Piltdown Hoax

1.Hoax is a fossil of early human found at Piltdown, East Sussex, England 1912, collected by Charles Dawson. Dawson sent a letter to Arthur Smith Woodward at the Natural History Museum to let him know that Dawson had found a piece of thick human-like skull in Pleistocene gravel deeds at Piltdown in Sussex. Dawson and Smith worked together for this exciting founding. They finally found more skull fragments, a jawbone with 2 teeth, and a variety of animal fossils and primitive stone tools. These findings are considered as further evidence of that Piltdown man is the ancestor of modern human.*1

Scientists believed that the deference between ape and early human is brain size which indicates a level of intelligence because They had believed that human evolution deign with the brain. Piltdown man had a larger rounded brain skull comparing to apes, it was looked as the evidence of larger brain and intelligence. The skull also had human-looking teeth. However, the skull still appears strong ape like jawbone. These looked like a transition between ape and early human, finally Dawson and Woodward decided that Piltdown Man is the "missing link" between apes an humans.*1

2. Most of scientists at that period believed that the large modern brain, and there was  prejudice of English scientists. England was the most powerful country in the world at that time, however, none of early human fossils were found in English soil. Piltdown man was a satisfaction of English scientists who wanted English man being the earnest human.*2

Another fact for that many scientists believed the Piltdown man is the "missing link" between apes and humans is general scientific bias. Scientists at the time had believed that human evolution started with brain, having larger brain should have been one of significant evidence of early human. Piltdown man had very large brain skull and still had ape-looking strong jaw too. This satisfied the common belief of the evolution between apes and humans. *1

3. There were only few ancient human fossils had been discovered at the time of finding of Piltdown Man, thus there was not enough data to reveal if Piltdown man is the true "missing link" or not. However, in the 40 years since the discovery of Pitdown man, many more ancient human skulls were discovered in Africa, China and Indonesia, also Asia and Europe. It brought enough data to point out the conflict of Piltdown Man.*3

Kenneth Oakley used a series of fluorine tests which uses fluorine to accumulate in calcium-containing organic matter such as bones and teeth to determine the age of skull, and figured out that Piltdown man is probably less than 50,000 years old which proved that it is not nearly enough to be a species with ape-like features. The results of scientific tests proved that the skull is made of bones of two different species, and it is artificially stained to look similar to the gravel at the work site.*3

4. I think it might be impossible to remove the "human" factor such as prejudice and bias from science to reduce the chance of errors and mistakes, and it might help the progress of science. For the case of Piltdown Man, the skull was intentionally made by human, and it is not a mistake or a result of experiment, so I think this is not a error, and not OK. However, it had become one prompt in the history of science, and helped scientists to think and develop various possible and experimental theories of the "missing link". Therefore, I think it is not necessary to take away "human" facts because science has progressed on many experiments and mistakes, and these mistakes and errors are also one of result to lead scientists to the certain facts at the end anyway. 

   

5. A lesson I think I can take from this historical event regarding taking information from unverified source is that you cannot depend on only one source to determine the facts. You must collect information as much as you can. You have to carefully look at all information form various perspective. 

2 or 3 years ago, there was a news about archeologist developed artificial fossil in Japan. I think Dawson's case is similar to this Japanese Archeologist's case because I assume that they both might be under pressure by people hoping great findings and progresses. Dawson's attempt shouldn't be accepted, but somehow it is understandable.    

=========================================================

*1http://www.nhm.ac.uk/nature-online/science-of-natural-history/the-scientific-process/piltdown-man-hoax/piltdown-discoveries/index.html

*2http://www.nhm.ac.uk/nature-online/science-of-natural-history/the-scientific-process/piltdown-man-hoax/index.html

*3http://www.nhm.ac.uk/nature-online/science-of-natural-history/the-scientific-process/piltdown-man-hoax/piltdown-hoax-revealed/index.html