The human fault that first influenced these findings was to find the earliest and first Englishmen. The British science community, wanted to have pride and to be the center of attention, on finding the 'missing link' on British land. People were convinced that the Piltdown Man was the first human like, but without the technology, scientists couldn't really do tests and other stuff to find out how old the fossils are; a majority of the scientific community remained unconvinced.
The positive aspects of the scientific process that was responsible for revealing the skull to be a hoax was a chemical test, that was done by Kenneth Oakley. By doing chemical tests on the fossils you can date them back to when the originally occurred.
I do no think you can remove the human factor from science to reduce the chance of errors. I do not think it is possible because humans change, get better educated and we can propose new theories. This means humans are evolving and are learner newer and helpful ways of learning about fossils, and other stuff.
The life lesson I'm taking from this historical event is not to trust everyone and everything you hear or see. Not everything you hear or see may be true. It can be a fake, a phony, or a lie.
I completely agree that you cannot trust all humans, especially with something so important as the process of evolution. The findings discovered are how we became us, and without the proper evidence, how can we really know how we became who we are today? I also liked your statement on not taking the human factor out of science. This issue was a mistake, as the assignment claimed, but without experience and education, how can we expect people to grow and learn.
ReplyDelete^This post was from Rebecca Botson. I apologize. Sometimes It does that and I have no idea why!
ReplyDeleteI agree with you. I really liked how you mentioned the importance of advance technology in research findings. As time goes by, we get more advanced machines to evaluate the findings and create more accurate results.
ReplyDeleteGood job on the post and it was great that you pulled in the politics behind this event.
ReplyDeleteAside from fluorine analysis, are there any other positive aspects of science revealed in this scenario?
I actually disagree with you that there were no testing methods available to falsify this find. There were numerous finds in other countries that discredited Piltdown during this 40 year span of time, simply because they all fit an alternative timeline of human evolution. Piltdown didn't fit. Also there were scientists expressing skepticism but they were ignored. I honestly think Dawson, et. al., did not WANT to know the truth.
Rebecca,
ReplyDeleteMake sure you are using Firefox or Google Chrome to post comments.