Hoax Revealed

In the Early 1900’s the first skull fragments were discovered  and then later in 1912 publically announced as Piltdown Man to the Natural History Museum. This was accredited to Charles Dawson who invited Arthur Smith Woodward and Father Pierre Teilhard De Chardin to support his discovery. This was significant because Piltdown Man theorized that it was an evolutionary path that associated apes and humans closely together. Another member involved in the Arthur Keith an anatomist that once opposed the remains authentication, changed his opinion and fully supported Piltdown Man when it supported his theory that large brains came before walking upright in the human evolutionary path. The remaining fossils were uncovered four years after the public announcement and death of Charles Dawson. Within the decade of Piltdown Man last discovered remains ancient human fossils were found in Asia and Africa and less human looking in appearance some were discredited due to the fact that they did not follow the evolutionary path of Piltdown Man.

The reconstructed skull of Piltdown Man was one of male skull fragments and the altered lower jaw bone and tooth of a female orangutan. The jaw bone was purposely broken to remove the tell-tell sign that the jaw was not human and the back teeth were filed down to resemble human molders, the staining with potash gave the fossil the appearance of being older and the tooth also filed down was painted to resemble aged remains. Piltdown man was later proven to be a hoax due to cutting edge test however the hoax lasted for 40 years some of which were scientist were not allowed to conduct test even as new discoveries gave evidence to question the integrity of the remains (first and last remains were discovered by Charles Dawson and none were found after his death, 1975 the trunk belonging to Martin Hinton of artifacts with chemical staining and filing down proven similar to Piltdown Man). 

              

The human fault in this scenario or any scientific discovery is when artifacts are altered to prove theories and integrity of the discovery is not objective (egos and pride). The Piltdown Hoax was a discovery that temporally changed the beliefs our evolutionary path and discredited other discoveries because they were different from Piltdown Man. This error in history lasted 40 years until accurate test were developed and allowed to be administered on the remains of Piltdown Man. The falsification of Piltdown Man was a mystery that was questioned but never really remarked on at the time, even when older authentic remains surfaced in other parts of the world.

Positive aspects of science are that test can be improved with time. The test that confirmed the hoax of Piltdown Man were a drilling test that revealed the skull fragments were odorless clearing them to be older than the lower jaw bone. The lower jawbone contained a burning scent that only occurs with fossils that are younger (like fresh bones). This test disproved the assumption that the skull fragments and jaw bone are from the same specimen. Another test was the fluorine absorption test performed in 1949 by Dr. Kenneth Oakley (the longer remains are in ground the more fluorine they can absorb from the soil) results stated that the skull fragments were much younger than estimated (500,000 years old) and the jaw bone was younger than the skull and from a female orangutan. Test in 1959 (carbon-14 dating technique) confirmed by Joseph Weiner that the skull was 520-720 years old and jaw centuries younger. The Acid Test where hydrochloric acid applied to the fossils rubbed off the staining color caused by  potassium dichromate.

I’m not sure if it’s possible to take the human factor out of science completely, so that past errors like Piltdown Man won’t occur again but I think several precautions are in placed because of events like this. Scientists can keep detailed documentation, record all interpretations/speculation, review with specialist and re-check results several times but in the end we are all just human. It’s common nature to over-look things and change a thought during a discovery and have an ego. I’m on the fence about whether I would remove human factors from science as a whole because we may produce errors on occasion but we’re persistent about proving our findings true but without unbiased evidence and mindset errors are bound to happen.

This makes me want ten forms of confirmation that something is accurate. That amateur in the field should review  with established scholars or scientist on findings because this event can really open your eyes to bad/good research and methods. I have never really heard of this particular event in history perhaps due to the huge discredit it received. This assignment has made me cautious and curious of discoveries and how objective methods are key in the science process.