Piltdown Hoax Post.
1.) Discovered in 1909 in the town of Piltdown square in Sussex, England by geologist Charles
Dawson (who specialized in fish fossils), the Piltdown fossils were believed at the time to be the
missing link between man and ape. Originally, he found a skull and a piece of a jawbone that he
dubbed as 'The Piltdown Man'. He then called upon Arthur Woodward, who was a keeper of the
Geological Department at the British History Museum. The fragments found were an ape like skull
with was presumed to be a human jawbone (being that the teeth were flat, like that of a humans)
and also seemed to fit the belief that man did indeed involve from apes.
2.) In this particular case, the fact that scientists still did not have an answer as to whether or not man
truly did evolve from apes is what drove them to jump to conclusions. Scientists are always seen as
the ones who have all the answers- and in the public eye, the odds were not in their favor given they
still did not have an answer about the evolutionary processes. This case not only presumed to solve
the 'missing link' case between man and ape, it also elevated the reputation and credibility of modern
scientists of that time.
3.) The continuous testing theory was a huge help. It wasn't until years down the road that we had the
technology to accurately date the fossils- scientists were able to discover that the teeth had been filed
down so as to appear like those of human teeth, and they were also able to find that what appeared to
be years of fossilization turned out to be fake as well- the skull had been chemically dyed so it would
look much older than it really was.
4.) I'm not really sure what it means to take away the 'human' factor in science- if it means to simply
remove the way of humans to be naturally curious, then I think it could be possible, but not
beneficial. If humans were not curious not by nature, then would we even have science? Would we
question anything outside of our own common knowledge? We would simply take things as they
come to us, never wondering why. But not being curious, we are not being intellectual.
5.) I have learned to do my research thoroughly before making such possibly influential and historical
claims.
posted by Unknown @ 3:44 PM
2 Comments
2 Comments:
Okay on your background but with regard to the "missing link" comment, did you get a chance to review the information regarding that term in the assignment file? Does this accurately represent the importance of this find?
There was no question at that time that humans "evolved from apes" (humans ARE apes). The question at this time was "how" we evolved from that common ancestor with modern apes (notice how I stated that?). So what would the Piltdown fossil, had it been a valid find, have taught us about *how* humans evolved from that common ancestor?
This issue moves into your second section... again, it wasn't an issue of *if* humans evolved from a common ape ancestor but *how*. While the general public might not have completely understood this, that isn't the point of this section. Why did the culprits behind this hoax create the fraudulent fossil and why did scientists, British scientists in particular, accept the find with so little skepticism? What human faults were involved in the production and acceptance of this hoax?
" The continuous testing theory was a huge help."
Exactly. The very nature of the scientific method, requiring the repeated testing of a idea to see if it stands up to honest scrutiny, was one of the key reasons why this was eventually uncovered. But that aside, can you describe the specific new test that is credited for uncovering the hoax some 40 years after it was unearthed?
"If humans were not curious not by nature, then would we even have science? "
Precisely. If we tried to remove the human factor from science, we would lose not only the bad aspects of human nature (pride, greed, ambition) but also the positive aspects that are the driving force of science.
Okay for your final statement, but outside of science, how can you use this story to guide you in your everyday life, when you hear stories on the news or read them in magazines?
Hi! Nice post, I especially liked your take on the human factor question. I agree, science is questioning what is presented to you.I also liked your take on the second question, I believe that the scientists at the time felt pressured to please everyone, and resulted in not being more careful about their findings.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home