Week 5 blog March 7, 2017
1.The Piltdown hoax was “discovery” made by Charles Dawson
in the early 1900 s in England in a city of Piltdown. Charles Dawson made the
discovery of a human skull (jaw bone). He invited Arthur Smith Woodward which
was one of England’s leading geologist along with Father Pierre wo was a paleontologist
to work with him to keep digging for more artifacts. Other credible men were
brought on board to give credibility to the finds like Arthur Keith that believed
that big brains were developed before walking upright (which was the opposite).
Also, Arthur Woodward which specialized in fish fossils. By the 1920’s new
methods of testing were introduced which included fluorine testing. Fluorine
testing was done on the Piltdown fossils and the staining dated back sooner
than what was originally said. Other artifacts were being discovered around the
world and the artifacts did not match the Piltdown man artifacts and the artifacts
found were less human. Then after World
War 2 a better method of testing methods was introduced and more accurate that proved
that the Piltdown fossils had stains falsified in them and the teeth in the jawbone
were filed down. The method proof that the jaw bone came from a female orangutan
that dated back to 100 years and not thousands of years and this created an uproar
amongst the science since all signs were leading that the Piltdown man was a
hoax.
2.One of the faults that come in place is that one there wasn’t
the necessary elements that could help these scientists come up with an
accurate find. One thing that stand out is that the video mentions how maybe
Charles Dawson committed the hoax because he was jealous that the rest of the world
was making discoveries and England was not.
3.Positive aspects of the scientific method that proved that
the Piltdown man was a hoax was the investigation process. If the jaw bone was
observed as well as other data being collected to compare this artifact to
others discovered around the world. At the time, no one really questioned the
findings, and I feel in part was because the people that were behind was
respected science people in England that no one felt the need to questioned the
finding. Thankfully science keeps evolving and creating new testable methods
that catch hoaxes. Like the fluorine testing that proved that the stains were falsified
in the fossils.
4. The human factor is accounted to our instinct; and I believe
that is very important in humans but that’s why we need science to back up what
we humans discovered. Humans and science make a team without wither or it wouldn’t
work.
5.The life lesson that I take with this hoax is that we must
questioned everything. Like the saying, says “not everything that shines is
gold” so as humans we must questioned the why, where, and when and even the how
things happen.
Hey Daisy,
ReplyDeleteYou make some really interesting points in your blog post. The only thing I'd say about it is to remember to check back and proof read because there were a lot of grammar and spelling errors and at times it made it hard to follow. Besides that, I completely agree with your last statement that "not everything that shines is gold". Its a perfect example that shows that the scientific method is very useful and we must continue to as questions instead of believe everything we hear. Great job!
Hey Miranda and thanks for the spelling corrections. Ill make sure I note that, and thanks that saying is one of my favorites
DeleteThanks for reading!
You have some good detail in your synopsis, but let's get a little more specific and accurate on dates. The first piece of Piltdown was uncovered in 1912. The fluorine analysis that uncovered the hoax was conducted in 1949, more than 40 years later. This is a significant part of the story. In your synopsis, you kind of jump from the fossil discover to the uncovering of the hoax. This misleads your reader a bit and skips some important information. How did the scientific community respond when the fossil was publicly presented? You mention Keith's pet theory of larger brains evolving early, but did Piltdown support this theory? How?
ReplyDeleteI agree that jealousy over the success of others (and envy?) may have contributed to the creation of the hoax, though we need to remember that we still aren't sure who was the perpetrator(s). How about ambition? Or greed? Other than the culprits, can you find fault with anyone else? How about the scientific community? Why did they accept this find so readily without proper scrutiny? What might have inspired them (particularly the British scientists) to not do their jobs properly when it came to this particular fossil?
Very good discussion on the positive aspects of science that helped uncover the hoax. You not only highlighted new technology, you also explained how the conclusions of other discoveries contradicted the conclusions of Piltdown, leading scientists to revisit and ultimately falsify that fossil. Well done.
I agree that the process of science is important in weeding out the negative impact of the human factor, but this doesn't really answer the question at hand. Is it possible to remove the human factor. I do see that you may be arguing that science removes it, and that is a good point, but would you want to remove it by taking humans out of the equation of science? Are their any human traits you would miss if you did this? Do humans bring anything positive to the process of science, such as curiosity, ingenuity and innovation? Could we even do science without these factors?
Good life lesson.