Through the process of the findings of Mr. Dawson and Mr. Woodward, he well wanted to be known as the person who found a fossil resembling of a human and monkey. In order to get known they had to do something that wasn't possible that they didn't have. So they came up with the theory to make up and work together to make a creation that couldn't be found.
A few aspects that were shown were that the teeth had been stained. This was done in an effort to make the teeth appear aged. Also the finding that parts of a human and orangutan were combined to try and pass off as being that of a fake fossil. It was also discovered that the teeth had been tampered with. The teeth showed signs of being filed down. I feel that the Archaeologist wanted to be well known therefore, went to great lengths to fool many for 40 years.
As much as technology has moved forward, I still feel that humans play an important role in research. While there may be some Archaeologist who like Charles and Arthur, there are still many honest Archaeologist out there. These Archaeologist understand and have a passion to discover the truth of our origins.
The life lesson here would be to be more diligent and do as much research as possible. I would also ask as many questions from as many sources as i possibly could. By doing so you reduce the risk of being deceived.
In general, good synopsis with a couple of comments:
ReplyDeleteGood job bringing up Waterston's skepticism. Too bad no one listed to him then. Why didn't they?
What is the significance of this find, had it been valid? What would it have taught us of how humans evolve? Why in particular were the British scientists so enthusiastic?
Be careful about concluding that Dawson and/or Woodward were the culprits. They are possibly responsible, but we still don't know for sure who did this.
Dawson and Woodward (or whomever created the hoax) didn't create theory. That theory was Arthur Keith's and there really isn't any evidence that he was part of the hoax. But that doesn't address the question of human faults. Why did the perpetrators commit the hoax? And what about the scientific community as a whole? Why did they accept this find and its conclusions so easily, without testing and analyzing to be sure it was valid? Aren't they at fault as well?
Yes, those are some of the techniques that were used to analyze the skull, but what test provided the conclusive evidence of the hoax? And why were scientists still studying this fossil for more than 40 years? What aspect of the scientific process does this represent?
I agree that part of the human factor involves passion that helps to drive the process of science. We couldn't do science without that, or without human curiosity and innovation.
Good conclusion.
found this really interesting how you included Waterston's skepticism was very unique of you. i really enjoyed reading your contribution
ReplyDeleteEnjoyed reading your post. This was a very interesting topic this week; it hard to believe that whoever did this hoax got away with it for so long. I too feel that humans are very important to science and the way to prevent mistake it to be active in the process.
ReplyDelete