Tuesday, September 23, 2014
Britain and the Piltdown Man
This discovery which originated in 1912 revolved around the supposed "missing link" discovered by Charles Dawson. At the time the term missing link used to give an explanation of the skulls distinct resemblance to man and ape. While today we know that these species are actually ancestors the time frame and the recent findings in Germany and France is what led to the events surrounding this "being". The skull itself was actually the jawbone of an orangutan and the cranium of a man, a medieval man to be exact. The discovery which was at the time so praised and talked about found out to be a fraud by the technology not available during their time. When the skull was first uncovered in East Sussex England Charles Dawson had claimed to have found the ancestor everyone believed to be the connection between humans and ape. The human element of this story, emotions such as pride and greed is what led to it's being praised for so long. Many scientists those of course who were not from Britain had claimed the skull was falsified but due to the lack of evidence could never prove it. In 1953 however when we are able to determine the species and age of fossils it was proven to be a hoax. Carbon dating and a curious mix of chemicals which provided the skull with it's age is how the found it to be fake. Also with the help of microscopic analysis they were able to find file marks on the lower teeth, proof that the jaw been altered in order to fit the idea this species was omnivorous. I feel this example is a perfect reason why scientists need to constantly test and confirm with other scientists. Humans by nature do make mistakes and it sometimes takes more than one person to find the answers. We can't simply remove human from science as we are the ones able to ask the questions like why and how. A machine can only give us the answers but not the questions.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hey Nicole,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you about not being able to remove the human factor. If we don't have humans asking questions than how are we able to advance in science? Yes computers can help us with solving issues and understanding evidence but we cant forget who built those computers...humans. Computers are there as a tool to answer our questions.
Nicole,
ReplyDeleteI also agree with you and Sarah on not being able to remove the human factor, without humans knowledge it would be so much more difficult to advance scientifically and gather evidence. Humans play a huge role in experimenting and proving things to be a fact rather than a false hypothesis. Humans have helped science evolve to where it is today.
Okay on your use of the term "missing link", along with your explanation, but honestly, it isn't necessary to use it at all to explain why this find was significant. "Missing link" implies that this helped us recognize that humans and non-human apes were connected in some way through common descent. Well, that wasn't really in question at that time, so the term is not of any use for multiple reasons.
ReplyDeleteThe fossil was recognized as an early hominid, which means it wasn't answering questions about "if" humans evolved but the more important question of 'how' they evolved. So what would this fossil have told us about how humans evolved, had it been valid? It also seemed to make British scientists very happy. Why?
Yes, pride and greed come into play here, but how? How do you explain the reaction of the scientific community? Why did they accept this find so quickly with so little analysis and skepticism? Don't they bear some responsibility for this hoax as well? What faults were involved there?
"...a curious mix of chemicals..."
That needs to be more specific for our purposes here. Besides new technology, what about the process of science itself helped to uncover the hoax? Why were scientists still analyzing this fossil some 40 years after it's discovery?
"We can't simply remove human from science as we are the ones able to ask the questions like why and how."
While I agree, this section could have been expanded and explained more thoroughly.
Life lesson?
It might help to treat these posts as papers, complete with proper formatting and paragraphs. Makes it easier for your readers to appreciate your work and it might help you address the guideline points more fully.