The Piltdown hoax revolves around a fossil skull that was found in the village of Piltdown in England during the early 1900's. The man responsible for the finding went by the name of Charles Dawson, who was an amateur archaeologist. The significance was twofold: first, it was Britain's first discovery of modern man's ancestors on its own soil. This was important because Britain had long been jealous of the fact that Germany and France had found many fossils of neanderthals within their territory. Secondly, it was important because it looked as if it would bridge the gap between apes and men in scientists understanding of human evolution. The theory of evolution at the time was more firm than it was during Darwin's time, but it was still contested. Thus, the Piltdown Man served as a victory for evolutionists who could finally point to a fossil that could connect men and apes. It was even believed that the Piltdown Man was proof that humans developed big brains before they began walking on two feet. (Now we know that the opposite is true; humans acquired big brains after walking on two feet.) The hoax was discovered in 1953, when new technologies allowed scientists to accurately date the fossils involved. British scientists were embarrassed because while the Piltdown Man had been their darling, scientists from other countries had always been suspicious of their findings. It turned out that the jaw was probably an Orangutan's, and the teeth had simply been filed down to be more human-like. Around 40 fossilized finds had been discovered at Piltdown, and it turned out that all of them were fakes.
The scientists that bought the Piltdown Man as legitimate succumbed to typical human downfalls such as pride and naivety. The scientists of Britain were especially susceptible to the hoax because they so badly wanted Britain to be on the same level as Germany and France with regard to early human findings. There was also a lot of competition between scientists within Britain, especially at the Natural History Museum. This competition led to a certain level of blindness with their findings.
The integrity of science revolves around the idea that everything is questionable. Of course there are things we are almost completely sure about in science, but it can be dangerous to blindly accept a so-called consensus. Even 40 years after the discovery, scientists were thoughtful enough to test the nitrogen content and apply chemical tests to the Piltdown remains. The scientific method requires testing of a hypothesis until it is confirmed; even if it took 40 years, the scientific method still successfully rooted out the hoax. Once new technology was available, scientists returned to the case.
It is not possible to remove the human factor from scientists because as of yet, we do not have any artificial intelligence that could possibly replace human ingenuity. And even if we did, that would take away the joy of scientific discovery. The reason for scientific advancement is, at its core, related to humans' ability to enjoy it. Of course science is partly utilitarian, but it is also partly an endeavor that quenches our thirst for discovery.
The lesson here is simply to be careful. Lies get accepted as truth when people do not do their due diligence. We should not accept ideas from people simply because of their status or because of high emotional stakes. Emotion is an important part of the human experience, but its involvement in science should merely be as motivation to find the truth.
Good detail in your synopsis and I agree that Piltdown's status as the first hominid found on English soil certainly is significant. I do want to challenge you on your second suggestion of scientific significance:
ReplyDelete"Secondly, it was important because it looked as if it would bridge the gap between apes and men in scientists understanding of human evolution."
This is just another way of saying "missing link". It isn't just the words that are the problem but the meaning behind them which fails to reflect how evolution actually works. The assignment module provides background information that explains the problem with this concept. Make sure you take the time to review this.
So the issue of significance remains. Yes, this was significant because it was the first hominid found on English soil, but there was also *scientific* significance. Had Piltdown been valid, it would have helped us better understand *how* humans (not *if*) evolved from that common ancestor with non-human apes. Piltdown was characterized by large cranium combined with other more primitive, non-human traits, suggesting that the larger brains evolved relatively early in hominid evolutionary process. We now know this to be incorrect, that bipedalism evolved much earlier with larger brains evolving later, but Piltdown suggested that the "larger brains" theory, supported by Arthur Keith (one of the Piltdown scientists) was accurate.
I agree that the scientific community was partially at fault for the perpetuation of the Piltdown hoax. But what about the perpetrators themselves? Why did they create the hoax in the first place? What human faults are involved there?
Well done highlighting the practice of revisiting old conclusions when new evidence arises that seems to contradict them. That is a very important point. But I would have liked you to explain, even briefly, the new technology that was used to uncover the hoax (fluorine testing) as that was definitive as well.
Good discussion and conclusion on the issue of the human factor. I agree, and it isn't just ingenuity. Could we even develop initial questions without human curiosity?
Good life lesson.
I like that you target the community as being at fault. I personally feel that it is everyone's responsibility to question and deeply understand the world around them, at least on a critical thinking level. I feel that when large groups of people accept hoaxes, it's either because the con is just that good, that there is little to know way of actually finding an error, or that the community is just that naive, hopeful, vain, or uncaring to push further. This societal vetting process is something I find fascinating in both its powerful and negative effects. This is a perfect example of how the acceptance of the piltdown man, due to lack of questioning, established it as true, and made it even harder to disprove in the future.
ReplyDeleteNice essay. I like that you recognize the fact that the discovery of the Piltdown man was significant in two different ways, scientifically and in world politics.
ReplyDeleteHi,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading your post. Your summary of the Piltdown Hoax was proficiently detailed and explained. I believe you effectively covered the important details of the case. I agree that the scientists are at fault for being complacent with the Piltdown findings. The scientists should have challenged the findings and constructed more tests based on the scientific procedures. I believe we can look to the human motivators of recognition and contempt to point to what may have served as motives for the hoax. Regardless of who committed the hoax, it can be agreed upon that the want of personal gain and recognition outweighed the respect for the scientific process.
Hi Caleb,
ReplyDeleteI liked reading your blog post and found it to be very thorough. I agree with you that a likely cause for the hoax being undiscovered for so long was pride and nationalism on the part of the British scientists. The nationalistic tension between European countries at the time only escalated to culminate in World War 1.