Sunday, September 20, 2015

        The Piltdown hoax is perhaps one of the most infamous hoax’s to have been made and is infamous for two reasons. The attention that it gained to the issue of human evolution and the length of time it took from its discovery to its time to of being exposed as a forgery. Which took more than forty years to be exposed. The Piltdown Man hoax was a hoax in which bone fragments were thought to be the fossilized remains of an unknown human, not a modern human. The fragments consisted of parts of a skull and part of a jaw-bone. They were said to have been found in 1912 from a gravel pit at Piltdown, East Sussex, England. It was finally exposed in 1953 as a forgery. It  consisted of the lower jaw-bone of an orangutan that was combined with the skull of a fully developed modern human.
        The Piltdown man Hoax affected research on human evolution because it led scientists to believe that the human brain grew in size before the jaw adapted. Many scientist believed that this was the “missing link”. This hoax sparked a debate and was used as an example of the dishonesty in the study of human evolution. Scientists were skeptical because it proved inconsistent with the findings of hominid evolution with fossils that were found from other places. 
        It was said that in 1908, Charles Dawson had discovered the first Piltdown fragments. In February 1912, Dawson contacts Arthur Smith Woodward about the skull fragments. Woodward was thought that the Piltdown man was an evolutionary “missing link” between apes and humans. However, Woodward's theory of the Piltdown was challenged by some researchers. Woodward believed that he had stumbled upon the missing link between us and apes and therefore wanted to prove that the fragments were connected to our ape ancestors despite inconsistencies of the bone fragments. He was prideful and ambitious. This negatively affected the scientific process because it lead to a false belief and also lead scientists down the wrong path of evolution. 
        In 1949 scientists had discovered that measuring the fluoride in fossils, you were able to tell how old the fossil was. When the Piltdown Man was tested, it was shown that the fossils were not that old and that these fossils were actually pretty recent. In 1953 scientists did a little more research into the fossils and they found that the fossils were only around a hundred years old. When the teeth were observed under the microscope, they discovered that the teeth had been filed down and made to look like human teeth. 
       The human factor cannot be removed from science because it’s human nature to always have a biased opinion. You can never ensure that another mistake won’t happen. By removing the human factor from science, it would be easier to make it all about science and less about your “feeling” about it. 
       I’ve learned that scientist are just as likely to make mistakes as we are. Although they are scientists and one would think that they never make mistakes, they have faults just like us. It is important to test your theory and do research. Scientists use factual evidence to support their ideas. In the case of the Piltdown man Hoax, it was a fraud and shows that one should always verify from the source where the facts are coming from and from who.

4 comments:

  1. i like your post very much and I agree with you on your last paragraph in that scientists are just as likely to make mistakes as we are.

    ReplyDelete
  2. You did a very good job in answering all the questions Alexandria. I really like how you describe Woodward as prideful and ambitious. I believed he was greedy and impatient to discover the next big advancement in science, but reading how you described his actions made me look at him in a way that makes me understand why he did what he did.

    ReplyDelete
  3. You use the term "missing link" several times in your post. Did you see the not regarding this term in the guidelines? Did you get a chance to review the information on this term in the assignment folder? I suggest you return and review it when you have the opportunity.

    The significance of this find was not that it was the "missing link". There is no such thing. The significance of this find, had it been valid, was that it was the first hominid found on British soil AND that it suggested large brains evolved early in human evolution. We now know this to be false. Other than this point and the issue of the missing link, good coverage of the background on this event.

    I agree that pride and ambition were factors that played a role in this hoax, though would you necessarily consider ambition to be a fault? Perhaps that is dependent upon the results? Other than the culprits, can you find fault with anyone else? How about the scientific community? Why did they accept this find so readily without proper scrutiny?

    Good job explaining the process that uncovered the hoax. But why were scientists still studying this find some 40 years after it was uncovered? What aspect of science does that represent?

    "By removing the human factor from science, it would be easier to make it all about science and less about your “feeling” about it. "

    Yes... but could you still do science without humans? Without their curiosity, ingenuity and intuitiveness? Do they only bring negative things to the scientific process?

    Good life lesson.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I agree with you Alexandria that when it comes to science results they need to be trustworthy by minimizing the human factor involved since the human factor can provide biased results. I think that humans in science are needed for ingenuity in thought and ideas. This allows us to formulate new hypotheses and also devise a method to test the hypothesis in an unbiased way. I think this is the hardest part of the scientific method; developing the method of testing. Ultimately, the scientific method has to be the counterbalance to the human factor that can exist in science. I think you had a really strong ending to your post by emphasizing the importance of researching information instead of just accepting information given by scientists and other experts.

    ReplyDelete