The Piltdown hoax was an event in
which it is believed that three respected scientists conspired to get the
public to believe that fossils of an ancient human skull were found in the
small village of Piltdown in Sussex, England. This was an extraordinary find
because prior to this supposed discovery, remains of ancient species had been
found in many rival countries such as Germany and France but until that point
only stone age tools had been found in Britain. Britain, believing that it was
the greatest empire on earth, had never found remains of the “ancient man” and
was eager to prove that it was the birthplace of the human race. This find
could make this lofty goal a reality for Britain. This event started with a man
named Charles Dawson who was an amateur geologist who had been given the
remains of a skull by a laborer that was digging in a dirt pit. The remains
were fragments of an oddly shaped jawbone that was difficult to identify due to
the fact that it did not follow the structure of early humans or animals.
Dawson took the remains to a well-known geologist Sir Arthur Smith Woodward
with the Natural History Museum who helped him formulate his theory that the
fossil was a portion of a human skull. Later
that summer Dawson, Woodward, and a French Paleontologists Father Pierre
Teilhard, after more excavation they unearthed several additional items
including: prehistoric animals, stone-age tools, and finally an ape-like
jawbone with human-like teeth that seemed to link it to the skull that Dawson
had from the laborer. On December 18, 1912 Dawson and Woodward presented the
“Piltdown Man” to the world. It was nicknamed “the earliest Englishman”. This
find had a significant effect on the scientific community and impacted not only
archaeologists, geologists, naturalists, paleontologists, and even anatomists
because this find was perceived to be the “missing link” in Darwin’s theory
that gave physical proof of humans’ connection with apes and helped to explain
our place in nature. It gained wide support through the endorsement of high
profile individuals like Arthur Keith who was England’s leading anatomist. His
and Woodward’s endorsement of the find dispelled any questions of validity. The
popular acceptance of this find went on for some time without question.
In the 1920’s scientists began to
discover ancient human fossils in Asia and Africa that were hundreds of
thousands of years after the Piltdown find. Curiously enough these fossils were
less human instead of more human. This anomaly led to a rise in the questions
that had been in the minds of the scientific community members but who had been
previously reluctant to voice their concerns out of fear of upsetting the more
prominent and established members. But the seeds of doubt had been reinforced
and resulted in a more thorough study of the Piltdown finds.
After WWII a new technology was
developed whereby scientists would measure the fluorine content in fossils
which allowed them to be dated. Chemical testing became a primary method of
testing artifacts. In 1949 this type of fluorine test was conducted on the
Piltdown fossils. Finally in 1953 a full scale investigation was conducted
using these advanced dating methods. Chemical testing also revealed that the
apparent staining on the fossils was not as old as previously thought and
improved microscopic tools allowed scientists to determine that the teeth in
the jawbone were actually filed down but allowing them to see the jagged
scratches that were not visible to the naked eye. This combination of
validation methods revealed that the Piltdown finds previously thought to have
been the oldest found at the time were actually only about a hundred thousand
years old. A massive hoax had been committed that would lead to questions for
years to come.
Pride, self-interest, and greed
were the major faults that led to this hoax. In general the desire for Britain
to be able to compete with rival countries like Germany and France in this
field was a major coup considering that it had previously been an area in which
Britain had no standing. Additionally there is no doubt that this find gave
standing, notoriety, and respect to the scientists involved at a level that was
previously unknown. Arthur Keith used the find to bolster his own theories
regarding the evolution of man and the fact that Woodward’s involvement removed
any question of the validity of the find is proof that once a person had
attained a certain level of respect their findings were unquestionable.
Unfortunately this practice casts a dark cloud of the scientific process and
makes me question all early finds in view of what was later proven. How many
other prior discoveries were accepted on the basis of someone’s standing
without true empirical proof of its validity? We may never know because the
likelihood of anyone going back and validating all of that early data is
unrealistic. This causes me to question current theories that were based on
this early information. How much do we really know and how much did we assume
based on who told us?
Unfortunately science like every
other discipline is impacted by the “human factor” meaning that it cannot exist
without human involvement. This fact alone ensures that science will never be “full
proof” as some people tend to think. Unfortunately this hoax proves that as
long as there is an opportunity for personal gain there will always be the
possibility of data manipulation.
Personally not only do I think it is not
possible to remove the human factor I wouldn't want to. Our instinctive curiosity
and wonder has led to some of the most amazing and magnificent discoveries. Also,
our ability to think “outside the box” has enabled us to figure out solutions
to abnormal and complex situations that computers and mechanics do not have the
ability to discern. I think we went wrong in that we failed to do the very
thing that the scientific method is known for namely validation and
replication. The scientific community at this point in time accepted the
findings based on the endorsement by certain individuals who were thought to be
above reproach. I find this particularly funny because it’s no different that
someone who believes in a religious theory told to them by their priest and
doesn't question it because they believe that their priest is above reproach.
The most important thing that I've learned from this hoax is that everyone has
motives, some innocent, some malicious, and many based on pure greed. I know
that I will not be a person who questions everything that I’m told because some
things have to be taken on faith but I do know that when it comes to the
important issues and questions about who we are and where we come from I have
to do my own verifying and make a conscious decision about what I am going to
accept on faith.
