1. Begin by giving a brief synopsis of the Piltdown hoax,
including when and where it was found, by whom, and varying affects this had on
the scientific community. Also include how the hoax was discovered and the
varying responses it received from the scientist(s) involved and in the related
fields of human evolution. (5 pts) In
the early 1900s, a laborer was digging at Barkham Manor near the
village of Piltdown in Sussex. He unearthed a strange piece of skull and gave
it to a man named Charles Dawson. Dawson realized that the skull looked like
one of a primitive human. He teamed up with Sir Arthur Smith Woodward and
Teilhard de Chardin. Together, they found more fragments of the skull and
teeth. They also teamed with was a huge controversy until in 1953, it was
discovered that it was a jaw of a primate forged with the skull of a human.
Thus, The Piltdown hoax is one of the greatest paleoanthropological hoaxes of
all time. The hoax ties in with Darwin’s theory of evolution because it created
a huge controversy that lasted for over 40 years.
2. Scientists are curious, creative and persistent by
nature, but being human, they also have faults. What human faults come into
play here in this scenario and how did these faults negatively impact the
scientific process? (5 pts) Some of the
human faults that were present were nationalist and gendered issues. When
Dawson discovered the Piltdown man, he as well as other English scientists
automatically considered it an early Englishman. Also, when it was discovered,
it was seen as a male, skull when Woodward suggested it was a female. During
the time of its discovery, the women’s suffrage movement was going on. So
critics saw this as a mockery to the suffrage movement.
3. What positive aspects of the scientific process were
responsible for revealing the skull to be a fraud? Be specific about scientific
tools, processes or methodologies that were involved in providing accurate
information about the Piltdown skull. (5 pts) Some of the positive aspects of the scientific process are tat fluoride
tests showed that the skull was purposefully stained and dated back to about
100,000 years ago, which was too recent. Also, tests were able to show that the
skull was human while the jaw was from an orangutan which was sabotaged in a
way to resemble a human jaw as well as its teeth.
4. Is it possible to remove the “human” factor from science
to reduce the chance of errors like this happening again? Would you want to
remove the human factor from science? (10 pts) Without the “human factor” we wouldn’t have science. Humans are
responsible for questioning the world and fining the means to solve them. I don’t
think it is possible to remove the human factor from science.
Hi Anne Tereska,
ReplyDeleteI liked your overall summery on the Piltdown Hoax. Your insight on how humans have their faults was pretty interesting and I didn't know that the scientist were trying to distinguish the bones as male or female and the scenario being the woman's suffrage movement was a good one to read on. I also like your life lesson because that is basically the message that is given from this experience and it is something that happens a lot and not just in the scientific community.
-Corey Sims
Dear Anne,
ReplyDeleteThis is the second blog post I saw that included nationalism as a cause for human fault. Although I do believe there was a sense of competition to find the fabled missing link, I don't believe Dawson cared that much about his competitors. I believe he just wanted the fame and recognition he desperately dreamed for, even if the had to forge the evidence found in the excavations. Overall, I liked the summary and that you saw that the human factor can't truly be taken out of the scientific process. Great life lesson included at the end as well.
Freddie Svendsen
You've got the basics in the synopsis, but what was the significance of this find? Why was it important? If it had been valid, what would it have told us about human evolution?
ReplyDeleteYes, national pride was a key issue here. Another student mentioned "gender issues" and I'm curious where you got this. It is true that science was very male-run back then, but the tendency to think in male-dominated terms did not cause this hoax to occur. What about other key faults, such as greed and fame?
What about the fluorine analysis? Also, these are all new technologies, but what about the process of science itself? How did that lead to revealing the hoax?
I agree with your conclusion on the human factor. Good final life lesson.
Anne,
ReplyDeleteI like how you spoke about how humans are responsible for sciences and studies, I also used this to support my idea as well. I didn't know that there were gender issues involved, it was an interesting read!