The Piltdown hoax happened in the early 1900s and had fooled
many scientists for over 40 years. In 1912 in Luis, by the village of Piltdown
Charles Dawson had been digging in a gravel pit. He had claimed to have found a
piece of a human skull. Dawson had asked three other scientists to join him
with his future searches in finding more fossils. Soon after a jaw bone was
found although it was nothing of what anyone had ever seen before. The jaw line
had an ape structure yet the teeth were example of human teeth because they
were flat. This was an extreme find at that time because no fossils had ever
been found in Europe before. The hoax was discovered by a full scale analysis
that was launched in 1953. They discovered that there were scratches on the
teeth giving them evidence that the teeth had actually been filed down. The
jawbone was less than 100 years old and it was from a female orangutan giving
them evidence that someone had actually forged the fossils. The forgery of
these fossils cause scientists to believe that there were earlier findings that
they had not yet found before.
In this
situation any scientist can get ahead of themselves in trying to be the best.
Yes they are only human but when it comes to being the best, most humans try
there hardest no matter what. Just in this situation, of whoever faked the
fossil, tried to prove something to be the best and he turned out to be fraud.
Faults like this effect the scientific process in multiple ways starting from
the results. If people keep attempting to fake all of these fossils imagine the
devastation in multiple situations.
A
scientist named Kenneth Oakley had ran a test called a fluorine test. The
fluorine would accumulate calcium that would contain organic matter like bones
and teeth. But what Oakley had discovered from this test was that the fossils
had to of been less than 50,000 years old. From what they had claimed that this
was from an ape like specie, that is definitely not true because it was not
even old enough to be qualified as an ape like species. Two more scientists
names Joseph Weiner and Wilfred Le Gros Clark had teamed up to further along
the investigation to prove that the fossils were not what they had been said to
be. The two fossils had been proved that they were actually 2 separate species
not even of the same kind. The part of a skull was from a human and then the
jaw was from an ape. The scratched proved the teeth were filed down in order to
make them look like a humans. Other findings that Dawson had claimed to have
been found were also proven to be artificially stained in which made to match
the local gravels.
In certain
situations I believe it is possible to remove the human factor just to make it
so certain situations like these do not happen. Although most of the time
humans are how we find out certiana aspects of life. So that would be one hard
thing to change. Never take anything or judge a book by a cover. Mainly because
you can’t always prove everything just by looking at the cover. That is one
thing that I learned from this scandal.
Some knowledge I gained from your post was how extreme this find was because fossils had never been found in Europe before. I also agree that there are situations in life where people then to get ahead of themselves in trying to be the best. This could be caused by several emotions including excitement as well as pride.I actually feel that it is impossible to remove the human factor because, even if we used technology only, humans would be the ones to input the information and miscalculations could still be made. I also feel that these mistakes teach life long lessons and without the human factor we wouldn't progress or feel as motivated. Great information and point of view.
ReplyDeleteHi Casey,
ReplyDeleteI thought it was really interesting in how you said that all scientists try to be the best. I totally agree with that, but I also think that scientists need to be able to fail, and then be okay with it. That is one way to learn and grow. Good job on your post!
Pretty good on the synopsis. Actually, fossils had been found in Europe, but not in England. That was part of the problem. England wanted to produce it's own early man, just as Germany and France had done.
ReplyDeleteWhat was the significance of this find? What did it contribute (had it be valid) the our understanding of human evolution?
Interesting to read your comment about scientists wanting to be the "best". In this case, that wouldn't mean finding a well-supported fossil, correct? :-) I think in this case, "best" was measured by notoriety, which should never be the goal of science.
Were there any other negative factors that influenced the acceptance of this find as valid?
Good description of the methods that uncovered the hoax. What aspects of science itself (the process itself, not the methods) led to revealing the evidence for the fraud.
How would we remove the human factor? Are there any aspects of humans that would be bad to take away from science? Curiosity? Inventiveness? Innovation? Creativity?
Can you explain your "can't judge a book by it's cover" comment a little more fully?