In
1912, a fossil was unearthed that scientists believed to be the missing link
between man and apes. The unusual skull
remains were discovered at Barkham Manor in the village of Piltdown,
England. Amateur archeologist, Charles
Dawson excavated the gravel pit in Piltdown and found a human-like jaw and
numerous other skull fragments. They
also discovered primitive tools and various animal fossils. The authenticity of Dawson’s monumental find
was verified and announced by Arthur Smith Woodward of the British Museum. Their findings showed that the remains
belonged to a primitive hominid that was estimated to have lived 500,000 to 1
million years ago. This discovery was
monumental because it was the first evidence of ancient primitive ancestry that
could be linked to modern humans to be found in England. It was considered to be vital to science
because this fossil purportedly proved that the large brain developed in early
hominids before their ability to walk upright had developed (this theory was
later falsified). The prominence of this
find was also used to further support Darwin’s Theory of Evolution. The Piltdown fossils were kept safely locked
away in England for nearly 40 years, thus suspicions were slow to arise that
would oppose their authenticity. It
wasn’t until 1953 when Kenneth Oakley performed fluorine tests on the remains
that he was able to discover that the remains were significantly younger than
Dawson originally claimed. Once the
scandal broke, further examination and texting proved that the skull and jaw
originated from two different species: a human and an orangutan. The teeth of the orangutan were filed down to
purposely cause them to resemble human teeth.
The reality was startling for the scientific world because prior to this
event, scientists operated on a system of honor. The person responsible for this shameful act
of deceit not only devalued the reliability of scientific discovery, he also
delayed and distorted the understanding of the origins of mankind for numerous
decades.
Like
any other field, science is extremely competitive. To be the first person to discover a new
species, a cure for a deadly disease, or a new scientific methodology or tool
would be a dream come true for any enthusiast of science. Although we will never know the true
motivations for this fraudulent act, it could have easily been motivated by
national pride, the desire for recognition, acceptance in the scientific
community, wealth, or even fame.
Wherever there is the potential for reward, there will always be the
potential for dishonesty. It is for
this reason, that all experiments must be testable and precisely reproducible
so that all scientific merit can be verified.
From
1912 until 1926, scholars and scientists remained sufficiently convinced that
the Piltdown fossils could authentically explain the evolutionary link between
apes and humans. However, in 1926, the
Piltdown gravel was found to be less ancient than originally claimed. Additionally, other fossils were being
discovered around the world that conflicted with the findings that were
produced from the Piltdown skull.
Lastly, technology improved that could be used to accurately verify the
age of fossils. When Oakley tested the
fluorine levels, the tests proved that the Piltdown Man fossils were all
fake. The jaw was orangutan, the teeth
were filed down to resemble human teeth, and the fossils had been boiled and
stained with chemicals in an effort to make them look ancient.
It
would be impossible to remove the human factor from science. Scientific inquiry leads to new discoveries,
all of which are made possible by the hard work and dedication of scientists.
Yes, this hoax was devastating to the field of science, but to quote an old
proverb—you can’t let one bad apple spoil the bunch. This hoax illustrated the need for more
stringent verification of discoveries.
In the end, it was an excellent learning tool because it resulted in a
better system of checks and balances to be instituted in order to prevent a
future Piltdown reoccurrence.
Piltdown
teaches us all that even those who are considered experts in a field have the
potential to manipulate the truth in order to reap some form of profit, so be
careful what you choose to believe. It
also proves that sometimes we believe what we want to believe. With all of the fossil evidence that was
being discovered in Africa and Asia, the Europeans desperately wanted to
believe that their ancestors had indeed been the first of the human race. Sadly, it was this desire that prevented them
from seeking the truths that were available all along.
Very good post, your description of the hoax was very detailed and provided a great overall summary. I agree that the human factor is impossible to remove from science and that the hoax was a great learning tool. One mistake cannot be attributed to a whole, but rather can be used to improve the future of science as long as that same mistake is learned from and thus avoided.
ReplyDeleteGood post. I like that you mentioned national pride as one of the possible motivations for creating the hoax. It's possible that the person who planted the fossils did it so England could be considered a more credible source in the field of anthropology. It's an interesting idea, and I haven't thought of it before.
ReplyDeleteDid you get a chance to review the background information on the term "missing link"? Did you understand the problems with the use of this term?
ReplyDelete"It was considered to be vital to science because this fossil purportedly proved that the large brain developed in early hominids before their ability to walk upright had developed (this theory was later falsified)."
That is better and does represent the significance of this find (though it "supported" the idea, not "prove" it). This is not the same thing as purporting to have found the "missing link". This helps to explain *how* humans evolved, not to support *if** humans evolved. This is a very important difference.
Good discussion on the faults that may have been involved in the perpetration of this hoax. National could also have been a likely reason for the scientific community accepting this hoax so readily, which must be recognized as another cause of this hoax persisting as long as it did.
Good description of the technology used to uncover the hoax. Other than better technology, what about the scientific method itself helped to uncover the hoax? Why were scientists still investigating this find some 40 years after it was uncovered?
I agree with what you argue in your section on the "human factor", but you mention only the problems with the human factor. Do humans bring any positive traits to the process of science that you would not want to lose, such as curiosity, ingenuity and intuition? Could we even do science without these positive human factors?
Good life lesson.