The bones were originally found by Charles Dawson in a gravel pit in Piltdown, East Sussex, England. It consisted of part of a jaw bone and some parts of the cranium. For many years since it's discovery, many scientists were cynical at his validity of actually finding them. Arthur Keith and Smith Woodward were very prestigious and since they were involved, no one really doubted it intensely.
Scientists desperately wanted to know what the missing links between apes and humans were, very passionately. So just by ignorance and goggled observations, the faults in the bones were overlooked. Letting this happen dents the scientific process' trustworthiness as every aspect of observing something that has never been observed before becomes so much a contest that cheaters come about.
Examining the carbon dating of the bones and teeth gave substantial evidence it was a fraud. The skull was a 500 year old Medieval man and the jaw was of an orangutan, with the teeth of a chimp. Also, while under a microscope, it can be seen clearly that someone had filed down the teeth to make them look like they had been chewing side to side.
You can't remove the human factor. Or else why would there be science in the first place? It is the study of our history, so removing 'our' would be a misstep. It takes the human factor to want to find new discoveries if there isn't a piece found in the large puzzle of evolution. If there isn't that want, nothing will be found, and may never be found.
The lesson to take from this hoax is that it happens. Science can be taken very royally and have an 'unwritten' rule that we will take each others word for it that your findings are legitamite, since we are colleagues. But that may sometimes not be the case, and there will be con that invalidates that trust.
I was struck by your use of the term "goggled observations". Perfect!
ReplyDeleteIt wasn't carbon dating that uncovered the fraud. Do you know the name of the dating technique that was used?
Actually, in science, there is an unwritten rule that we will NOT take each other's word for it. :-) Go to a talk where a scientist is presenting his or her findings and they will be questioned brutally by the audience of fellow scientists, but we know this is coming because it is part of the process. We expect it and as long as the questions are based upon valid concerns, we must address them if we want our ideas to be accepted.
Hi Stephen,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed what you said about how without the human factor where would we be in science. I don’t think we would have what we have for science now without the human factor. Scientists discover new things whenever they study something, if we take out the human factor, what does that leave us with? It leaves us with nowhere to grow and no way to learn. I agree that one thing to take from the Piltdown hoax is that it happens. Science is very delicate and complex; I don’t think any one person will fully understand it (at least not for awhile). Overall a great post.