Breaking the Jaw: the Deconstruction of the Piltdown Hoax

In 1912, Charles Dawson (an amateur archaeologist) conducted at dig at Piltdown in England. He had found what he claimed to be the fossilized remains of a human skull. Along with Arthur Woodward (geologist) and Father Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (paleontologist), Dawson continued his dig at Piltdown. Over a summer, they made what was deemed "astonishing finds." There, Charles Dawson found a jawbone he asserted belonged to the ancient piece of human skull he had previously discovered.

This jawbone did not look to be human, but something closer to an ape in structure. What did imply human characteristics was the shape of the teeth. They were ground into the shape of human molars, as though from grinding and crushing food over time. This find was incredible, at the time, and caused a lot of excitement in the field of science. It was viewed as the "holy grail" of paleontology, and seemed to express some kind of evolutionary connection between apes and humans. In England, it was widely celebrated by the scientific community because (finally) there was evidence that England, too, had ancient human remains. What was particularly important to England was the fact that these remains (dubbed the "Piltdown Man") might even be the oldest human remains of all.

With affirmation from England's leading anatomist, Arthur Keith, the finding of the jaw and skull bones seemed to support the theory that the development of large brains came before the development of upright walking in human evolution. This was incredibly important to the field of science and, in particular, to the field of human evolution. The group continued to find fossilized remains until the death of Charles Dawson in 1916, and people in the scientific community (even skeptics) did not challenge their findings.

Evidence contradicting the findings of Piltdown Man began appearing in the 1920's when, in places like Africa and Asia, a number of ancient human remains began to be discovered. The contradicting evidence came in the fact that the newly discovered human remains were not as old as Pildown Man, but were far less human. At that time there was insufficient technology to distinguish whether the remains of Piltdown Man were just a weird phenomenon in human evolution or entirely false.

It was until 1949 that technology allowed for a new method of dating the remains by measuring the fluorine content of the fossils. This method of chemical analysis had been devised in 1939 by Kenneth Oakley. Fossils absorb fluorine from the soil and water around them, so fossils found in the same area should be around the same age.  10 years after its discovery, Kenneth Oakley was able to use the measurement of fluorine to reveal that the fossilized remains that were significantly younger than previously asserted(50,000 vs. 500,000). This furthered confusion in the scientific community because other remains of the same ages found in other areas made the Piltdown Man appear to be a throwback. Then after WWII, in 1953, a larger-scaled study of the Piltdown Man was underway. This study revealed that the Piltdown Man was, in fact, a hoax.

The coloring of the fossilized jawbone was false, having been stained to appear older, and pieces of the bone had been cut off after fossilization. In addition to this, the teeth had been filed down to resemble human molars. The jawbone actually belonged to a female orangutan less than a hundred years old, but pieces of the jaw that would have indicated this were broken off. By 1959, carbon-14 dating was available and it was then revealed that the skullcap "fossils" were not even more than 1,000 years old and were really just old bones.

This evidence was very important to the field of evolution because it is physical evidence, rather than purely circumstantial. It shocked scientists that this could happen, but it brought to light that scientists are human, subject to pride and self-interest, and can therefore lie to further careers (as seen in the particular case of Piltdown). It had previously been thought that scientists would not provide false science, but now scientists are more aware that this can happen and are therefore more careful in the analysis of scientific evidence. Unfortunately, this also gives "ammunition" to groups that are against science, and specifically against evolution. It can be asserted, now, that scientists lie and therefore all scientific evidence cannot be taken seriously.

While it would be ideal to remove the human qualities that lead to scientific falsities like the Piltdown Man, removing the human nature aspect of scientists would also remove the positive parts of human nature. The positive aspects of human nature allow for things like creativity, perseverance, and curiosity. Without these things, I think there would hardly be any advancement in science at all.

From the Piltdown Man hoax, a lot can be learned in regards to using verified sources. I definitely understand the value in not taking everything at face-value and how important it is to rely on sources with a lot of credibility and merit. Sometimes, a little dose of skepticism could even be a good thing. Perhaps if the scientists in England in the early 1900s had taken their own skepticism more seriously, they would have been more creative and persistent in their evaluation of the Piltdown Man remains and therefore would have revealed it as a hoax sooner than ~40 years after the initial findings. 

Sources:
Piltdown Man is revealed as fake 1953, PBS

Piltdown Hoax, pt 1

Piltdown Hoax, pt 2