At first, I read the book's definition of the Piltdown Man hoax but soon realized it would have to take more explaining than that, so I read the given materials. Throughout this weeks modules, I learned that in the early 1900s, there was a scientist who made a fake fossil claiming it was half man, half monkey. He did a number of things to disguise the skull of an orangutan to make it look like it had an ape's jaw and a human skull. The fossil looked older, so it was easily trusted by many communities and other scientists. After a few tests, forty years later, another scientist discovered that the hypothethis wasn't true. It was a real skull of an orangutan, however there was staining added to the fossil to make it look older, and the teeth were grinded down. During this time, this hoax was believed because it was seen as more evidence to complete Darwin's theory of humans and apes being related.
I think the Piltdown Man hoax could have been easily dissapproved by scientists during this time but because they were confident in the findings and needed evidence to prove Darwin's theory, they settled for it. Every human has its faults, and in this case, the scientists had too much faith in the story. I am sure that during the forty years, other scientists thought of many ways to test and see if it was true or not, because that is what they did. Many people in the 1900's needed something to believe, in order to accept Charles Darwin's theory. Having too much confidence in something, or settling for less (which is demonstrated in the Piltdown Man hoax) impacts the scientific process.
Some positives in the Piltdown Man hoax could be the tests that proved the skull was not a humans. In revealing that the findings were bogus, methods of relative dating and chronometric dating were used. Professor Kenneth Oakley used fluorine analysis, a relative dating method to prove that the bone of the skull was not as old as people thought. The longer a bone lies in the earth, the more flourine it will have, and apparently, the skull did not contain enough to fit the description.
I don't think its possible or needed to remove the human error from science. If there are no humans to come up with the answers, methods, and questions to prove or dis prove a fact, then situations like the Piltdown Man could keep occurring. A life lesson learned from this is that, you can not trust anyone or everything you here. Until there are multiple tests or true evidence to prove something, don't trust it.
I think they definitely trusted the evidence too early, but i'm not sure threy would have been able to disprove the age without the proper fluorine testing and microscope technology. We learned from this that scientists make mistakes when they don't retest a theory or skull multiple times by different scientists and to always keep an eye on the source of information and whether it's credible or not. Good job!
ReplyDeletei also agee that all humans have faults and i think in this case there was much pressure on Britain at this time as France and Germany already had significant fossil findings. They wanted to prove that they were the birth place of the human race. The discovery of the Piltdown man gave them that fame and honor.
ReplyDeleteone thing I would point out is that in my research the skull was actually found to be human, but a recent human and the jaw was that of an orangutan also recent.
Good points.
A few clarifications on your background of this hoax.
ReplyDeleteThe "half human, half monkey" comment is too simplistic and misleading. We need to be developing a more accurate and nuanced understanding of this hoax. This find was seen to be an early human ancestor since it possessed some traits that were human and some that seemed more similar to non-human apes (not monkeys).
Who was involved in this hoax? Who are the possible culprits?
"During this time, this hoax was believed because it was seen as more evidence to complete Darwin's theory of humans and apes being related. "
No, the idea that humans and apes were related was well-supported by many other fossil finds and wasn't at issue here. The significance of this find was not that it supported "if" humans evolved but it would have helped explain "how" they evolved from the common ancestor with apes. So what would Piltdown have taught us about how humans evolved, had it been a valid find?
"Many people in the 1900's needed something to believe, in order to accept Charles Darwin's theory. "
Again, this find didn't reflect on Darwin's theory, so that is an inaccurate view of the faults leading to this hoax persisting as long as it did. This was England's first hominid find, while Germany and France and other countries had already had significant fossil finds. England was falling behind and Piltdown put them back in the game, so to speak. This issue of national pride likely played a role in the scientific community accepting the find so readily. But why was this hoax perpetrated in the first place? Why would cause anyone to try to do this?
Good explanation of the technology that uncovered the hoax, but what about the process of science itself helped to reveal it? Why were scientists still analyzing this find so many years later? What does that say about how science works to weed out false information?
I agree with your conclusion on the "human factor" and good final lesson.
Good coverage of the technologies used to discover the hoax. I believe though that it was an orangutan jaw bone, human skull, and chimpanzee teeth.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with Abbie, without modern technology they would not have been able to figure out exactly how old the fossils were.
I agree with you that the human factor can't be removed. We humans are inquisitive and are always searching for more answers.