Basically, the Piltdown hoax was about when the question of the common ancestor of humans and apes came about. In 1912, in Sussex, England, a man named Charles Dawson discovered an interesting bone piece of a skull. He stated that there were many similarities between the skulls of a human and an ape. Also found was a jaw bone with teeth that had the same similarities, between man and ape. He felt that this was a major discovery.
In 1953, however, further tests proved that this discovery was a hoax. First of all, the fact that there were critical components missing to the jaw bone that would automatically classify it as man or ape, made this discovery questionable. Also, after further tests that included fluorine absorption, it was discovered that there was filing done on the teeth to give an effect, and in fact there were only about 100 years old.
There are definitely examples of human faults at play in this situation. Dawson desired to be given the glory of this discovery. It was a very competitive challenge to make this discovery, and he wanted the prestige of being the founder. He was selfish with this and even though this Piltdown man was not real.
I do not believe it is possible to remove the "human" factor from science to reduce the chance of these errors, because as long as we have free will and control over the use of machines and scientific tools, there will always be the possibility of a man or woman being selfish and wanting glory for themselves. I would like to remove this human factor, because these types of discoveries are important to our future. I do not think it is possible, but yes i would like to remove this factor.
The lesson i take from this event is to never believe something as important as this event, without enough evidence. It seems obvious to not believe something without enough credibility, however now I am even more aware of the importance of the factor of evidence.
Good job with just a couple of points to highlight:
ReplyDeleteThe key to the fraud was not that the bones were young, but that they were from two different species and from two drastically different time periods.
Is there nothing beneficial of the "human factor" which outweighs our tendancy toward selfish, greedy behavior, something that would make us worth keeping around?
Finally, how do you know when you have enough evidence to confidently say something is true?
I like your view on the lesson being learned from the Piltdown man hoax because not only could Dawson learn a lesson (like i mentioned in my post) but scientists could be more aware in the future to look for credibility and evidenciary support in new findings. Do you think, however, the piltdown man hoax was accepted because scientific techniques had not been perfected and advanced enough to prove it false?
ReplyDeleteHello Martin,
ReplyDeleteyour blog about the Piltdown Hoax is very well written. Even though I have watched and read about it, your short, but very informative synopses of the Piltdown Hoax is all that I needed. I also believe that the human factors cannot be removed, although I wish for it to stay more than I want it to be removed. That's just my opinion, of course. ^^ I also agree that this hoax should be a lesson to learn from. We should determine fossils and finds through evidence and not rely too much on the reputation of the person who found it.
Hi Martin,
ReplyDeleteI agree with of your comments with respect to the human factor. Man is only capable of errors, not perfection. It would be unimaginable to think otherwise. But, I have to say that you did not mention why where such a hoax came in to play, or who was believed to be behind it. After further research and analysis on my part, I find the Dawson played a particularly great role in implementing the hoax. As you stated, he wanted the prestige and fame. As the video stated, other countries around the world had discovered evidence of fossil records, and the British had none. Because of his wants and needs to be famous and recorded into history, I believe Dawson may have planted the artificats found. If he did not plant them though, it would be hard to suggest that this man had no inclination to regard the artifacts as being false. Therefore, he must have played a substantial role in the development of this fraud.
I disagree with you. We are always forced to learn things, wether it is at school or by family members. Therfe really is no way that we can prove if something has enough evidence in order for it to be true. We are all brought up with different beliefs that came from generations and we beleve for them to be true.
ReplyDelete