The Piltdown Hoax

In the small village of Piltdown, an amateur archaeologist Charles Dawson happened to come across a fragment of an ancient human skull in the year 1912.  Upon making this discovery, he asked his fellow colleagues, Arthur Smith Woodward and Father Pierre Teilhard to join him in his search for more evidence.  Later, it was again Dawson who made another discovery of what he claimed was a human jawbone.  The evidence which was pieced together and named “Piltdown Man” brought notoriety to England’s otherwise barren archaeological community. It also caught the attention of anatomist Arthur Keith who had hypothesized that the humans had developed large brains before walking upright.  The discovery of Piltdown man supported Keith’s findings thereby galvanizing Piltdown man as a significant contribution not only to the archaeological world but to the scientific world as well. The fluorine testing performed on the skull after World War II was the first evidence that the skull was a fake.  The discovery of the hoax sent an important message to the scientific community that scientists are indeed human and are not always out for the best interests of the community.

It seems even today that the true motives of Charles Dawson are not known. However, upon Charles Darwin’s death, England had not made any significant archaeological discoveries and was itching for a chance to be in the limelight. Whether it was Dawson who planted the evidence at the archaeological site, or if it was someone else, it was clearly human ego that motivated Dawson to make the discovery known to the world.  The most negative side effect of the discovery is that it held back the scientific community for 40 years from advancing its knowledge.

The most positive aspect of discovering that the skull was a fake was the awareness that it brought to the scientific community that if something like this could happen, a better system was needed for testing scientific evidence.  The fluorine testing was one of the key tests used to determine that the skull was in fact not as old as Charles Darwson claimed.  Also, the scientists who re-examined the skull noticed that pieces had been left out of the skull in order to make the jawbone appear to fit and that the teeth had been filed down to make them look human.

                “To Err is Human, to Forgive Devine” as Alexander Pope is quoted as saying. Therefore, it is not possible to remove the “human” factor from science, nor would it make sense to do so.  There is no such thing as the perfect setting to conduct research.  For example, in Psychology I learned about the “observer effect” and that humans don’t behave the same way when being observed.  Also research conducted in a controlled environment such as a laboratory setting also yield different results than if conducted in a natural setting.  Therefore, the only way for researchers to obtain the best possible data is by testing and re-testing.  Whatever data shows to be consistent over time is the most reliable.

                The lesson learned here is one in critical thinking. Throughout our life it will be important to use critical thinking to weigh and evaluate the credibility of information that is presented whether it is looking at scientific methods or simply making a personal purchase.  I thought it was interesting to read in our text that collagen creams do not really work.  Now, I know not to waste my money!