aspect of science does this represent?

    "Human’s play a huge role in science."

    I agree, but so far, your post has focused on the negative aspects of that human role. Do humans bring positive aspects to the process of science? What about curiosity? Ingenuity? Can ambition be a positive thing if it drives you to try to find the answers to questions about human evolution?

    Good conclusion.

    ReplyDelete