Piltdown Hoax

In the early 1900's (1910-1912) Charles Dawson found 'fossilized' fragments of a skull in Piltdown.  These fossils were supposedly the remains of an unknown species of an extinct hominin to which scientists believed could be a link between humans and primates; and were the oldest dated fossils yet to be discovered.  Later on in the 50's with increased knowledge on dating fossils by scientists it was found that the efforts of Dawson, Aurthur Smith Woodward, Samuel Woodhead, Martin Hinton and, Father Pierre Teilhard de Chardin were all a hoax.  The new efforts of scientists to test these bones with chemical tests which proved that the bone fragments had been stained, the teeth on the jaw bone were manipulated and shaved, and the pieces matched those of a female orangutan and were only 600 years old.

These faults that come into play here in this scenario were that these pieces of bone were taken at face value and were not investigated and further researched. If these were further researched when the fossil pieces were first discovered scientists and others would have known that these were phony.  These faults negatively impacted the scientific process by affecting the integrity and honesty that scientists and professionals abide by.  This helped the scientific community build a series of honesty and ethical rules because there were so many phony stories and findings and breaches of truth and findings. Findings of scientists need to be of honest nature and research because other scientists use these findings and research to build upon new findings.

One of the main reasons for revealing the skull to be fraud was because many scientists were skeptical and they have very curious thoughts because there was really no proof so they did their own research to build upon Dawson's findings. Because technology had improved scientists were able to re-date the bones to an earlier time. The process that they used was using a newly available study process that was a fluorine absorption test and discovered that the bones were not over 500,000 years old but around 500-600 years old. Later on they discovered the bones to be a fraud and of different species and stained.

It is not possible to remove the "human" factor from science because it is our minds and thoughts and questions that bring up another ones error, or another thought on a discovery to build upon and find out something new or that was missed. I would not want to remove the aspect of human or human error because it is what keeps science going, without human questioning and curiosity we would not pursue further investigation. Yes there may be faults (on purpose or on accident), but sometimes this leads to new discoveries. This is why scientists follow the scientific method so that they can follow a guide line and save research, evidence, and proof of what they have discovered.

What I can take from this historical event regarding taking information at face value from an unverified source is that you can not always trust what you see at face value. You must investigate on your own, or look at the research. If not everything adds up, look in to it and ask questions. Asking questions is very important because without answers we can be lied to. No one questioned Dawson and didn't do so  until after his death did those in the scientific field start to investigate. If they would have asked questions and investigated early on, Dawson would not have been as prestige and honored as he 'falsely' was.