An archaeological discovery in 1912 by Charles Dawson, who was digging at a sight dated to be 1myo, in Piltdown, England; found a piece of a skull, this finding led to many others on the part of Dawson. However, it all ended 40 years later as a hoax and was proven to be a complete fabrication, a scientific falsity in 1953. Unfortunately for the scientific community, the original finding of the piece of skull was celebrated and dubbed a new species of early man. The British academic establishment wanted nothing more but to believe in the “Piltdown man” as they were sadly lacking in ancient findings of fossils.  Until Dawson, most of the important discoveries of early man had come from Germany, Asia and Africa. 

               Over the years, Dawson submitted other finds and was thought to be someone who “had a great eye for collecting things”. After a while it did become quite evident that the fossils derived from Africa and Asia did not show the same patterns of development as the Piltdown man, this began to raise some questions but at the time Dawson and his team were thought of as gentleman and top of their class scholars, not to be questioned.

               It wasn't until Joseph Weiner, a S. African anthropologist, used a magnifying glass to look at the teeth in the jaw bone and saw scratch marks that were obviously from someone using a file to wear down the teeth. The incisors were made to a smaller scale and the fossils seem to have been died and manipulated to have both human and ape characteristics. Shortly after WWII, the fossils were dated using a new technology of measuring fluorine absorption, as well as the measurement of nitrogen. The fluorine test indicated that the fossil was between 100,000 years old; this contradiction launched a full scale analysis in 1959.  Radiocarbon tests were performed and showed the human cranium to be only about 600 years old and the jaw 500 years old. These are great examples of the positive influences of scientific testing, being able to falsify a claim.

               The scientific academic community was stunned; it reflected negatively on their credibility that the "Piltdown man" escaped detection. Although, the reasoning for this (escaping detection); seemed to be the limited accessibility to the fossils for any substantial length of time. Arthur Smith Woodward was the keeper of geology at the British Museum at the time; He was the most respected authority in paleontology and was the one that controlled access to the fossils. It is speculated that, had other scientists been able to examine them more closely, perhaps they would have seen that the fossils had been tampered with. 

               The lessons that were learned in this hoax were simply that the honor system does not mix with science. “Good science depends on objectivity to prevent lies”, this is simply true because distracting oneself on someone’s reputation, therefore not questioning the science, does not make for good researched or tested fats of science. Human factor will always be a part of science; humans are the ones that begin to ask the questions that prompt evaluation of science to begin with; Scientists will always have the potential of being dishonest this is why we have established a great system on peer review. It is pretty difficult and highly scrutinized to make something a scientific theory or for a scientist to draw a conclusion on an artifact. This is why critical thinking and asking critical questions are so important, if one never looked in a magnifying glass or took a closer look at what is presented, one might be believing a lie.  

-Maria Hernandez